Is Hasek really the best goaltender?

[TheDevilMadeMe]

And this makes things stated there wrong?

When he blows off data that doesn't fit with his preconceived notions, then yes, it does.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

That site has a lot of merit - but the site name is off-putting and reeks of bias, even though I do think it has a lot of great content.

That's the thing. The sight does have some great content and The Contrarian Goaltender obviously knows how to manipulate his statistics in new and sometimes revealing ways. But he has a blatant hate-on for Martin Brodeur and, for example, when confronted with data that there was a systematic undercounting of shots at the old Continental Airlines Arena (aka The Swamp), he tosses it aside without much thought. Compare to how puck prospectus, a much more professional site handles data that goes against previous conclusions.

 

[Jabba11]

One name: Patrick Roy
You will never ever get a more arrogant but yet extraordinary goalie than Roy.

 

[Grabbe Grabovski]

It's an easy, but incomplete case, considering Roy's statistical prime was the late 80s*, and any case he has to be #1 values his playoff performances very highly. And that Brodeur is 7 years younger than Hasek and was likely just entering his prime when Hasek was leaving his.

*someone calculated save % vs. the rest of the league, and Roy had a peak in the late 80s where he led the field almost as much as Hasek did in the mid 90s, albeit against weaker competition.

You have to take account, that Hasek was a world class goaltender in Czechoslovakia, before he came to NHL. Playing at Czechoslovakian World Championship team in 1983 at age of 18 was legendary. He wasn't even draft eligible at the time (April 1983) when the 1983 World Championships were played.

 

[Infinite Vision*]

If you give any credit to Hasek's career before coming to the NHL, I don't think there is much debate, because in reality he has an incredible career and longevity to go with his unsurpassed dominance in his prime.

Hasek was literally the youngest professional hockey player in history, and now he is one of the oldest.

To this day, or has there been a younger pro player now?

 

[RabbinsDuck]

To this day, or has there been a younger pro player now?

He was 16 at the time, and no one really jumps out at me since then (as younger), but maybe it no longer stands.

 

[Chili]

"greatest of all time"

That's an opinion.

Mine is Jacques Plante for many reasons.

 

[overpass]

That's the thing. The sight does have some great content and The Contrarian Goaltender obviously knows how to manipulate his statistics in new and sometimes revealing ways. But he has a blatant hate-on for Martin Brodeur and, for example, when confronted with data that there was a systematic undercounting of shots at the old Continental Airlines Arena (aka The Swamp), he tosses it aside without much thought. Compare to how puck prospectus, a much more professional site handles data that goes against previous conclusions.

Funny you should write this. The Contrarian Goaltender wrote an article at Puck Prospectus about shot undercounting/overcounting.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Funny you should write this. The Contrarian Goaltender wrote an article at Puck Prospectus about shot undercounting/overcounting.

haha, that's funny and kind of makes me look like a jackass (but that's okay, wouldn't be the first time ). I remember he dismissed it offhand a few months ago when it first came up.

But then he writes stuff like this:

In contrast, teams like Tampa Bay, Boston, and Columbus probably were more likely to utilize the neutral zone trap or other similar tactics at home than they were on the road. Perhaps those management groups counted on home wins doing more than goals scored to boost attendance.

And I just have to wonder if he knows nearly as much about hockey as he does about stats. When was a team ever accused of playing a less entertaining brand of hockey to bring in the fans? Because they don't care as much about winning on the road?

And then he has NJ as one of the "more neutral zone time at home" teams (ranked just behind the aforementioned teams)? Ridiculous and flies in the face of everything I've watched. During the late 90s, the Devils were notorious for playing extra boring on the road and "getting away from the system at home," much to Lemaire's chagrin.

He basically can't admit that shot recording (something that relies on human interpretation) isn't an exact science, and therefore his efforts to boil goaltending down entirely to save % is a useless endeavor. So he makes up ridiculous theories like this one that fly in the face of common sense, but he does use lots of numbers to support them.

