Patrick Roy -- Was he REALLY that good? | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League

Patrick Roy -- Was he REALLY that good?

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,494
18,589
Tokyo, Japan
Okay, the thread title is just to get attention. I know Roy was good -- I watched pretty much his whole career, on and off, and I've always rated him very high.

Even so, I was sort-of stunned to see that this forum seems to consider him the #1 goalie ever. Really?? While I agree he was one of the best of his time, I don't see him as anywhere near the best ever.

I think one of the difficulties of evaluating Roy is that he played much of his career for two pretty stacked, good teams. This is in contrast to Hasek, who in his Buffalo days (which made his name) did not play for a stacked, great team, but still helped that team to the playoffs and very nearly the Stanley Cup. In other words, Hasek's contribution to his team in that mid-to-late-90s period is extremely clear. With Hasek, Buffalo was a contender. Without him, they were almost nothing.

But with Roy, it's hard to say how much he added. Certainly, he added a lot. But enough that we can say he's the greatest of all time...?

Maybe my judgement is clouded because I just watched the highlights of an Edmonton-Montreal match from 1985 when rookie Roy let in 4 of the first 5 shots he faced in the second period, but it seems to me that in the brief periods when Roy backstopped average-level teams, he was himself less than stellar (I'm not saying he was just average, but that he was less than stellar when his team was more average). At the end of his career, he sits with three Vezina trophies. Not small change, but not enough to suggest the greatest of all time.

What Roy did very well was turn it on in the playoffs, and to bounce back from weaker efforts. Nobody can argue with his three Conn Smythes. That forms the strongest argument for his 'greatest' status, I suppose. But he won it in 1986 on the bad of a very unremarkable rookie season, and then the 1993 and 2001 wins are in front of very stacked teams. I agree that Roy deserved the three Conn Smythes (certainly the '86 and '93 ones; perhaps '01 is more debatable), by the way.

From the stats: Roy led the NHL in save-% 4 times in 18 years. Good? yes. Great? yes. Best of all time..? Uhh... He led in GAA 3 times and wins 2 times. In 18 years. Is this the best goalie ever?


I dunno... I like Roy a lot and I think he was great. But I don't think he's the best ever. I'm just wondering if the legend of 'St. Patrick' is starting to take over from reality.
 
I don't see him as anywhere near the best ever.

Come on...

How many goalies do you rank ahead of him?

I mean, I consider Mario Lemieux to be pretty near the best ever, but I have him 4th of all-time.How low can you really rank Roy?

As for what he added to the teams he played for, he was a top 2 player on four cup winners.

And you say 1993 was in front of a very stacked team, I wouldn't say the team was that good, but regardless he was clearly and overwhelmingly it's best player.I think 1993 was Roy's finest moment.
 
Last edited:
I'm so obviously biased that my view is going to be tainted, but I don't think Roy was the best goalie of his era, never mind best of all time. For me, Hasek was better than Roy. Obviously Roy is one of the best ever but I can't really compare him with guys I didn't see. Of guys I did see, then for me Hasek>Roy>Brodeur.
 
The reason Roy doesn't have more personal, regular season accolades, is that he played in a stacked era for goalies, for much of his career. The most stacked it had been since the original 6, when practically every team had a HOFer in net.

I don't think he was the best ever, but a great argument could be made in his favour. He's in the discussion and deservedly so.

PS While I think the 93 team was very good and very underated, I wouldn't call it stacked. Deep up front, but without superstars and an inexperienced defense.
 
And you say 1993 was in front of a very stacked team, I wouldn't say the team was that good, but regardless he was clearly and overwhelmingly it's best player.I think 1993 was Roy's finest moment.

Roy was lights out in 1993 for sure.. but Montreal was a 102 point team that year so I do think that the "Roy took a ragtag bunch of players to the Cup by himself" overstates it. Same thing with the OT record that year -- impressive as hell -- but in at least one of them Roy didn't even make a save so I think it also gets blown up a little too much even though it was amazing.

The Habs also won the matchup lottery of a lifetime throughout those playoffs.

All that being said he was still awesome those playoffs.
 
Roy was lights out in 1993 for sure.. but Montreal was a 102 point team that year so I do think that the "Roy took a ragtag bunch of players to the Cup by himself" overstates it. Same thing with the OT record that year -- impressive as hell -- but in at least one of them Roy didn't even make a save so I think it also gets blown up a little too much even though it was amazing.

The Habs also won the matchup lottery of a lifetime throughout those playoffs.

All that being said he was still awesome those playoffs.

Other teams have had more favourable matchups on the road to a cup.

