Martin Brodeur vs Dominik Hasek, who would you draft

[BigBadBruins7708]

0.923 you're right.

Just want to clarify:

Roy cups on teams that were already elite before him=WOW (and with HOF dmen as well)
Hasek cup on the greatest superteam assembled in the 21st century=WOW
Brodeur cups on a team that wasn't elite before he got there, with 2 great dman=unimpressive?

Neither Montreal or Colorado were elite before Roy joined them. Colorado hadnt won a playoff series before Roy (Montreal had fallen off pre Roy). Additionally a bit facetious to say "with HOF dmen" for Roy then not call Stevens/Neidermayer HOF dmen. Especially since the HOF'ers on the 96 Avs are Forsberg, Sakic, Roy.

and for the record, no one points to Hasek's Detroit years as what puts him over the top.

The argument for Hasek is simple, he played against the primes of 2 of the 5 greatest goalies ever:

- One of them didnt sniff a Vezina until he was 30 and Hasek was out of the way
- The other went from winning Vezinas to never winning one again after age 27, the same time Hasek came on

 

[dgibb10]

Neither Montreal or Colorado were elite before Roy joined them. Colorado hadnt won a playoff series before Roy (Montreal had fallen off pre Roy). Additionally a bit facetious to say "with HOF dmen" for Roy then not call Stevens/Neidermayer HOF dmen. Especially since the HOF'ers on the 96 Avs are Forsberg, Sakic, Roy.

and for the record, no one points to Hasek's Detroit years as what puts him over the top.

The argument for Hasek is simple, he played against the primes of 2 of the 5 greatest goalies ever:

- One of them didnt sniff a Vezina until he was 30 and Hasek was out of the way
- The other went from winning Vezinas to never winning one again after age 27, the same time Hasek came on

Colorado was literally 1st in the east before Roy got there.
MTL was 3rd in the east before Roy got there.

Yes, Roy, Hasek, and Brodeur all had 2 HOF dman to win. Only Brodeur seems to get criticised for that tho.

 

[Romang67]

Neither Montreal or Colorado were elite before Roy joined them. Colorado hadnt won a playoff series before Roy (Montreal had fallen off pre Roy). Additionally a bit facetious to say "with HOF dmen" for Roy then not call Stevens/Neidermayer HOF dmen. Especially since the HOF'ers on the 96 Avs are Forsberg, Sakic, Roy.

and for the record, no one points to Hasek's Detroit years as what puts him over the top.

The argument for Hasek is simple, he played against the primes of 2 of the 5 greatest goalies ever:

- One of them didnt sniff a Vezina until he was 30 and Hasek was out of the way
- The other went from winning Vezinas to never winning one again after age 27, the same time Hasek came on

It's really weird that they keep bringing up Roy. I feel like I would stay as far away from Roy comparisons as possible when discussing Brodeur's greatness.

 

[FerrisRox]

100% agree that Brodeur revolutionized puckhandling (hell, they invented the trapazoid for him!).

This is complete nonsense.

There was nothing that Martin Brodeur did in terms of puck handling that hadn't been done decades before by Eddie Giacomin and just as well if not better by Ron Hextall while Brodeur was still in the QMJHL.

 

[HugeInTheShire]

Hasek.

Though he is the only guy I’d take ahead of Marty.

Put it another way - Hasek on the Devils has as many or more cups than Brodeur.

Brodeur on the Sabres doesn’t win six Vezinas and two Harts or go to the Finals in 1999.

This is not true at all, Brodeur was the perfect goalie for the system NJ played. It relied on his puck handling more than people realize. Unless they changed the system to better suit Hasek he would have struggled in NJ.

 

[FerrisRox]

Valid point. I don't feel like he consistently set the puck up as much for his defence so much as played it up the boards, but I was pretty young when he was in his prime.

I mean, also Plante?

And Eddie Giacomin. Giacomin was very influenced by Plante and handled the puck incredibly well, but what he did that was different was he fearlessly roamed from his crease to get dump ins and set up his defence. The rise of the Rangers in the early 1970's was fuelled in large part by the emergence of Giacomin and how well he handled the puck and made crisp, accurate passes.

