Is Hasek really the best goaltender?

[Chili]

Hasek's prime numbers must be taken in context of the era, a period where the perimeter offense entered the NHL.

I think it's important to bring up the relevancy of era with all goaltenders.

The evolution in styles, rules, equipment, training, etc have changed the position enormously since the beginings of the game.

Try to imagine one of today's goalers playing without a trapper. Until Emile Francis wore a first baseman's mitt in 1948, they didn't even have catching gloves. Or when they were penalized for dropping to the ice in the earliest days.

Put one of today's goaltenders in there without a mask .

'Greatest of all time' is really no one. They have played under such different conditions that there is no comparing certain eras, in my opinion.

 

[Regal]

Depending on how the comparison is made the difference is paper thin and extremely debatable. Prime vs prime.

Roy Prime
Roy .902 vs Casey . 891 difference is .011 or 11/891 = ~.0123 better

Hasek Prime
Hasek .929 vs Roy .915 difference is .014 or 14/915 = ~.0153 better

What is very interesting is that post prime Roy was a better goalie by 13/902 = ~.0144 better.

The question is why. The answer is rather straightforward. Hasek prime was during an era when the NHL featured a greater perimeter game with much higher SV% numbers

Evidence = look no further than this years playoffs. The equipment did not change from series to series or game to game yet the performance of goalies SV% varied enormously. Halak looked great against teams that played on the perimeter and average when the teams crashed the crease or the slot. Leighton looked great against the Canadiens when they played on the perimeter but like a minor league call-up the one game they played in the slot or against Chicago who regularly crashed the crease or the slot The goalies that had SV% in the .930 range against a perimeter game saw their numbers drop significantly to the .875 -.890 range.

Hasek's prime numbers must be taken in context of the era, a period where the perimeter offense entered the NHL.

I don't think anyone is arguing that Hasek's numbers must be taken in context to era. No chance he posts a .930 Sv % in the 80s. His peak started just before the dead puck era and went on right through it.

Certainly the difference between Roy's SV% dominance and Hasek's is minimal. However, as someone else mentioned, I think we have to take a look at the competition as well. Roy beat out guys like Jon Casey and Ron Hextall. Hasek beat out guys like Roy, Brodeur, Belfour, and Joseph. Also, I wonder if the perimeter game you mentioned, combined with the bigger pads, improvements in goaltender techniques and positioning, and a more defensive game actually made it more difficult for Hasek to consistently lead the league in SV% as he did.

While I haven't gone over the specific data, it seems to me that there was much less fluctuation in Sv% among goaltenders during Hasek's prime (which I think your comment on the perimeter game suggested as well), and as such it seems like there's more room for "lesser" goaltenders to get lucky or hot and slightly edge out those that are considered the best within a single season. This would also be increased slightly by having a more teams, as there's more chance of one of those goaltenders having one of these "fluke" seasons. Although, at the same time, looking over hockey-reference's data for Sv% going back to 83-84, only Belfour and Turco with two times each have led the league in Sv% more than once besides Hasek's 6 and Roy's 4.

One thing I wonder about too, is how far Roy was actually removed from his prime during his Avalanche career. His prime is usually considered the late 80s/early 90s, due to how he dominated, but the only goaltender who was clearly better than him during his Avs career was Hasek, with competition from Brodeur and Belfour (two other HoF goaltenders). He was still putting up great stats, and showed he could dominate in the playoffs, with two more cups and another Conn Smythe. Was he really any worse than late 80s Roy? And if not, how much better would Hasek have been than goaltenders Roy was beating out in his prime?

 

[MS]

To me, Hasek is the greatest goalie who ever lived. His dominance from 1993-1999 was just unreal, and perhaps the greatest example of one NHL player's dominance over his peers save for Gretzky and Orr.

The kicker for me is that almost every other great goalie (save maybe Glenn Hall) has dominated behind a great team. Take out Dryden and Roy, and guys like Bunny Laraque, Brian Hayward, and Andre Raicicot were still able to put up elite numbers behind those teams. Scott Clemmensen stepped in seamlessly for Brodeur when he missed most of a season. Harry Lumley and Hall put up identical numbers to Sawchuk on powerhouse Detroit teams on either end of Sawchuk's best years.