The Habs themselves in 86 and Isles in 81 and 82 come to mind off the top of my head.
 
Okay, the thread title is just to get attention. I know Roy was good -- I watched pretty much his whole career, on and off, and I've always rated him very high.

Even so, I was sort-of stunned to see that this forum seems to consider him the #1 goalie ever. Really?? While I agree he was one of the best of his time, I don't see him as anywhere near the best ever.

I think one of the difficulties of evaluating Roy is that he played much of his career for two pretty stacked, good teams. This is in contrast to Hasek, who in his Buffalo days (which made his name) did not play for a stacked, great team, but still helped that team to the playoffs and very nearly the Stanley Cup. In other words, Hasek's contribution to his team in that mid-to-late-90s period is extremely clear. With Hasek, Buffalo was a contender. Without him, they were almost nothing.

But with Roy, it's hard to say how much he added. Certainly, he added a lot. But enough that we can say he's the greatest of all time...?

Maybe my judgement is clouded because I just watched the highlights of an Edmonton-Montreal match from 1985 when rookie Roy let in 4 of the first 5 shots he faced in the second period, but it seems to me that in the brief periods when Roy backstopped average-level teams, he was himself less than stellar (I'm not saying he was just average, but that he was less than stellar when his team was more average). At the end of his career, he sits with three Vezina trophies. Not small change, but not enough to suggest the greatest of all time.

What Roy did very well was turn it on in the playoffs, and to bounce back from weaker efforts. Nobody can argue with his three Conn Smythes. That forms the strongest argument for his 'greatest' status, I suppose. But he won it in 1986 on the bad of a very unremarkable rookie season, and then the 1993 and 2001 wins are in front of very stacked teams. I agree that Roy deserved the three Conn Smythes (certainly the '86 and '93 ones; perhaps '01 is more debatable), by the way.

From the stats: Roy led the NHL in save-% 4 times in 18 years. Good? yes. Great? yes. Best of all time..? Uhh... He led in GAA 3 times and wins 2 times. In 18 years. Is this the best goalie ever?


I dunno... I like Roy a lot and I think he was great. But I don't think he's the best ever. I'm just wondering if the legend of 'St. Patrick' is starting to take over from reality.

For me, he is not #1 ever. I'm in the Hasek camp.

Patrick Roy is a great regualar season goalie. But I do give him full credit for the 86 and 93 Stanley Cups. He was the best player on both of those Montreal teams, and they would not have won without him. By the team he reached Colorado, he was just part of the team. There were other elite players to share the load, and it was not really a surprise to see Colorado winning the Cup.

Again great regular season goalie. The goalie with the best playoff resume ever - which counts big time. Probably the best clutch goalie ever. But I did not see goalies from the 60's and earlier.
 
Other teams have had more favourable matchups on the road to a cup.

The Habs themselves in 86 and Isles in 81 and 82 come to mind off the top of my head.

Yes, the 86 Habs had a nice draw as well.

The point being, other than an inexperienced Quebec squad (who were offense heavy and defensively light), the 1993 Habs faced inferior opponents the whole way.

Even Quebec didn't have as many regular season wins as the Habs (but 10 ties).
 
Okay, the thread title is just to get attention. I know Roy was good -- I watched pretty much his whole career, on and off, and I've always rated him very high.

Even so, I was sort-of stunned to see that this forum seems to consider him the #1 goalie ever. Really?? While I agree he was one of the best of his time, I don't see him as anywhere near the best ever.

I think one of the difficulties of evaluating Roy is that he played much of his career for two pretty stacked, good teams. This is in contrast to Hasek, who in his Buffalo days (which made his name) did not play for a stacked, great team, but still helped that team to the playoffs and very nearly the Stanley Cup. In other words, Hasek's contribution to his team in that mid-to-late-90s period is extremely clear. With Hasek, Buffalo was a contender. Without him, they were almost nothing.

But with Roy, it's hard to say how much he added. Certainly, he added a lot. But enough that we can say he's the greatest of all time...?

Maybe my judgement is clouded because I just watched the highlights of an Edmonton-Montreal match from 1985 when rookie Roy let in 4 of the first 5 shots he faced in the second period, but it seems to me that in the brief periods when Roy backstopped average-level teams, he was himself less than stellar (I'm not saying he was just average, but that he was less than stellar when his team was more average). At the end of his career, he sits with three Vezina trophies. Not small change, but not enough to suggest the greatest of all time.

