Patrick Roy in the regular season

[SnowblindNYR]

He's viewed as one of the best for his playoff heroics and we know he never reached the heights of Hasek in the regular season. Was he a dominating regular season goalie too or is he viewed as one of the best because of his playoff heroics? I started watching in 00-01 but never really followed his numbers at the time.

Click to read more...

 

[MadLuke]

. Was he a dominating regular season goalie too

Yes, number wise relative to his peers one of the most ever

I tried to look at a rolling 5 season windows, which goaltender had the best GSAA in the league (that how much goals they saved the team if they had the league average save percentage instead the one they had that year, like all stat very far from perfect but it reward playing a lot with a good save percentage)

Thread 'The save percentage-GSAA debate'

Oct 24, 2022

There was quite a bit of talk surrounding the value of looking at GSAA for goaltender, so I got curious and tried to see how noisy it was by looking the goaltenders that achieved to most GSAA for 5 seasons.

startSeason	lastSeason	FullName	GSAATotal	perGameGSAA
20182019	20222023	Andrei Vasilevskiy	79.6	0.37
20172018	20212022	Andrei Vasilevskiy	92.3	0.34
20162017	20202021	Andrei Vasilevskiy	79.6	0.30

...

• MadLuke
• Replies: 46
• Forum: The History of Hockey

• 

startSeason	lastSeason	FullName	GSAATotal	perGameGSAA
20182019	20222023	Andrei Vasilevskiy	79.6	0.37
20172018	20212022	Andrei Vasilevskiy	92.3	0.34
20162017	20202021	Andrei Vasilevskiy	79.6	0.30
20152016	20192020	Ben Bishop	66.9	0.28
20142015	20182019	Devan Dubnyk	64.2	0.20
20132014	20172018	Carey Price	67.2	0.27
20122013	20162017	Carey Price	77.3	0.32
20112012	20152016	Henrik Lundqvist	77.4	0.28
20102011	20142015	Henrik Lundqvist	87.1	0.31
20092010	20132014	Henrik Lundqvist	96.7	0.31
20082009	20122013	Henrik Lundqvist	100.3	0.32
20072008	20112012	Tim Thomas	123.7	0.46
20062007	20102011	Tomas Vokoun	115.1	0.39
20052006	20092010	Tomas Vokoun	135.2	0.46
20032004	20082009	Roberto Luongo	149.0	0.43
20022003	20072008	Roberto Luongo	151.3	0.42
20012002	20062007	Roberto Luongo	147.5	0.43
20002001	20052006	Roberto Luongo	134.8	0.43
19981999	20032004	Dominik Hasek	108.9	0.44
19992000	20032004	Roberto Luongo	102.0	0.38
19971998	20012002	Dominik Hasek	164.6	0.54
19961997	20002001	Dominik Hasek	206.6	0.68
19951996	19992000	Dominik Hasek	220.0	0.74
19941995	19981999	Dominik Hasek	242.8	0.80
19931994	19971998	Dominik Hasek	242.5	0.82
19921993	19961997	Dominik Hasek	195.8	0.77
19911992	19951996	Dominik Hasek	143.5	0.70
19901991	19941995	Curtis Joseph	149.2	0.56
19891990	19931994	Patrick Roy	182.6	0.61
19881989	19921993	Patrick Roy	173.6	0.62
19871988	19911992	Patrick Roy	182.1	0.69
19861987	19901991	Patrick Roy	149.1	0.62
19851986	19891990	Patrick Roy	123.2	0.51
19841985	19881989	Kelly Hrudey	89.3	0.36
19831984	19871988	Kelly Hrudey	93.2	0.49
19821983	19861987	Bob Froese	95.0	0.55
19811982	19851986	Billy Smith	110.9	0.54
19801981	19841985	Billy Smith	125.7	0.61
19791980	19831984	Billy Smith	137.1	0.66
19781979	19821983	Billy Smith	126.3	0.62
19771978	19811982	Tony Esposito	155.5	0.50
19761977	19801981	Tony Esposito	188.0	0.57
19751976	19791980	Tony Esposito	188.1	0.56
19741975	19781979	Ken Dryden	203.8	0.75
19721973	19771978	Ken Dryden	221.3	0.79
19731974	19771978	Tony Esposito	201.0	0.59
19711972	19761977	Ken Dryden	233.4	0.80
19701971	19751976	Ken Dryden	202.4	0.84
0	19741975	Ken Dryden	141.7	0.79
19691970	19731974	Tony Esposito	202.2	0.69
19681969	19731974	Bernie Parent	155.5	0.54
19671968	19711972	Bernie Parent	102.9	0.41
19641965	19711972	Jacques Plante	102.7	0.58
19661967	19701971	Bernie Parent	77.3	0.35
19651966	19691970	Johnny Bower	72.8	0.58
19631964	19671968	Johnny Bower	115.2	0.61
19621963	19661967	Glenn Hall	104.0	0.39
19611962	19651966	Glenn Hall	108.0	0.35
19601961	19641965	Glenn Hall	110.1	0.35
19591960	19631964	Glenn Hall	113.7	0.33
19581959	19621963	Jacques Plante	93.0	0.31
19571958	19611962	Jacques Plante	110.5	0.36
19561957	19601961	Jacques Plante	87.4	0.30
19551956	19591960	Jacques Plante	109.4	0.34
19541955	19581959	Jacques Plante	94.3	0.31
19531954	19571958	Jacques Plante	55.5	0.22
19521953	19571958	Glenn Hall	42.2	0.19