The original puck prospectus article had visual examples of what was counted as a shot in either Florida or Nashville (I forget which one) and what wasn't counted as a shot in St. Louis or NJ, and they were indistinguishable plays.

 

[overpass]

Whatever the possible issues with save percentage, I've never heard a good argument that Hasek's save percentages were misleading. In his prime, he was reducing his team's goals against by 20-40%. That's just ridiculously valuable. No other goaltender has ever had a comparable run to Hasek's 1994-2001 since save percentages were recorded (unofficially back to the 1950s).

And Hasek wasn't a short career burnout either. Circumstances beyond his control put much of his very long career outside the NHL, but he excelled wherever he played.

 

[Blakkmantis]

For me it's Patrick Roy

 

[RabbinsDuck]

Whatever the possible issues with save percentage, I've never heard a good argument that Hasek's save percentages were misleading. In his prime, he was reducing his team's goals against by 20-40%. That's just ridiculously valuable. No other goaltender has ever had a comparable run to Hasek's 1994-2001 since save percentages were recorded (unofficially back to the 1950s).

And Hasek wasn't a short career burnout either. Circumstances beyond his control put much of his very long career outside the NHL, but he excelled wherever he played.

Agreed. It really bugs me we do not have shot totals for Sawchuk's peak, though.

 

[overpass]

Here's a link to a post where I posted quotes from an article on Hasek in the 1987 Canada Cup. Even then he was considered one of the best goaltenders in the world.

 

[Ward Cornell]

He was 16 at the time, and no one really jumps out at me since then (as younger), but maybe it no longer stands.

According to the NCAA there's a lot of 16 year old pros playing Junior Hockey in Canada.

 

[Big Phil]

Yes he is. There is no logical argument for him not being the best ever. The only arguements are for guys who played on stacked teams for longer periods of time, both seasons, and games per season, yet none match his 6 Vezina trophies, or his 2 Hart trophies. No one matches his statistical dominance in save percentage. Whether people like it or not save percentage is the most important statistic for comparing goalies. Yes there are many factors which determine a goalies save percentage...but there are even more that determine GAA and wins, etc. There really is no reason to believe Hasek wasn't the best goalie ever...IMO that is.

Hmmm, I tend to disagree there. There certainly is a logical argument for him NOT being #1 all-time. The Vezinas and First team all-stars are nice as well as the Harts but Plante is right there with him in both categories and let's not forget how he helped anchor a dynasty. Not to mention Plante was great late in his career, getting to two more final appearances and then in his early 40s leading the NHL in GAA on a poor Toronto team all the while being a 2nd team all-star.

Peak value Hasek is probably the best goalie ever. That's hard to beat. Parent and Sawchuk are the only two as good in that department. But the thing with a goalie is that they are so harshly judged. Kind of similar to how a QB is judged in Football. Championships are important, very important. And in Roy's case he won 4 of them and was the MVP of the playoffs 3 of those times while still being vital the 4th time. Very, very similar to Joe Montana in the NFL who won 4 Super Bowls and was the Super Bowl MVP 3 times and still stellar the only time he didn't win. This is why Montana is ranked higher the majority of the time than Dan Marino, who never won anything. Or Brett Favre, who owns every stat but only won once.

Same can be said in hockey. A goalie needs championships and needs to be a central contributor to those championships in order to get ranked so high. Hasek was good when he won in 2002 with Detroit, but was he the most important one on that team? 2nd? 3rd? Maybe 4th. That's fine, but a Conn Smythe would be nice and we all know he didn't win one in 2008 either although he was old by then. This is something I think that holds Brodeur back from Roy. Statistically he beats him for sure but he never was judged the most valuable asset on his team's run to a Cup. Roy was. Sawchuk would have been twice probably. Even Hall was. And Plante probably captures it in 1960 if it existed. On the flip side we literally witnessed Hasek carry weak teams on his back who had no business even being in the playoffs. He took Buffalo to the finals, he went to the semis and the knock on Roy is that we never saw him do that with a weak team, he just never played for one.

