How did CuJo never win a Vezina in his career?

[connellc]

This is a strong argument for Hasek's case, so perhaps he is worthy of the distinction. But what about the others?

Frankly it's all about what YOU value. As mentioned above Hasek has the regular season statistics that Rival Orr and Gretsky in terms of being so much more valuable than his peers and that's including forwards and defense too.

Patrick Roy's claim to fame is that his Playoff resume is unlike any other goaltender in league history. I know you don't put much in awards, but again, no goalie has been playoff MVP 3 times in history and no other player in any position, skater or goalie has done that.

Brodeur's is that he's "ironman" of goalies whereby his win record will likely never be touched.

I can go into specifics with numbers if you wish, but I don't want to derail this thread.

Another point I didn't even think about. You talk about eras, right? Serious question did Plante/Sawchuk adapt to another era? Roy and Hasek Certainly did. Different equipment, while other goalies couldn't. There's video evidence of this too. Check out Hasek's pads in the 1987 CC, or even in the finals in 1992....it's night and day and he was still robbing Mario Lemieux on breakaways. Goalies didn't automatically get better with bulkier equipment either, because a lot, like Bill Ranford, dropped off by his early 30's because he couldn't adapt.

The main point is, Cujo was competing against 3 generational goalies and didn't have much of a window to win much hardware compared to other eras because I don't think any other era had that type of top tier competition at the same time period.


Good conversation BTW, I in no means want to be adversarial.

 

[MadLuke]

Serious question did Plante/Sawchuk adapt to another era?

Yes, Plante had strong seasons in mids 50 original 6 hockey and in the early 70s hockey, he played in the nhl pass 44 years old.

Sawchuck played 21 years in the league, they went from playing with no to barely no helmet, with a lot of people thinking goaltender should never play the puck outside their crease to post expansion hockey.

 

[The Panther]

Frankly it's all about what YOU value. As mentioned above Hasek has the regular season statistics that Rival Orr and Gretsky in terms of being so much more valuable than his peers and that's including forwards and defense too.

Hasek's statistics in no way rival Orr and Gretzky, and certainly not if you factor in position. When people watched Hasek -- for about 10 years from c.1983 to 1993 -- very few people thought he was better than Peeters / Fuhr / Roy, let alone Orr and Gretzky. Conversely, when people watched Orr and Gretzky at age 18 or 20, nearly everyone could see they were becoming (if they were not already) the greatest players of all time.

Hasek was the best in the NHL from 1993 or so to 1999, certainly, but not by degrees that come close to the degree of dominance-of-peers of Orr and Gretzky, and less so if you factor in the goalie position (i.e., the only guy who plays that position; 60 minutes per game).

Patrick Roy's claim to fame is that his Playoff resume is unlike any other goaltender in league history. I know you don't put much in awards, but again, no goalie has been playoff MVP 3 times in history and no other player in any position, skater or goalie has done that.

Patrick Roy is one of the all-time greats. He is also the most overrated player on this particular forum. Roy was uniquely fortunate in his team designation --- he went from by far the best defensive team of his era (Montreal, which earlier had made Rick Wamsley a Jennings winner and briefly saw Brian Hayward rival Roy in statistics) to... the deepest and co-best team in the League, just as they ascended the throne (and then he retired just before they declined).

Serious question did Plante/Sawchuk adapt to another era?

Well, Plante had the best save precentage in NHL history, and he did it post-expansion, in his 15th season.

 

[Jericho111091]

His best years he was up against the likes of Hasek, Belfour, and Roy. No shame in not winning against those three

 

[connellc]

Hasek's statistics in no way rival Orr and Gretzky, and certainly not if you factor in position. When people watched Hasek -- for about 10 years from c.1983 to 1993 -- very few people thought he was better than Peeters / Fuhr / Roy, let alone Orr and Gretzky. Conversely, when people watched Orr and Gretzky at age 18 or 20, nearly everyone could see they were becoming (if they were not already) the greatest players of all time.

I should have made it clear, I was talking about Haseks Peak, not career vs his peers. More Specifically 1994-1999 in terms of goalies I can't see any other goalie with a longer/impressive regular statistical period than him in NHL history. Career wise, I'd agree that Roy and Plante may have him beat, however. Which comes full circle that Cujo had it tougher than any other goalie in his caliber in a different era.

 

[MadLuke]

Roy was fortunate, but not all luck either, he took advantage of the free agents era and got out both time pre-decline a bit per choice.

Belfour jumped from good team to good team, Brodeur stayed on one, they all were in-demand free agents at one point of their journey (Hasek went on the redwings and Senators super teams...)