3 Vezina in 4 years.


The giant issue with the raw number, is that higher the scoring era, the more goals there is to save, so for how long they stay number 1 would be something that more universally impressive in league history.

And by how much they dominated the 4 other best goaltender of that window could be more interesting (something I wanted to do some adjusted GSAA using elite goaltender of the time but never ended up doing it is always noisy I feel like, there is not that many each season and they shift a lot). Just keep in mind some a little bit of a Parent-Dryden played in a more heteregenous league with high scoring but on team that did allow that much goals, lates 80s early 90s Roy also in a lesser but still there while Hasek did it in the dpe mental filter. A bit the same way you would look at 70s +/- number versus 1999 one.

 

[The Panther]

Roy didn't lead in save percentage (if you're into that stat) six seasons in a row behind a mediocre D line-up like Hasek did, but his 1987-88 through 1991-92 regular seasons (five in a row) are pretty crazy good:

(min. 125 games played):
Save %
.909 Roy
.899 Belfour (barely played before 1990-91, when scoring was already dropping a bit)
.898 Essensa
.892 Casey
.891 Vanbiesbrouck

GAA
2.57 Roy
2.75 Belfour
3.06 Moog
3.07 Lemelin
3.11 Hayward

Shut-Outs
16 Roy
11 Essensa
10 Hrudey / McLean / Moog


His record was also 148-70-34 over this half decade. There probably aren't too many goalies in NHL history who had a better five-straight regular seasons.

 

[Crosby2010]

It is the playoffs that give people the idea that Roy was the best goalie ever. I don't think he does it on his regular seasons, but in all honesty how many goalies have better regular seasons than Roy? Hasek, Hall, Plante, probably Sawchuk. Maybe Brodeur? That's it. 1995 is the only time in his career he never got a Vezina vote. Other than that he was top 10 every year of his career. Still was a 1st team all-star 4 times, 2nd team twice. That's 6 in total. Glenn Hall has 11 and holds the record for goalies. The 1987-'92 seasons were already mentioned, but simply put Roy was never NOT elite. 1997 he finishes 3rd in Vezina voting behind Hasek and Brodeur who had phenomenal years. Regular seasons he was always in the mix.