Hasek dominated on teams that would have been bottom-5 in the league if they'd had an average goalie in his place. From 1996-1999 they went 13-26-9 in games where he didn't get the decision. He had a GAA nearly 2.00 better than a HHOFer in Grant Fuhr in a year where they were splitting games.

I know that Roy had a similar level of save % dominance for a stretch, but I somehow doubt that he would have managed that margin if he were playing for a '90s Sabres equilavent - say the Winnipeg Jets. That Montreal team was an easy team to stop pucks behind, as evidenced by the similarly dominant save % numbers posted by a very average goalie in Brian Hayward over the same stretch.

What Hasek did in the 1990s was absolutely magical. He was the best player in the sport.

And personally I don't rate Brodeur in the same ballpark as either Hasek or Roy.

 

[hockeyfan125]

To me, Hasek is the greatest goalie who ever lived. His dominance from 1993-1999 was just unreal, and perhaps the greatest example of one NHL player's dominance over his peers save for Gretzky and Orr.

The kicker for me is that almost every other great goalie (save maybe Glenn Hall) has dominated behind a great team. Take out Dryden and Roy, and guys like Bunny Laraque, Brian Hayward, and Andre Raicicot were still able to put up elite numbers behind those teams. Scott Clemmensen stepped in seamlessly for Brodeur when he missed most of a season. Harry Lumley and Hall put up identical numbers to Sawchuk on powerhouse Detroit teams on either end of Sawchuk's best years.

Hasek dominated on teams that would have been bottom-5 in the league if they'd had an average goalie in his place. From 1996-1999 they went 13-26-9 in games where he didn't get the decision. He had a GAA nearly 2.00 better than a HHOFer in Grant Fuhr in a year where they were splitting games.

I know that Roy had a similar level of save % dominance for a stretch, but I somehow doubt that he would have managed that margin if he were playing for a '90s Sabres equilavent - say the Winnipeg Jets. That Montreal team was an easy team to stop pucks behind, as evidenced by the similarly dominant save % numbers posted by a very average goalie in Brian Hayward over the same stretch.

What Hasek did in the 1990s was absolutely magical. He was the best player in the sport.

And personally I don't rate Brodeur in the same ballpark as either Hasek or Roy.

100% agree on all accounts. Hasek's mid-to-late 90's stretch of hockey is one of the most dominant in the history of hockey.

 

[BraveCanadian]

100% agree on all accounts. Hasek's mid-to-late 90's stretch of hockey is one of the most dominant in the history of hockey.

I don't hear anyone challenging Hasek's regular season peak.

I do think he peaked higher than Roy although Roy also was dominant during his peak and still outstanding during Hasek's.

I'd take Roy any day for the playoffs though. Cause you'd know what you were gonna get.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I'm in the Hasek for his peak but Roy for his career/playoff's camp.

Hasek's 2 Harts are all well and good but Roy has 3 Conn Smythe's and was in the running for two others.

Can't go wrong with either.

 

[Hardyvan123]

I agree. Roy changed the position like no other goalie in history. Most historically important goalie since Plante, and possibly ever, in terms of his impact on the game. That should give him points if anything, not take them away.

IMO, much of the decrease in scoring from the 80s is directly related to 2 innovations by Roy - the perfection of the butterfly used by Hall, and the "innovative" use of equipment for purposes other than protection.



I agree that Brodeur is behind Hasek and Roy, but the "rock solid defense and team's style of play" argument is really old.

Since the lockout, Brodeur won 2 Vezinas and was a 4-time finalist. He did this with a defense worse than any that Roy ever played behind and one that was no worse than what Hasek had in Buffalo. The "rock solid defense" argument might have worked when Brodeur's best defensemen weren't Paul Martin and blind-in-one-eye Colin White.

Not to mention that the 80s Canadiens were probably the most defensive-minded team in the league, coached by the likes of Jacques Lemaire and Pat Burns who would later coach the dead-puck era Devils. And the 90s Sabres were definitely a defense-first team, though they didn't have the personnel of NJ or Montreal to be as good at it.