 

[Victorias]

Hasek's statistics in no way rival Orr and Gretzky, and certainly not if you factor in position. When people watched Hasek -- for about 10 years from c.1983 to 1993 -- very few people thought he was better than Peeters / Fuhr / Roy, let alone Orr and Gretzky. Conversely, when people watched Orr and Gretzky at age 18 or 20, nearly everyone could see they were becoming (if they were not already) the greatest players of all time.

Hasek was the best in the NHL from 1993 or so to 1999, certainly, but not by degrees that come close to the degree of dominance-of-peers of Orr and Gretzky, and less so if you factor in the goalie position (i.e., the only guy who plays that position; 60 minutes per game).

Patrick Roy is one of the all-time greats. He is also the most overrated player on this particular forum. Roy was uniquely fortunate in his team designation --- he went from by far the best defensive team of his era (Montreal, which earlier had made Rick Wamsley a Jennings winner and briefly saw Brian Hayward rival Roy in statistics) to... the deepest and co-best team in the League, just as they ascended the throne (and then he retired just before they declined).

Well, Plante had the best save precentage in NHL history, and he did it post-expansion, in his 15th season.

I wonder if people would have felt the same about Orr and Gretzky if they were playing in the Czech Republic. I don’t know if Hasek would have been winning Vezinas in the 80’s, but considering how bad goaltending was in the NHL, it wouldn’t surprise me if he did.

And regarding Plante, he played 40 games that year in a 78 game season. C’mon…

 

[Sergei Bure]

The main point is, Cujo was competing against 3 generational goalies and didn't have much of a window to win much hardware compared to other eras because I don't think any other era had that type of top tier competition at the same time period.

3 generational goalies and you put Brodeur instead of Belfour, during Joseph's peak, Belfour was better than Brodeur and he was at his peak more than Brodeur was in the 90's.

 

[Sergei Bure]

Patrick Roy is one of the all-time greats. He is also the most overrated player on this particular forum. Roy was uniquely fortunate in his team designation --- he went from by far the best defensive team of his era (Montreal, which earlier had made Rick Wamsley a Jennings winner and briefly saw Brian Hayward rival Roy in statistics) to... the deepest and co-best team in the League, just as they ascended the throne (and then he retired just before they declined).

I agree with Roy being fortunate, we also have to agree that he was the missing piece in Colorado...

I don't think Roy was on Hasek's level, nobody was. Belfour to me was on Roy's level, and when he finally got a great defensive team like Roy had in Montreal, he won the Stanley Cup, beating also Roy 2 years in a row (1999 & 2000) and looking much more impressive especially in 2000.

 

[connellc]

3 generational goalies and you put Brodeur instead of Belfour, during Joseph's peak, Belfour was better than Brodeur and he was at his peak more than Brodeur was in the 90's.

I just don't think Joseph has enough elite season to really have a solidified "peak" per say. You have string more than 2 along in my eyes, and that's another wart on Cujos stats. It's basically just 1998-1999 and the 1999-2000 season is about it right?

 

[MadLuke]

. It's basically just 1998-1999 and the 1999-2000 season is about it right?

92-93-94 I think ? was is peak versus his peers and the other goaltenders playing on his own team.

GSAA
1991-92 NHL
1. P. Roy*... 47
2. C. Joseph. 43
3. B. Essensa 31

1992-93 NHL
1. C. Joseph.. 57
2. E. Belfour* 39
3. F. Potvin.. 32

1993-94 NHL
1. J. Vanbiesbrouck 56
2. D. Hašek*....... 54
3. P. Roy*......... 44
4. C. Joseph....... 37
5. M. Richter...... 25

Only Roy .922 was higher than Joseph .920 save percentage in the playoff during that stretch and no one else at .915 or more. he was quite high at the time, maybe not a clean #1 team Canada 1996 option over Roy but not far behind either in the picking order. He tended to only have a great first round those 3 seasons in a row from memory, I remember a newpapers calling him St-Joseph in the playoff, he did beat good teams, the Stars, the Hawks, Colorado etc... when there were really good.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Belfour to me was on Roy's level, and when he finally got a great defensive team like Roy had in Montreal, he won the Stanley Cup, beating also Roy 2 years in a row (1999 & 2000) and looking much more impressive especially in 2000.

i think those chicago teams where he won his vezinas were excellent defensive teams. the best defensive player of his generation (chelios, same guy as roy had in montreal), selke calibre dirk graham for a bunch of those years, future cup winning coaches (bowman acolyte mike keenan, then darryl sutter), and very good defensive depth pieces (larmer, brent sutter, wayne presley, steve smith, off the top of my head).

i don’t think those hawks teams were as good defensive as the late 80s habs, mind you, but they were probably as good as the 93 team. but belfour had some disappointing playoff series — minnesota in 91 and the 92 finals come quickly to mind. i think it’s more belfour found a rhythm at the end of the 90s than he just didn’t have hitchcock, et al yet in chicago.