Obviously the playoffs is where he separated himself. That competitive nature paid off. 151 playoff wins, no one is even close. Brodeur is next with 113. Fuhr and Fleury at 92. Fleury is still active, but he may not even get 100 to be honest. And Vasilevskiy has 66 as the next best active goalie. Roy always had his teams contend, and it was because of him. They were never out of it and even when you bounced him out how many times did it take 6-7 games to do? I am picking one year - 1998 - where Roy lost in the playoffs to a team where I'd say he shouldn't have. 18 years in the NHL, 17 postseasons, 4 Cups, that leaves 13 times he lost in the playoffs. 1 was against Edmonton in 1998 where he shouldn't have, and you can say 2003 with Minnesota. That's it. Whoever beat Roy in the playoffs was always good.

But since this is about his regular seasons, he was still Hall of Fame level there too. Check out his Hart voting record. It is impressive. How many goalies have that?

 

[MadLuke]

where Roy lost in the playoffs to a team where I'd say he shouldn't have.

Not a bad way to compare all time great, yes Roy was particularly lucky during his career to have virtually played all his seasons with a team that had a shot at winning the cup and compete, maybe outside 1-2 year in MTL at the very end where it would have been difficult.

But, a lot of greats where in similar situation as well, how much you take advantage of it.

 

[Staniowski]

Roy was more or less the same in the regular season as in the playoffs (as virtually all goaltenders are).

In the playoffs - for which he is primarily known - Roy was obviously very lucky in the team's he played for. When he joined the Habs, they were the ideal team any goaltender could join - they were already a Stanley Cup contender, and had great defensive players (especially forwards), and had a great and deep generation of players for the next decade.

Ten years later, Roy again joins the most ideal of teams, set for the next decade, and already a Cup contender.

If he played for average teams, he wouldn't have any Cups or Conn Smythes, and that's what should be considered (for him and for every goaltender).

 

[The Panther]

As noted, Roy had no Vezina votes in 1995. Okay, it was a weird (short) season and the Habs crapped out, so it's understandable.

1995-96 is weird. Roy, of course, got traded mid-season. If Hockey Ref. is correct, he received one 1st-place vote for the Vezina... and that was it. No seconds, no thirds. So, that's totally weird in itself -- one writer (?) thought Roy was the best goalie in the League, and literally nobody else even voted for him.

But I think this is interesting in re-creating the history of it a bit. There's this perception now, after two Colorado Cups and Conn Smythes, that Roy was the key ingredient to pushing Colorado over the top. And maybe that's true, but evidently that's not how people perceived it at the time. Roy's stock had apparently fallen so low --- after one average season (1995) and then being traded and finishing 1995-96 with 1st-place Colorado --- that he wasn't even worthy of third-place Vezina votes (well, except for one nut who voted him first). This, despite Roy's easily having the best save-percentage on his team.

But I guess there was a perception at the time that Quebec / Colorado was already a great team, and that Roy was just falling into a good spot. (Which he was, but...)

 

[MadLuke]

I feel that back in the days if anything it was exaggerated and stronger than now, the perception that Roy was what put them over the RedWings.

People voted for the Vezina before the playoff occurred.... and they vote not for who are the best goaltender, but who had the best season.

 

[The Panther]

I feel that back in the days if anything it was exaggerated and stronger than now, the perception that Roy was what put them over the RedWings.

After the third-round of the playoffs, yes. But I'm talking about from December 6th 1995 through the end of the regular season (April 14th 1996). I do remember there being some talk that Montreal had won the Roy-trade, as crazy as it seems in retrospect...

 

[MadLuke]

. But I'm talking about from December 6th 1995 through the end of the regular season (April 14th 1996).

The team did not get better in the regular season from memory... it was all about what would happen in the playoff and did.

Avs were .667 before December 6, 4.41 GF, 3.0 goals against
Avs were .618 after December 5, 3.76 GF, 2.89 goals against

The Nordiques were second in the nhl the previous season, but first round exit, the talk of the time (at least in Quebec) was not Roy turning them into a good team, but into a cup winner. And was quite strong at the time, while it was happening.