For Broduer the "old argument " of playing behind a "rock solid defense" isn't only about the defense he placed behind but more overall of the defensive 1st system that the Devils have played for ages now.

For most people who follow hockey the 1st thing that comes to mind when asked about what type of team and style the devils are the word defensive comes up plain and simple.

Hasek clearly is the better goalie and I would put Broduer behind Roy even with his dominance in the counting stats.

Judging Plante and Sawchuk with the modern big 3 is a little unfair as the hockey, equipment, styles where more different than the difference between position players.

 

[MS]

I don't hear anyone challenging Hasek's regular season peak.

I do think he peaked higher than Roy although Roy also was dominant during his peak and still outstanding during Hasek's.

I'd take Roy any day for the playoffs though. Cause you'd know what you were gonna get.

You didn't know what you were getting in the playoffs with Hasek?

He had one poor playoffs in his career, in 1995. Other than that, he was unreal, and his playoff numbers are actually better than his ridiculous regular-season numbers.

As a Sabre, his playoff GAA was under 2.00 and his playoff save % was about .935.

Unfortunately, he played for teams that were crap aside from him and couldn't score goals. As soon as he went to a good team, he won a Cup on his first try.

If Hasek played for teams of the calibre Roy did over the course of his career, he'd have 3-4 Cups, too.

This is to take nothing away from Roy - who is obviously one of the greatest playoff goalies ever - but Hasek's lack of team success was not his fault. He did everything he could.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Hasek is without a doubt the best regular season goalie I've seen. His peak value is also significantly higher than any other goalie, hence more Vezina's. Parent and Dryden are the only other two in his league in terms of peak value.

But, and a big but, does that make Hasek the best I've seen? I think Brodeur and Roy were better compilers so to speak due to being great NHL goalies right from their early 20's, whereas for various reasons, Hasek took longer to establish himself. In addition, Hasek's playoff resume isnt' as good as Roy, Brodeur, Dryden, Parent, Smith and Fhur, other goalies I saw at their best.

So Hasek may be the best goalie I've seen, but due to a lesser playoff resume and not being a great goalie until his later 20's, it certainly is arguable.

I think this is poorly chosen wording. Hasek didn't take longer to establish himself as a goaltender. He simply took the long road to the NHL. I know you're alluding to the existence of Belfour, maybe even culture/language barriers, etc, but Hasek established himself as a goaltender of note on the international scene by the time he was 18, hence his addition to Czechoslovakia's World Cup team.

Totally agree though; in my opinion it's pretty clearly Hasek, but it IS arguable.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

You didn't know what you were getting in the playoffs with Hasek?

He had one poor playoffs in his career, in 1995. Other than that, he was unreal, and his playoff numbers are actually better than his ridiculous regular-season numbers.

As a Sabre, his playoff GAA was under 2.00 and his playoff save % was about .935.

Unfortunately, he played for teams that were crap aside from him and couldn't score goals. As soon as he went to a good team, he won a Cup on his first try.

If Hasek played for teams of the calibre Roy did over the course of his career, he'd have 3-4 Cups, too.

This is to take nothing away from Roy - who is obviously one of the greatest playoff goalies ever - but Hasek's lack of team success was not his fault. He did everything he could.

Sure, Hasek was great in the playoffs... when he wasn't sitting out with controversial injuries. I would guess that's what he's getting at.

 

[Dreakmur]

I think this is poorly chosen wording. Hasek didn't take longer to establish himself as a goaltender. He simply took the long road to the NHL. I know you're alluding to the existence of Belfour, maybe even culture/language barriers, etc, but Hasek established himself as a goaltender of note on the international scene by the time he was 18, hence his addition to Czechoslovakia's World Cup team.

Totally agree though; in my opinion it's pretty clearly Hasek, but it IS arguable.

Agreed.

Hasek didn't even come to North America untill he was 25 years old, and he wasn't an NHL starter untill he was 27. Many people seem to forget he was already building a strong resume before that time.