I agree that the man was downright exciting to watch. He made your jaw drop ALL the time. He made saves that made you scream in hatred! But man, oh man, was he dominant. So for that alone he is never worse than #3 on my list. The top 4 in my mind are Sawchuk, Roy, Hasek and Plante and then a little gap before Brodeur and Hall etc. But those top 4 ALL have cases to be #1 in some way shape or form. Nothing is written in stone with goalie rankings. The only thing is, I would disagree with him at #1. Still though, he's not underrated.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

Lemiuex had only 2 Cups, yet his dominance unquestionably lands him in the Big 4. I believe Hasek's dominance is close, and he dragged bad teams further into the playoffs than Lemiuex ever did. Hasek was the equivalent of a 120+ forward in the late 90s... how many more Harts would he have won if he were not a goalie? The fact he did win his Harts by some of the largest margins ever is more than enough to allow that maybe it was Hasek's teams keeping him from the Cup mores than Hasek himself. That has to be taken into the equation.

The other part so often overlooked is that he was considered amongst the best in the world for numerous years before coming to the NHL. How many more Vezinas would he have? Or at least how many more would he be in contention for? Any more Harts? With earlier free agency how many more Cups could he have had? I believe that also needs to be added to the equation. This is not a "what if" scenario over what if a player never got injured - Hasek was playing, and at an elite level.

Without adding either of those parts to the equation, Hasek is a strong candidate, but factoring them in, even conservatively brings him close to the realm of the Big 4, IMO.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

To the original poster: Try checking out the 2009 version of the "top 100 players of all time" list stickied at the top of this forum (the list with only 70 names on it. ). Specifically, read the discussion for Round 2, Vote 2 (spots 11-20). There is an excellent discussion of the pros and cons of Hasek vs. Roy vs. Plante there (possibly with Sawchuk and Hall).

 

[Devils Mike*]

Nope, it's still Brodeur.

 

[Hardyvan123]

I'm in the 'Hasek is #1' crowd. Roy was more technically proficient, but Hasek played like he'd rather lose a limb than allow a goal. Easily the most exciting goalie to watch that I've ever seen. It's not easy for a goalie to be widely regarded as the best player in the world. Only goalie to win the Hart twice (and the Lindsay/Pearson).

I have to agree here as he is the best goalie I have seen and I've seen most of them since 1970 onwards but I have to admit that I do pay more attention to position players than goalies, especially in the new "HUGE SAFETY PADS" NHL and all that goes with it.

 

[justPlay]

According to the NCAA there's a lot of 16 year old pros playing Junior Hockey in Canada.

?

He was a professional hockey player at the age of 16, playing in the Czechoslovak league.


The ranking of top goalies is incredibly difficult though; Plante, Roy and Hasek all could be #1.

Brodeur isn't even in the conversation for me.

 

[unknown33]

Nope, it's still Brodeur.

Any explanation or is that all you have to say?

 

[seventieslord]

Whatever the possible issues with save percentage, I've never heard a good argument that Hasek's save percentages were misleading. In his prime, he was reducing his team's goals against by 20-40%. That's just ridiculously valuable. No other goaltender has ever had a comparable run to Hasek's 1994-2001 since save percentages were recorded (unofficially back to the 1950s).

And Hasek wasn't a short career burnout either. Circumstances beyond his control put much of his very long career outside the NHL, but he excelled wherever he played.

Exactly.

Agreed. It really bugs me we do not have shot totals for Sawchuk's peak, though.

I wouldn't expect that he'd have faced a lot of shots. He wasn't facing the production line or Red Kelly. That team was friggin' stacked.

He was leading the league in GAA but I would not be surprised if he was 2nd or 3rd in sv%, or led by a very small margin.

Hmmm, I tend to disagree there. There certainly is a logical argument for him NOT being #1 all-time. The Vezinas and First team all-stars are nice as well as the Harts but Plante is right there with him in both categories

Come on, Phil, you know better.