 

[The Panther]

Avs were .667 before December 6, 4.41 GF, 3.0 goals against
Avs were .618 after December 5, 3.76 GF, 2.89 goals against

Yes, and I think Roy went 6-6-1 in his first 13 games with Colorado. He apparently then sat down with Pierre Lacroix --- who had been interested in Roy since the latter's Junior days with Granby Bison --- for a personal talk, in which Roy said he was worried about letting Lacroix down. Lacroix, as the story goes, put Patrick's mind at ease, and then the goaltender did well the rest of the way, obviously peaking in the playoffs.

As for Montreal... (sigh). The more you go back and look at this trade, the more insane it is.

I realize they had to part ways with Roy after the Detroit-game blow up. There was no going back. So, okay, what you do is, you wait patiently for the right trade pieces to align. (Like Glen Sather did after Jimmy Carson walked early in the 1989-90 season. Sather let Carson sit for a month before pulling off a masterful trade to acquire Murphy, Graves, and Klima... effectively enabling Edmonton to win the 1990 Stanley Cup.) What you don't do is rush a trade as fast as possible, because you're almost surely going to lose it. But that's what Montreal did.

Then, how the hell did the Habs' org get talked into adding Mike Keane into the deal? Keane was a really good player and the captain of Montreal. Like.. how do you throw your team captain in, when you're already losing the franchise, decorated goaltender?

This whole thing has taken on almost mythic proportions, as it's the moment when the Canadiens' organization officially (in public perception, that is) lost its perma-shine and took on some stank that still hasn't lifted. It's like right from this moment of the Roy disaster, every move the franchise made was bizarre or inexplicable. So, shortly after this, you've got Kovalenko (who scrored the final goal at the Forum -- itself, a strange situation) being shipped out after 50-odd games for... Scott Thornton...? Then, you've got new captain Pierre Turgeon being briefly feted as the new Habs' captain in the legendary line... carrying the Flame onto center-ice at the Forum's final game... and then promptly being traded (the 2nd Habs' captain traded in his prime in 1 year, with 600 more points in his HOF career to come) for Murray Baron (?) and the corpse of Shayne Corson. Then, they traded still-prime Mark Recchi (12 seasons left to play) for two draft picks (who never played a game) and Dainius Zubrus. Then, they traded 31-year-old Vince Damphousse for... draft picks.

 

[MadLuke]

Then, they traded still-prime Mark Recchi (12 seasons left to play) for two draft picks (who never played a game) and Dainius Zubrus. Then, they traded 31-year-old Vince Damphousse for... draft picks.

That part to me at the time felt like the MTL expo of that era a little bit, 2000s payrolls the Panthers were ahead of MTL.

In a world where star in general and even more so in mtl were always injured, Recchi-Damphouse could at least play a lot of games, 4 of the next 5 season were 82 games for Damphouse, since 1988 he had missed like 10 games in total... Reechi was a constant ironman.. kind of felt them wanting to save money with the exchange rate, but with feedback while they did not want to spend like Toronto, it was still a choice they signed Linden and others.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Roy’s Smythe’s were well earned. But he was pretty inconsistent in the playoffs. By the spring of 93 (before the cup win) the majority of Montreal fans wanted him traded. He was pretty brutal against the Bruins in particular.

 

[MadLuke]

I think there is a mix of the Montreal market, Roy reputation and specific bad goals from Cam Neely in people mind.

Roy was 18W-18L against Boston in the playoff with a 0.911 save percentage, 2.62 GAA (for 86-94 hockey that was quite good).

non Roy goaltenders in the playoff during that time went .892, Roy overall in the playoff was .913.

 

[Crosby2010]

Roy’s Smythe’s were well earned. But he was pretty inconsistent in the playoffs. By the spring of 93 (before the cup win) the majority of Montreal fans wanted him traded. He was pretty brutal against the Bruins in particular.