Before setting foot in the NHL, Hasek already had:
2 x Best Goaltender at WC (1985, 1987)
3 x Czech League MVP (1987, 1989, 1990)
5 x Czech League Topp Goaltender (1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990)

 

[quoipourquoi]

This is to take nothing away from Roy - who is obviously one of the greatest playoff goalies ever - but Hasek's lack of team success was not his fault. He did everything he could.

But how can we say definitively that Hasek did everything possible in the playoffs when Patrick Roy is the only elite goalie of the era to statistically trend up both as the games went to the playoffs and as they went to playoff overtime?

Hasek did everything he could, but he didn't do everything that Roy could, at least not statistically.


These numbers were taken from analysis I did a few seasons back.


Regular Season Record (Pre-1983 Standards) vs. Playoff Record Trend:

507-283-207 (.612); 151-94 (.616); +.004: Roy
442-289-198 (.582); 88-68 (.564); -.018: Belfour
341-188-146 (.613); 59-41 (.590); -.023: Osgood
348-205-154 (.601); 65-49 (.570); -.031: Hasek
470-273-228 (.601); 95-74 (.562); -.039: Brodeur
403-317-177 (.548); 63-66 (.488); -.060: Joseph


Regular Season Overtime Record vs. Playoff Overtime Record Trend:

44-32 (.579); 40-18 (.690); +.111: Roy
39-35 (.527); 22-20 (.524); -.003: Belfour
43-34 (.558); 13-15 (.464); -.094: Joseph
35-20 (.636); 15-14 (.517); -.119: Hasek
36-28 (.563); 4-7 (.364); -.199: Osgood
54-29 (.651); 11-19 (.367); -.284: Brodeur


Playoff Record vs. Playoff Overtime Record Trend:

151-94 (.616); 40-18 (.690); +.074: Roy
63-66 (.488); 13-15 (.464); -.020: Joseph
88-68 (.564); 22-20 (.524); -.040: Belfour
65-49 (.570); 15-14 (.517); -.053: Hasek
95-74 (.562); 11-19 (.367); -.195: Brodeur
59-41 (.590); 4-7 (.364); -.226: Osgood


I won't pretend that there are not other factors involved, just as I hope none of you pretend that there are not other factors involved in SPCT and Hart voting records, but the following are statistical truths of playoff hockey in the Hasek/Roy era:

Hasek, Brodeur, Belfour, Joseph, and Osgood are less likely to win a playoff game than they are a regular season game.

Patrick Roy is more likely.

Hasek, Brodeur, Belfour, Joseph, and Osgood are less likely to win a playoff overtime game than they are a regular season overtime game.

Patrick Roy is more likely.

Hasek, Brodeur, Belfour, Joseph, and Osgood are less likely to win a playoff game when it goes to overtime than they are at the beginning of regulation in that same playoff game.

Patrick Roy is more likely.

 

[seventieslord]

Hey I'm not promoting Brodeur ahead of Roy all-time or anything but the all-time wins record has long been Brodeur's now, the single season win record is his now and the all-time shutouts record is his now. .

These are compiling records, though - game in, game out, he wasn't as dominant as Roy. Roy's a solid 2nd in the modern era when it comes to posting a dominant sv%. Hasek paces Roy, Roy paces the rest.

Depending on how the comparison is made the difference is paper thin and extremely debatable. Prime vs prime.

Roy Prime
Roy .902 vs Casey . 891 difference is .011 or 11/891 = ~.0123 better

Hasek Prime
Hasek .929 vs Roy .915 difference is .014 or 14/915 = ~.0153 better
.

That's terrible math.

What you're looking for is this:

Roy: 9.8% error rate, Casey 10.9%. Roy was performing 11.1% better than Casey.

Hasek 7.1% error rate, Roy 8.5%. Hasek was performing 12.0% better than Roy.

(with the usual caveat that sv% is not the sole determinant of performance even if it may be the best)

 

[seventieslord]

You didn't know what you were getting in the playoffs with Hasek?

