Rangers All-Decade Worst Of The Worst: Goalies Tiebreaker
So Dunham ran away with the starting spot, but we had a very tight race between Labarbera, Weekes, and Hebert for the backup job. This is the tiebreaker.
Again, you're voting for the person who summarizes the most. Use whatever criteria you want.
Guy Hebert and it's not even close. NOT even close. I have to think that people who aren't voting for him are either newer fans or fans with Alzheimer's.
__________________
"Of course giving Sather cap space is like giving teenagers whiskey and car keys." - SBOB "Watching Sather build a team is like watching a blind man with no fingers trying to put together an elaborate puzzle." - Shadowtron
Sestito still on the make a wish tour. - rholt168
Guy Hebert played 13 games, went 5-7-1 on the 2000-01 Rangers with a GAA of 3.43. Save percentage of 0.897. In 00-01 the Rangers were 30th in the NHL with 3.54 GA/G.
Weekes played 46 games, went 18-20-5 on the 2005-06 & 2006-07 Rangers. With GAA of 2.95 & 3.39. Save percentages of 0.895 & 0.879. In 05-06 the Rangers were 4th in the NHL with a 2.57 GA/G average and in 06-07 the Rangers were 9th with the same GA/G average.
Yes I know that Lundqvist makes a huge difference in the GA/G, but the teams that Weekes played on were MUCH better teams and yet their stats are almost the same.
People make it out like Weekes was a lot better than he was.
Guy Hebert played 13 games, went 5-7-1 on the 2000-01 Rangers with a GAA of 3.43. Save percentage of 0.897. In 00-01 the Rangers were 30th in the NHL with 3.54 GA/G.
Weekes played 46 games, went 18-20-5 on the 2005-06 & 2006-07 Rangers. With GAA of 2.95 & 3.39. Save percentages of 0.895 & 0.879. In 05-06 the Rangers were 4th in the NHL with a 2.57 GA/G average and in 06-07 the Rangers were 9th with the same GA/G average.
Yes I know that Lundqvist makes a huge difference in the GA/G, but the teams that Weekes played on were MUCH better teams and yet their stats are almost the same.
People make it out like Weekes was a lot better than he was.
yep...thanks for doing my work for me...Weekes was a terrible, terrible goalie...the team played so scared in front of him, they were afraid to even let 1 shot in per game, thats how horrible he was.
Weekes doesn't belong there. He was a decent backup and good soldier for this team.
agreed... he just doesnt fit here... and labs was never suppose to do much of anything... hebert was brought in to help/stabalize the goaltending situation and was an utter trainwreck
While Weekes sucked, his demise gave rise to Henrik...maybe we owe him for that.
Hebert's tenure in NY definitely signifies the darkest period of Rangers hockey in probably at least 3 decades...we were in between terrible goalies after Richter went down...Hebert, Maclean, Dunham...god knows who else I'm forgetting over that time span, I tried to block it all out. We tried to plug the gap with crappy old goalie after crappy old goalie...then finally a few years later, we get a bright spot in Dan Blackburn who looks great...and by age 21, he's out of hockey.
Dunham and Hebert both get bad raps, there were games these guys stood on their head, they had horrible D in front of em, especially Dunham. That being said, I went with Labarbera.
Labarbera played like, what, 200 minutes total with the team? Does he even belong here?
As ive said before, it is the fact that he only played 200 minutes when he showed so much promise. Guy dominated the AHL and stunk up his pro opportunities.
As ive said before, it is the fact that he only played 200 minutes when he showed so much promise. Guy dominated the AHL and stunk up his pro opportunities.
And then went on to be a serviceable backup elsewhere in the league. Blackburn didn't do so great when he first came up either but we still believed in him. I think the sample size is way too small to say Jason was the "worst" backup we've had this decade.
the most. Use whatever criteria you want.
). 