He piggybacked others, specifically Plante, but Giacomin took it to an entirely different level.

 

[DaPhazz]

Hasek AINEC

aInEC

 

[HugeInTheShire]

This is complete nonsense.

There was nothing that Martin Brodeur did in terms of puck handling that hadn't been done decades before by Eddie Giacomin and just as well if not better by Ron Hextall while Brodeur was still in the QMJHL.

Brodeur himself says that Hextall was the inspiration to him learning how to handle the puck as well as he did. The one thing Brodeur has over the others is the fact that they had to change the rules not just to stop him but to stop all the others that saw how effectively he did it and followed suit.

 

[dgibb10]

So you think he was capable of being a starter in Europe for 8 years where he consistently played over 50 games per season including international play, with stellar numbers, but you think he would have been incapable of doing so in the NHL?

I don't know, the fact that the moment he got the shot to be the starting goalie when Fuhr got injured, he promptly won the Vezina and was a Hart finalist, makes me think that is absolute nonsense.

At 29 yes.

Hasek elite play at 29 doesn't make him an NHL goalie at 22.

Anyway, we saw 2 gms make this decision.

Lou has ridden it into 3 cups and 35 years of GM work since then.
Pulford got fired after winning GM of the year because Hasek decided he wanted to feud with his Coach

 

[HarrySPlinkett]

This is not true at all, Brodeur was the perfect goalie for the system NJ played. It relied on his puck handling more than people realize. Unless they changed the system to better suit Hasek he would have struggled in NJ.

Between 1993-1999, Hasek had a save percentage of .930 or better five times.

Brodeur never did it once.

I think the Devils would’ve found a way to make it work with their goalie stopping 93% of the shots he faced, even with his inferior puck handling.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

At 29 yes.

Hasek elite play at 29 doesn't make him an NHL goalie at 22.

Anyway, we saw 2 gms make this decision.

Lou has ridden it into 3 cups and 35 years of GM work since then.
Pulford got fired after winning GM of the year because Hasek decided he wanted to feud with his Coach

FFS the only reason he wasnt an NHL goalie at 22 was because of the Soviet Union. Unless you're also going to claim that Fetisov wasn't NHL quality until he was 31

 

[HugeInTheShire]

Between 1993-1999, Hasek had a save percentage of .930 or better five times.

Brodeur never did it once.

I think the Devils would’ve found a way to make it work with their goalie stopping 93% of the shots he faced, even with his inferior puck handling.

You may be right, I don't think so. While Hasek is obviously the better goalie, NJ wouldn't have been as successful without the system they played and that system was built around having a goalie that could handle the puck. You could put Hasek on any other legitimate contender and he wins more Cups than Brodeur easily but NJ had the perfect storm and any disruption likely would have resulted in failure.

This is in no way a slight against Hasek, it's simply his greatest weakness as a starter was the backbone of the Devils system.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

0.923 you're right.

Just want to clarify:

Roy cups on teams that were already elite before him=WOW (and with HOF dmen as well)
Hasek cup on the greatest superteam assembled in the 21st century=WOW
Brodeur cups on a team that wasn't elite before he got there, with 2 great dman=unimpressive?

Roy won the Conn Smythe the year the Avs won it with a 40 year old Bourque. Put up a playoff best 0.934 SV% and a 1.70 GAA, with 4 shutouts. Gave up 1 goal in the last 2 games to win the Cup. He also won 2 Cups and 2 Smythes in Montreal on teams that weren't elite.

Hasek won 6 Vezinas in 8 years, and 2 Hart trophies. His Cup win checks a box on the form, and barely matters.

Brodeur won 3 Cups, but no Smythes, no Harts, and no Vezinas until the other two were 37+ years old. Never led the regular season in SV%, and only had the best GAA once. And despite playing the most games so many years, never once faced the most shots in a season. The year he won his first Vezina, he played 10 more games than Roy and faced 17 fewer shots on the season. Are we supposed to pretend they had the same workload in the games they played?

 

[Romang67]

At 29 yes.

Hasek elite play at 29 doesn't make him an NHL goalie at 22.

Anyway, we saw 2 gms make this decision.