He had one poor playoffs in his career, in 1995. Other than that, he was unreal, and his playoff numbers are actually better than his ridiculous regular-season numbers.

As a Sabre, his playoff GAA was under 2.00 and his playoff save % was about .935.

Unfortunately, he played for teams that were crap aside from him and couldn't score goals. As soon as he went to a good team, he won a Cup on his first try.

If Hasek played for teams of the calibre Roy did over the course of his career, he'd have 3-4 Cups, too.

This is to take nothing away from Roy - who is obviously one of the greatest playoff goalies ever - but Hasek's lack of team success was not his fault. He did everything he could.

As usual, you are 100% correct.

With Hasek, you never knew what you were gonna get in the playoffs... in the W column. Because teams win games, not players. Hasek's personal numbers were phenomenal.

 

[jkrx]

If Conn Smythe truly went to the best player in the playoffs, Hasek would have atleast one ('99).

 

[Rhiessan71]

But how can we say definitively that Hasek did everything possible in the playoffs when Patrick Roy is the only elite goalie of the era to statistically trend up both as the games went to the playoffs and as they went to playoff overtime?

Hasek did everything he could, but he didn't do everything that Roy could, at least not statistically.


These numbers were taken from analysis I did a few seasons back.


Regular Season Record (Pre-1983 Standards) vs. Playoff Record Trend:

507-283-207 (.612); 151-94 (.616); +.004: Roy
442-289-198 (.582); 88-68 (.564); -.018: Belfour
341-188-146 (.613); 59-41 (.590); -.023: Osgood
348-205-154 (.601); 65-49 (.570); -.031: Hasek
470-273-228 (.601); 95-74 (.562); -.039: Brodeur
403-317-177 (.548); 63-66 (.488); -.060: Joseph


Regular Season Overtime Record vs. Playoff Overtime Record Trend:

44-32 (.579); 40-18 (.690); +.111: Roy
39-35 (.527); 22-20 (.524); -.003: Belfour
43-34 (.558); 13-15 (.464); -.094: Joseph
35-20 (.636); 15-14 (.517); -.119: Hasek
36-28 (.563); 4-7 (.364); -.199: Osgood
54-29 (.651); 11-19 (.367); -.284: Brodeur


Playoff Record vs. Playoff Overtime Record Trend:

151-94 (.616); 40-18 (.690); +.074: Roy
63-66 (.488); 13-15 (.464); -.020: Joseph
88-68 (.564); 22-20 (.524); -.040: Belfour
65-49 (.570); 15-14 (.517); -.053: Hasek
95-74 (.562); 11-19 (.367); -.195: Brodeur
59-41 (.590); 4-7 (.364); -.226: Osgood


I won't pretend that there are not other factors involved, just as I hope none of you pretend that there are not other factors involved in SPCT and Hart voting records, but the following are statistical truths of playoff hockey in the Hasek/Roy era:

Hasek, Brodeur, Belfour, Joseph, and Osgood are less likely to win a playoff game than they are a regular season game.

Patrick Roy is more likely.

Hasek, Brodeur, Belfour, Joseph, and Osgood are less likely to win a playoff overtime game than they are a regular season overtime game.

Patrick Roy is more likely.

Hasek, Brodeur, Belfour, Joseph, and Osgood are less likely to win a playoff game when it goes to overtime than they are at the beginning of regulation in that same playoff game.

Patrick Roy is more likely.

About sums it up.
I especially liked this line "Hasek did everything he could, but he didn't do everything that Roy could".

Hasek may have tried everything he could but as Mr. Miyagi says....You do, or do not, there is no try.
Roy just did, he won it all twice with what is generally argued as being two of the weakest teams to win the Cup ('86 and '93) in the last 40 years.

Like I said earlier, you can give Hasek his regular season success and his Harts but there's no denying that Roy is the playoff King.
In the end as a fan, what would you rather see your team lifting in the air, the Presidents Trophy or the Stanley Cup?

 

[jkrx]

About sums it up.
I especially liked this line "Hasek did everything he could, but he didn't do everything that Roy could".