First of all, vezinas in Plante's time were like the Jennings today. Throw them out. If you're looking at first team all-stars (which can be properly compared), Hasek has six and Plante three. And Hasek had a harder time of it, too. (more teams means flash in the pan goalies who wouldn't even be in the league if it was smaller, sometimes have a great season and steal the spotlight) And plante's not "right with" Hasek in the harts, either. Plante is among many who have won one. Hasek is the only who has won two.

Arguments for Plante are comprised of his incredible longevity, strong personal numbers in both the regular season and playoffs, and unparalleled team success.

This is something I think that holds Brodeur back from Roy. Statistically he beats him for sure .

What? Come on, Phil. Brodeur does not beat Roy statistically!

Nope, it's still Brodeur.

ROFL

 

[tp71]

Id have to pick Hasek as the best. I believe he has a higher shutouts to games ratio than Brodeur. Basically if he had played the same amount of NHL contests as Brodeur, he'd be on pace for more shutouts.

That being said, my list goes:

Hasek
Sawchuk
Brodeur
Plante
Roy.

 

[seventieslord]

Id have to pick Hasek as the best. I believe he has a higher shutouts to games ratio than Brodeur. Basically if he had played the same amount of NHL contests as Brodeur, he'd be on pace for more shutouts.

That being said, my list goes:

Hasek
Sawchuk
Brodeur
Plante
Roy.

Why Roy and Plante behind Brodeur?

 

[shazariahl]

Lemiuex had only 2 Cups, yet his dominance unquestionably lands him in the Big 4. I believe Hasek's dominance is close, and he dragged bad teams further into the playoffs than Lemiuex ever did. Hasek was the equivalent of a 120+ forward in the late 90s... how many more Harts would he have won if he were not a goalie? The fact he did win his Harts by some of the largest margins ever is more than enough to allow that maybe it was Hasek's teams keeping him from the Cup mores than Hasek himself. That has to be taken into the equation.

The other part so often overlooked is that he was considered amongst the best in the world for numerous years before coming to the NHL. How many more Vezinas would he have? Or at least how many more would he be in contention for? Any more Harts? With earlier free agency how many more Cups could he have had? I believe that also needs to be added to the equation. This is not a "what if" scenario over what if a player never got injured - Hasek was playing, and at an elite level.

Without adding either of those parts to the equation, Hasek is a strong candidate, but factoring them in, even conservatively brings him close to the realm of the Big 4, IMO.

I find myself agreeing with a lot of this post. I can't really fault Hasek for not winning more championships because those Sabres teams had no business even being in the playoffs some years, let alone the finals. He was also instrumental in their gold medal win (not just against Canada either - he stole the entire tournament). Any of the goalies being compared to him played on Dynasty-type teams, or at least teams good enough to win multiple championships. He didn't have that until late in his career, arguably after many of his best years had already past. None of the others in contention won a bunch of cups on aweful teams either - I don't really think it can be held against Hasek alone.

What we can say, is that he led the league in SV % 6 times in 8 years, while Brodeur has NEVER led the league in SV % even once. That's not to pick on Marty, who has been an amazing goaltender for a long time, but to me Marty seems a lot like Messier - a great player on a great team who enjoyed a lot of success on a great team, and put up a lot of impressive numbers along the way. I wouldn't call him a compiler, since that implies he was just "along for the ride" so to speak (and neither Brodeur or Messier fall into that category, IMO), but I don't think he was ever the best. His numbers are from being consistant for a long time, but never really dominant.

Hasek is more like Lemieux (and IMO there's no goalie equiv for Gretzky), where he was amazingly dominant, but never got to fully enjoy his "full" career here, and only won a couple championships because some of the teams he was on rather sucked. But when he was on the top of his game, he was clearly amazing. Leading the league in SV % 6 times, winning 6 Vezinas, and 2 Harts are pretty gaudy, especially in an era where there are dozens of "elite" goalies instead of just 2 or 3.