Then he wins the Cup for them that season. I think there was a damaging poll done in January of 1993. At this time Roy had generally been losing to Boston in the playoffs, but he was the reigning Vezina winner. So you figure he's a guy you want to hang onto. Anyway the fan poll seemed to suggest if I remember that perhaps Roy's time with Montreal was done. The Habs had a woeful month of December, and so did Roy. That might have triggered some angry fans. Either way, I often wonder how much something like this affected him. Even winning the Cup in 1993 I just can't help but think that stuff like this made Roy's decision to leave in 1995 easier.

Roy was more or less the same in the regular season as in the playoffs (as virtually all goaltenders are).

In the playoffs - for which he is primarily known - Roy was obviously very lucky in the team's he played for. When he joined the Habs, they were the ideal team any goaltender could join - they were already a Stanley Cup contender, and had great defensive players (especially forwards), and had a great and deep generation of players for the next decade.

Ten years later, Roy again joins the most ideal of teams, set for the next decade, and already a Cup contender.

If he played for average teams, he wouldn't have any Cups or Conn Smythes, and that's what should be considered (for him and for every goaltender).

But neither team won without him. Montreal wasn't winning from 1980 to 1985. They weren't going to win in 1986 either but Roy carried them. 1993 it wasn't like Montreal was a bad team, but would they be among the 5 Cup contending teams you'd pick in the NHL to win? Maybe. But it is awfully borderline. That being said, they go onto win the Cup, again with Roy carrying them. Montreal does not have a Cup since 1979 without Patrick Roy. No question about it. Quebec was a team on the rise but once they arrived they lost to Montreal in 1993 (and Roy) and then had that disastrous series vs. the Rangers in 1995. They move to Colorado, Roy is traded there and months later they won the Cup. Sakic had an amazing postseason and deservingly won the Conn Smythe, but Patrick is easily 2nd on the pecking order that spring. Then in 2001 they win again and Roy is the Smythe winner again.

 

[JianYang]

The 1993 Habs were sliding. I believe they lost like the last 5 games of the season.

Damphousse mentioned recently though that they were generally at the top of their division but the late season slide pushed them down. They still finished with over 100 points and the 6th best record in the league.

It was a strange year for Roy. He did not have a good regular season, and he was feeling the heat. Then he went on to have arguably his best playoff of his career in that same season all the way to the cup.

I also think serge savard had mentioned that he had was looking to deal Roy before he got fired, and the avs at the time had offered nolan and fiset. Savard was going to pull the trigger on that one but it was too late.

It tells you that there was an issue before tremblay even came into the picture.

By the time the Habs actually traded Roy, I believe Nolan was no longer in play because he had already been dealt by Colorado. In retrospect, you can say it was not a good deal either, but nolan did hold some currency at the time as a former 1st overall pick with size in that era.

 

[MadLuke]

I also think serge savard had mentioned that he had was looking to deal Roy before he got fired, and the avs at the time had offered nolan and fiset. Savard was going to pull the trigger on that one but it was too late.

It tells you that there was an issue before tremblay even came into the picture.

Could be just the politically correct reason (and to look very good as an analysis, considering what will happen next), Savard reasoning was apparently that Roy got way too big on the team, bigger than the head coach could be.

1995 Owen Nolan was quite the juicy piece too, good-sized 1990 first overall, just finished third in goals in the short 94-95 season, it would have been seen at the time a better deal and I think an OK one if Nolan ever had a 2000 type run with MTL.

 

[JianYang]

Could be just the politically correct reason (and to look very good as an analysis, considering what will happen next), Savard reasoning was apparently that Roy got way too big on the team, bigger than the head coach could be.

1995 Owen Nolan was quite the juicy piece too, good-sized 1990 first overall, just finished third in goals in the short 94-95 season, it would have been seen at the time a better deal and I think an OK one if Nolan ever had a 2000 type run with MTL.

Nolan was definitely a better deal IMO.
I prefer the quality over quantity and nolan was a better player than anyone the habs actually got back. You theoretically keep Keane as well.

But they would have had to do something about the goaltending because I don't think fiset would have been it....not that Thibault lasted long there either but it probably would have been apparent more quickly with fiset.