Hasek may have tried everything he could but as Mr. Miyagi says....You do, or do not, there is no try.
Roy just did, he won it all twice with what is generally argued as being two of the weakest teams to win the Cup ('86 and '93) in the last 40 years.

Like I said earlier, you can give Hasek his regular season success and his Harts but there's no denying that Roy is the playoff King.
In the end as a fan, what would you rather see your team lifting in the air, the Presidents Trophy or the Stanley Cup?

When did Haseks team ever win a Presidents trophy?

 

[BraveCanadian]

As usual, you are 100% correct.

With Hasek, you never knew what you were gonna get in the playoffs... in the W column. Because teams win games, not players. Hasek's personal numbers were phenomenal.

Yeah.. unless he flaked and decided to sit out.

 

[BraveCanadian]

If Conn Smythe truly went to the best player in the playoffs, Hasek would have atleast one ('99).

I tend to agree but then again.. losing goalies do seem to have the best chance of winning the Conn Smythe if they really where the playoff MVP. (Hextall and Giggy being examples)

 

[Rhiessan71]

When did Haseks team ever win a Presidents trophy?

You missed the point.

As a fan, would you rather your team have better regular season success or better playoff success?
(Yes it's a rhetorical question)

 

[jkrx]

You missed the point.

As a fan, would you rather your team have better regular season success or better playoff success?
(Yes it's a rhetorical question)

Well as a fan you can't really fault Hasek for not winning more cups either. He didn't play on strong enough teams until he was in his fourties. People tend to forget that Roy wasn't the sole factor in those Habs runs. Overtime win statistics is basically irrelevant. A goalie can't score only prevent goals. Hasek didnt play with overtime clutch players like LeClair, Sakic and C. Lemieux. He had guys like Dixon Ward and Curtis Brown.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Well as a fan you can't really fault Hasek for not winning more cups either. He didn't play on strong enough teams until he was in his fourties. People tend to forget that Roy wasn't the sole factor in those Habs runs. Overtime win statistics is basically irrelevant. A goalie can't score only prevent goals. Hasek didnt play with overtime clutch players like LeClair, Sakic and C. Lemieux. He had guys like Dixon Ward and Curtis Brown.

Doesn't matter. The whole point is Roy could and did take weaker teams to the Cup and Win, Hasek couldn't.
From '86 till '95, it didn't matter what place the Habs finished, as long as they had Roy they were always a Cup threat and everyone knew it.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Well as a fan you can't really fault Hasek for not winning more cups either. He didn't play on strong enough teams until he was in his fourties. People tend to forget that Roy wasn't the sole factor in those Habs runs. Overtime win statistics is basically irrelevant. A goalie can't score only prevent goals. Hasek didnt play with overtime clutch players like LeClair, Sakic and C. Lemieux. He had guys like Dixon Ward and Curtis Brown.

Roy wasn't the sole factor in his 2 Habs cups but he was the major factor. For all you guys saying how Hasek was under 2.00 and .920+ save percentage with Buffalo. Have a look at Roy's playoff in '86 and then remember how often you all harp about how high scoring was a that time.

He was posting similar numbers to Hasek in the playoffs near the end of his career as well when he won his last cup at 35.

In fact, Roy's numbers in the playoffs on that last cup are easily superior to Hasek's (which are still good) when he won his first cup the next year with Detroit.

And you're going to have a hard time convincing me Detroit was an inferior team.. the wins are separated by only one year and both goalies are almost the same age as well.

 

[finchster]

In my humble opinion, Hasek is being held back by not winning the cup in his prime. Granted, winning the cup is a team effort but if they could have pulled it off in 1999 we might be talking about Hasek as a top 10 or even *gasp* top 5 player of all time.

I would take Hasek over Roy, but slightly. Roy has the most Conn Smythes out of any player and that in itself is an major accomplishment that cannot be overlooked. Calling it a tie or close is a fair outcome

 

[Rhiessan71]

Yeah, I mean I'm not taking anything away from Hasek. He consistently played at a higher level than pretty much anyone else.
The difference is that Roy had another level above everyone else he could not only go to but also do it more often than anyone else.