1993 was his next closest and Belfour is clearly the best goalie that year

i remember no one really standing out that year and belfour kind of won a default vezina that year. this was the one year of cujo’s career where he could have won it and i wouldn’t have minded. but depending on what you prioritize barrasso could have won that one too. in any event, i don’t remember really thinking that year, oh yeah belfour is the clear best goalie.

Talent is relative.

For all we know the worst goalie of the 6 team era would've been a HHOF goalie in the 80s or 90s.

there were many years where four of the six goalies were hall of famers, in some combination of lumley, sawchuk, plante, hall, bower, and worsley. there was one year where the six goalies were plante, worsley, hall, sawchuk, lumley, and al rollins, who had won the hart two years prior. they weren’t all in their peaks but a bonkers concentration of talent, with bower (31 years old) as the seventh best goalie in the world.

 

[PistolPete]

i think those chicago teams where he won his vezinas were excellent defensive teams. the best defensive player of his generation (chelios, same guy as roy had in montreal), selke calibre dirk graham for a bunch of those years, future cup winning coaches (bowman acolyte mike keenan, then darryl sutter), and very good defensive depth pieces (larmer, brent sutter, wayne presley, steve smith, off the top of my head).

i don’t think those hawks teams were as good defensive as the late 80s habs, mind you, but they were probably as good as the 93 team. but belfour had some disappointing playoff series — minnesota in 91 and the 92 finals come quickly to mind. i think it’s more belfour found a rhythm at the end of the 90s than he just didn’t have hitchcock, et al yet in chicago.



i remember no one really standing out that year and belfour kind of won a default vezina that year. this was the one year of cujo’s career where he could have won it and i wouldn’t have minded. but depending on what you prioritize barrasso could have won that one too. in any event, i don’t remember really thinking that year, oh yeah belfour is the clear best goalie.



there were many years where four of the six goalies were hall of famers, in some combination of lumley, sawchuk, plante, hall, bower, and worsley. there was one year where the six goalies were plante, worsley, hall, sawchuk, lumley, and al rollins, who had won the hart two years prior. they weren’t all in their peaks but a bonkers concentration of talent, with bower (31 years old) as the seventh best goalie in the world.

1954-55?

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

1954-55?

1955-56 NHL Goalie Statistics | Hockey-Reference.com

Check out the Goalie Statistics for the 1955-56 NHL season on Hockey-Reference.com

www.hockey-reference.com

 

[Crosby2010]

i remember no one really standing out that year and belfour kind of won a default vezina that year. this was the one year of cujo’s career where he could have won it and i wouldn’t have minded. but depending on what you prioritize barrasso could have won that one too. in any event, i don’t remember really thinking that year, oh yeah belfour is the clear best goalie.

Yeah, it was one of those years I guess you can say. The best numbers that year belonged to Belfour, so I get why he won it. Even Roy had an off year for his standards. Three out of the 4 previous Vezinas were his, so 1993 wasn't his best year. Funny looking back on it, but the fans really gave Roy a hard time during that season. And then of course he goes beast mode in the playoffs. But yeah Cujo or even Potvin weren't horrible Vezina candidates in 1993 either. I think they got it right with Belfour and then Barrasso though. But with scoring up higher from 1992 the year 1993 isn't thought to be a year of the goalie or anything.

 

[PistolPete]

Yeah, it was one of those years I guess you can say. The best numbers that year belonged to Belfour, so I get why he won it. Even Roy had an off year for his standards. Three out of the 4 previous Vezinas were his, so 1993 wasn't his best year. Funny looking back on it, but the fans really gave Roy a hard time during that season. And then of course he goes beast mode in the playoffs. But yeah Cujo or even Potvin weren't horrible Vezina candidates in 1993 either. I think they got it right with Belfour and then Barrasso though. But with scoring up higher from 1992 the year 1993 isn't thought to be a year of the goalie or anything.

Is any year the Year of the Goalie when their numbers are dependent upon the state of the game?

Even in the 80s, the goalies who hit the .900 mark had defenses allowing only around 25-28 shots against.

 

[MadLuke]

Yeah, it was one of those years I guess you can say. The best numbers that year belonged to Belfour, so I get why he won it

Some like wins, but not save percentage.

1992-93 Chicago Blackhawks Roster, Stats, Injuries, Scores, Results, Shootouts | Hockey-Reference.com

Check out the latest Chicago Blackhawks Roster, Stats, Injuries, Scores, Results, Shootouts and more on Hockey-Reference.com

www.hockey-reference.com

1992-93 St. Louis Blues Roster, Stats, Injuries, Scores, Results, Shootouts | Hockey-Reference.com

Check out the latest St. Louis Blues Roster, Stats, Injuries, Scores, Results, Shootouts and more on Hockey-Reference.com

www.hockey-reference.com

 

[rnhaas]

In 1993 he was

• 2nd in Games and Minutes
• 7th in Wins
• 1st in Shots faced
• 1st in Saves
• 1st in Save Percentage
• 4th in GAA
• 1st in Goals Saved Above Average (the 5th highest mark of all time, though nobody knew it at the time because the stat hadn't been invented - also the scoring context helps)
• and first in Hockey Reference's Goalie Point Shares if you think they mean anything

So I think you could certainly argue he deserved more than 3rd in Vezina voting that year.