Lou has ridden it into 3 cups and 35 years of GM work since then.
Pulford got fired after winning GM of the year because Hasek decided he wanted to feud with his Coach

More specifically than 29, the first time he got the chance to be a starter in the NHL. Before that, he was "only" providing equal or better play as a backup.

He was plainly able to handle a starter load. As a backup, his play equalled or eclipsed the starters. He was immediately able to provide Vezina level goaltending the moment Fuhr got injured. He had also done so for years in Europe.

Where is the evidence that he wouldn't have been able to handle a starting role in the NHL before 29?

 

[Hockey Outsider]

So you think he was capable of being a starter in Europe for 8 years where he consistently played over 50 games per season including international play, with stellar numbers, but you think he would have been incapable of doing so in the NHL?

I don't know, the fact that the moment he got the shot to be the starting goalie when Fuhr got injured, he promptly won the Vezina and was a Hart finalist, makes me think that is absolute nonsense.

Not to mention, in his first three years in the NHL (before becoming a starter), Hasek ranked 8th out of the 50 goalies (who had 50+ games played) in save percentage. That would seem to plainly contradict the idea that Hasek wasn't good enough to be a starter.

(I know what the counter-argument is going to be. Hasek was a backup, so he had more days rest. But this type of data is now easily accessible on NHL.com. Hasek actually did worse in the games where he had 3+ days rest, so this actually lowered his save percentage).

 

[sabremike]

If anyone is curious here is the roster for the 98-99 Sabres that Hasek took to within the most controversial call in playoff history of a winner take all game 7:

1998-99 Buffalo Sabres Roster, Stats, Injuries, Scores, Results, Shootouts | Hockey-Reference.com

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

www.hockey-reference.com

 

[Romang67]

Roy won the Conn Smythe the year the Avs won it with a 40 year old Bourque. Put up a playoff best 0.934 SV% and a 1.70 GAA, with 4 shutouts. Gave up 1 goal in the last 2 games to win the Cup. He also won 2 Cups and 2 Smythes in Montreal on teams that weren't elite.

Hasek won 6 Vezinas in 8 years, and 2 Hart trophies. His Cup win checks a box on the form, and barely matters.

Brodeur won 3 Cups, but no Smythes, no Harts, and no Vezinas until the other two were 37+ years old. Never led the regular season in SV%, and only had the best GAA once. And despite playing the most games so many years, never once faced the most shots in a season. The year he won his first Vezina, he played 10 more games than Roy and faced 17 fewer shots on the season. Are we supposed to pretend they had the same workload in the games they played?

Fun fact: Jim Corsi came up with his shot attempts statistic not because it was supposed to act as a proxy for puck possession, but because he wanted to measure goaltender workloads.

 

[dgibb10]

Roy won the Conn Smythe the year the Avs won it with a 40 year old Bourque. Put up a playoff best 0.934 SV% and a 1.70 GAA, with 4 shutouts. Gave up 1 goal in the last 2 games to win the Cup. He also won 2 Cups and 2 Smythes in Montreal on teams that weren't elite.

Hasek won 6 Vezinas in 8 years, and 2 Hart trophies. His Cup win checks a box on the form, and barely matters.

Brodeur won 3 Cups, but no Smythes, no Harts, and no Vezinas until the other two were 37+ years old. Never led the regular season in SV%, and only had the best GAA once. And despite playing the most games so many years, never once faced the most shots in a season. The year he won his first Vezina, he played 10 more games than Roy and faced 17 fewer shots on the season. Are we supposed to pretend they had the same workload in the games they played?

Bourque was 3rd place in norris voting that year, and Robinson was 2nd.

Do you perhaps think the fact that brodeur played approximeately 15-20 games a year more than everyone else was had an impact on his rate stats.

Roy won the Conn Smythe the year the Avs won it with a 40 year old Bourque. Put up a playoff best 0.934 SV% and a 1.70 GAA, with 4 shutouts. Gave up 1 goal in the last 2 games to win the Cup. He also won 2 Cups and 2 Smythes in Montreal on teams that weren't elite.