What Roy did very well was turn it on in the playoffs, and to bounce back from weaker efforts. Nobody can argue with his three Conn Smythes. That forms the strongest argument for his 'greatest' status, I suppose. But he won it in 1986 on the bad of a very unremarkable rookie season, and then the 1993 and 2001 wins are in front of very stacked teams. I agree that Roy deserved the three Conn Smythes (certainly the '86 and '93 ones; perhaps '01 is more debatable), by the way.

From the stats: Roy led the NHL in save-% 4 times in 18 years. Good? yes. Great? yes. Best of all time..? Uhh... He led in GAA 3 times and wins 2 times. In 18 years. Is this the best goalie ever?


I dunno... I like Roy a lot and I think he was great. But I don't think he's the best ever. I'm just wondering if the legend of 'St. Patrick' is starting to take over from reality.

IMO, Hasek was way better.

Roy was certainly clutch however that is his legacy.
 
When Roy wanted to be, he was unbeatable. Was he, on balance, better than Hasek? Not in my opinion.
 
^^^ yep. The Beat Goes On vs.... so, "was he REALLY that good"?.... Yes, I believe he was. Some serious attitude that one. Got right into the oppositions heads. Technically and innately everything youd want in a Goaltender. But "Best Ever"? I dont think so, wouldnt go that far. I know Im showing my age but hopefully not "ageism" when Im still in the Sawchuk camp on that score, but having seen them all and as a former goaltender myself, like to think I know a little bit about it. After that #1 spot, Im almost ambivalent who you might wanna rank (and I mean NHL exclusively, disregarding Intl players) #2/3/4/5 & so on, the cluster of Roy, Hasek, Plante, Dryden et al. They were all brilliant in their own ways. Psychologically smart, tough. Both Roy & Hasek brash about it. Not real big on that myself but for them it worked, was a weapon, tool. And thats ok.
 
Fuhr shouldn't even be mentioned with those names.

Fuhr is on the Osgood level....

IMO Andy Moog could have won that dynasty championships.

Fuhr's not the best goalie of all time, and Moog could have won multiple championships, but may not have won as many.

Bolded goes too far. Fuhr was one of the best goaltenders of his era. He also performed very well in the playoffs when the Oilers won those titles.
 
Fuhr's not the best goalie of all time, and Moog could have won multiple championships, but may not have won as many.

Bolded goes too far. Fuhr was one of the best goaltenders of his era. He also performed very well in the playoffs when the Oilers won those titles.

Fuhr was adequate, yet easily replaceable by Moog....

Liut was just way better than Furh yet one is in the HOF and the other isn't.. Fuhr was without question a second tier goaltender and he absolutely doesn't belong in the HOF.
 
Maybe my judgement is clouded because I just watched the highlights of an Edmonton-Montreal match from 1985

yeah, I'd say so.

There's nothing wrong with not thinking Roy is the greatest of all-time. But there is something wrong with thinking he's "nowhere near that".

can you explain why talking about how many times a goalie led the NHL in GAA is relevant at all? GAA is just the inverse of save percentage (error rate) times shots against per game, so you're taking a useful stat and adding something to it that the goalie can't control. There is simply no basis for caring about GAA, at all.

it's also a little too "binary" to care only about the times a player led the league in a category and not how many times they ranked very highly or take a bigger picture look at it. Roy's sv% performance in the regular season over the leaguewide average throughout his career is well ahead of anyone else aside from Hasek. And then of course you know what happened in the playoffs.
 
Roy was lights out in 1993 for sure.. but Montreal was a 102 point team that year so I do think that the "Roy took a ragtag bunch of players to the Cup by himself" overstates it. Same thing with the OT record that year -- impressive as hell -- but in at least one of them Roy didn't even make a save so I think it also gets blown up a little too much even though it was amazing.

The Habs also won the matchup lottery of a lifetime throughout those playoffs.

All that being said he was still awesome those playoffs.

Yes this doesn't stand to scrutiny neither, but I was arguing against "the very stacked team" comment.To me a very stacked team is not the 1993 Montreal Canadiens, but perhaps people have a different definition than me.

They were a good team no doubt, but they weren't Colorado of the late 90s.
 
Roy was my favorite player outside gretzky/lemieux and there is just no way he was a better goalie than hasek. No chance, this is one that many posters clearly get wrong imo.
 
Where was this large pro-Hasek/anti-Roy crowd when the top 40 goaltenders project was being done...
 
Maybe my judgement is clouded because I just watched the highlights of an Edmonton-Montreal match from 1985 when rookie Roy let in 4 of the first 5 shots he faced in the second period

This seems absurd. I'd recommend judging Roy on his body of work, not on one game in Roy's rookie season (the game was in 1986, by the way, not 1985) where he's playing against one of the greatest teams of all time.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Ad

Ad