 

[VanIslander]

Cujo was a media (especially TSN) fav.

He was likeable but overrated.

He would lose a big game (against a rival; in terms of standings) then bounce back for multiple wins.

These are my thoughts from way back then.

 

[ozzie]

Playing in Toronto inflates every players popularity and worth. Cujo's performance against Toronto in the playoffs was legendary. He wasn't consisitent and he went up against some of the best goalies in the history of the game. Hasek, Roy and Brodeur. Throw in Belfour some oddities like Jim Carey and Kolzig. Strange times.

I wouldn't agree with people saying he wasn't very good. I'd argue he was the victim of lack of consistency and performed better when his team was an underdog. He just wasn't in the zone enough, but when he was locked in. He was extremely good and top tie.

It didn't matter how well he did, there were usually 2-3 people better or on par in a golden age. But I can't see any year where he deserved a Vez.

I was lucky enough to meet him a few times North of Toronto. he came across as a real likeable guy and I suspect a great team mate based on brief interactions.

 

[The Panther]

In 1993 he was

• 2nd in Games and Minutes
• 7th in Wins
• 1st in Shots faced
• 1st in Saves
• 4th in GAA
• and first in Hockey Reference's Goalie Point Shares if you think they mean anything

In fairness, none of the above has anything to do with how relatively good a goalie is.

Certainly Joseph's three seasons in a row (1991-92, 1992-93, 1993-94) with St. Louis are highly impressive, and quite elite. I can see the argument that he should have got more Vezina votes than he did, but part of that award is generally reputation... you have to hang around for a while to "earn" it. He probably got more Vezina votes with the Maple Leafs in 1999 than he deserved, so it all evens out.

One good point in Joseph's career-legacy favor, I think, is that he didn't have any bad seasons, pre-Lock Out. He was pretty consistently near-great (and occasionally truly great). But no sad-sack seasons in there. And his playoff stats are also consistently solid (excepting one series in 1995*).

As Joseph mostly played on mediocre-to-pretty-good clubs, I think his having five seasons in the top-7 of save percentages is pretty great, especially considering how many games he was playing.

But a Vezina...? 1992-93 would seem to be his best argument for one, but I don't think he was an impressive as Belfour, so....?


* In this Vancouver-St. Louis series (won by Van in 7), the Canucks tied the NHL record for most shorthanded goals in a series, with six!

 

[connellc]

* In this Vancouver-St. Louis series (won by Van in 7), the Canucks tied the NHL record for most shorthanded goals in a series, with six!

That statistic was thanks to the incredible speed duo of Russ Courtnall and Pavel Bure on the PK. A treat to watch and an absolute shame we never saw more of those two together. Videos of it on YouTube. The only time in the NHL I've ever seen teams be defensive on a PP.

 

[MadLuke]

but part of that award is generally reputation... you have to hang around for a while to "earn" it.

Far from a Selke, Messier or Byng too.,..


1984 Barasso won it as a rookie,
1986 Vanbiesbrouck, first season as a clear number 1 ?
1987 Hextall won it as a rookie
1991 Belfour won it with the Calder, over a really established Patrick Roy.
1994 Hasek win it as his first season as a starter
1996 Carey win it as a sophomore and his first full 82 games seasons, was a finalist the year before as a rookie.

In that era at least you really did not had too, a season is over 2000 shots as a sample size, it can be quite flashy-in your face results and there is not a lot of candidate it is among the top 7 goaltender that had success in some obvious way that year if you are one of them, unlike something like trying to win a Selke-Norris without juicy numbers or long build reputation were you compete against 40 possible names

I think goalie point share could be an attempt at how good you were relatively to the others but I am not sure after reading it

 

[Felidae]

There's perhaps a legitimate argument that he should have won in 1992-93.

Led the league in SV and SOG, was also 2nd in games played.

Lead the league in sv% (.911sv%) and GSAA(57) by a decent margin. The next goalie that played above 60 games had a .906sv%, and the 2nd best goalie had a 37 GSAA.


He was at or very close to the top in nearly every statistical category. His team wasnt exactly a powerhouse either.. 5th in GA but 18th in GF.

The others had their narratives I'm sure, but on the surface it's hard to argue a better goalie that year.

 

[DRW895]

Lack of fortune in every aspect of his NHL waya