Hasek won 6 Vezinas in 8 years, and 2 Hart trophies. His Cup win checks a box on the form, and barely matters.

Brodeur won 3 Cups, but no Smythes, no Harts, and no Vezinas until the other two were 37+ years old. Never led the regular season in SV%, and only had the best GAA once. And despite playing the most games so many years, never once faced the most shots in a season. The year he won his first Vezina, he played 10 more games than Roy and faced 17 fewer shots on the season. Are we supposed to pretend they had the same workload in the games they played?

And brodeur had 4 games in the 02-03 finals alone where he did not allow a goal in regulation

 

[Romang67]

Not to mention, in his first three years in the NHL (before becoming a starter), Hasek ranked 8th out of the 50 goalies (who had 50+ games played) in save percentage. That would seem to plainly contradict the idea that Hasek wasn't good enough to be a starter.

(I know what the counter-argument is going to be. Hasek was a backup, so he had more days rest. But this type of data is now easily accessible on NHL.com. Hasek actually did worse in the games where he had 3+ days rest, so this actually lowered his save percentage).

Yeah, I mean, he was clearly an upper echelon goalie in the NHL from the moment he set foot in it, and he had already handle starter workloads since he was 17 in Europe. The idea that he wasn't capable just doesn't hold water.

Belfour just happened to come out of nowhere and be Vezina quality the first year Hasek could possibly have been a starter.

 

[dgibb10]

Yeah, I mean, he was clearly an upper echelon goalie in the NHL from the moment he set foot in it, and he had already handle starter workloads since he was 17 in Europe. The idea that he wasn't capable just doesn't hold water.

Belfour just happened to come out of nowhere and be Vezina quality the first year Hasek could possibly have been a starter.

And yet he was able to play 60 games just 5 times in his NHL career.

One of which he then quit on his team in the playoffs.

 

[AlwaysSunnyInDetroit]

I'd rather have the guy who I can trust to
a) stay healthy
b) not demand a trade
c) not retire out of nowhere
d) handle a full workload
e) not quit on my team in the playoffs like hasek did. Twice

for 20 years

Ask the GM who drafted brodeur how well it's worked out for him in the 35 years since. He's STILL got a GM job because of brodeur's excellence

Hasek might try and get you fired if you don't get along like he did his coach. In fact in that Feud with his coach, I'm pretty sure it did end with the GM who acquired hasek from chicago getting fired

that's cool. i'd rather have the guy who is the best goaltender that has ever lived

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

I'd rather have the guy who I can trust to
a) stay healthy
b) not demand a trade
c) not retire out of nowhere
d) handle a full workload
e) not quit on my team in the playoffs like hasek did. Twice

for 20 years

Ask the GM who drafted brodeur how well it's worked out for him in the 35 years since. He's STILL got a GM job because of brodeur's excellence

Hasek might try and get you fired if you don't get along like he did his coach. In fact in that Feud with his coach, I'm pretty sure it did end with the GM who acquired hasek from chicago getting fired

A - I'll give you staying healthy. Brodeur's longevity is the most impressive thing about his career.

B - I don't trust any hyper competitive goalie to be content to put up Vezina caliber seasons on a team that can't get a halfway competitive roster together over 8 years.

C - retiring at 37 after winning a Cup isn't "out of nowhere".

d - Hasek played 58+ games 7 times over 9 years, and 41 of 48 possible in one of the two where he missed.

e - if I can get 6 Vezinas and 2 Harts in 8 years, I'll take him quitting on my team when he's in his late 30s and strains his MCL.

 

[dgibb10]

that's cool. i'd rather have the guy who is the best goaltender that has ever lived

And you'd end up like Bob Pulford, fired as Hasek had one of his many locker room feuds.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Fun fact: Jim Corsi came up with his shot attempts statistic not because it was supposed to act as a proxy for puck possession, but because he wanted to measure goaltender workloads.

That is a fun fact, and makes some sense. Have to react to every shot attempt, regardless of whether it makes it on net or not.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

If anyone is curious here is the roster for the 98-99 Sabres that Hasek took to within the most controversial call in playoff history of a winner take all game 7:

Unless you have another controversial call in mind, this was a game six.