Patrick Roy -- Was he REALLY that good?

[vadim sharifijanov]

I wouldn't necessarily say that, particularly as today's goaltenders are learning and incorporating elements of Hasek's technique now.

Hasek's style was difficult to emulate - I used to teach the vertical angles element in particular.

Roy looks technically sound - now. At the time, coaches were asking if he wanted a pillow while he was lying on the ice. We know now that Roy was ahead of his time. We'll see that (collectively) about Hasek some day.

hasek was a genius in the way he saw the game. i remember watching hasek and thinking he was like paganini-- as a non-goalie i couldn't understand his technique it just looked like he'd made a deal with the devil so that some limb would always be in the right place at the last moment.

but you're right, dr. no: he was ahead of his time, he could understand the game in a way that no one at the time did, but we are all coming to understand how to synchronize body movement and reading the play, how to move in a way that leaves yourself an out even if you aren't a flexible freak like hasek was.

see jamie mclennan's comments in this video: http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=3&id=675135

and hasek's own comments on how he used his flexibility in this article: http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=739219

 

[Rhiessan71]

His style certainly catered to his gifts, but the principles can be taught.

I don't see it that way.
His principles at their core were pretty normal and mostly along the lines of what all butterfly goalies subscribe to.
He definitely had an advanced understanding of vertical angles but his style relied on taking chances and being extremely aggressive.
A style that really only he could effectively employ though because of being double-jointed and flexible like a Gumby doll.

I think you're right to a point that aspects of his style can be taught and Tim Thomas IMO is about the closest thing you will find to Hasek's style today but really at the end of the day, only Hasek could truly do what Hasek did.
I mean he put himself in positions that no other goalie could have recovered from.
You and I both know that technique only goes so far and that at some point it becomes a one on one battle where you have to give the shooter something, only to take it away.
That, along with how to properly poke check, is definitely an aspect I also tried to impart in any goalies I have worked with but I would never advocate trying to do as much or to the degree Hasek did.

That was also a drawback to Hasek as well. That unless he was completely 100%, his level of play dropped off sharply which was one of the reasons he was so quick to shut himself down over the years.


Best example I can think of of a goalie being taught these aspects later on is Carey Price.
He came into the league almost perfect technically but that only takes you so far. Now under Waite over the last couple of years, Price has become more aggressive and he's playing more give and take especially 5-hole and glove.
Want an amazing non-stat so far this season? Price has yet to be beaten 5-hole on a shot this season. And of course I just jinxed it but still.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Peak and regular season play: Hasek
Consistency and playoffs: Roy

That's the way I see it. Roy is still my favorite goalie but no one can deny Hasek and how he dominated

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

That was also a drawback to Hasek as well. That unless he was completely 100%, his level of play dropped off sharply which was one of the reasons he was so quick to shut himself down over the years.

i've never heard that argument before, but my initial hunch is there's a lot of truth to that. really thought-provoking point.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

IIRC if we remove the two lowest votes for Roy and Hasek in that project they are exactly tied.

You're correct. For some reason, some people want to remove the low vote for Hasek and not for Roy.

 

[Monstar Jay*]

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.

This is unreal, people always talk a it gretzky scoring on **** goalies now we have people saying they were all hof"s

WHAT IS IT

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

This is unreal, people always talk a it gretzky scoring on **** goalies now we have people saying they were all hof"s

WHAT IS IT

i'm 99% certain that he's talking about '91-2004, not the '80s.

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

This is unreal, people always talk a it gretzky scoring on **** goalies now we have people saying they were all hof"s

WHAT IS IT

They may talk that kind of BS about Gretzky over on the main board, but in the History Section those kind ignorant comments are thankfully rare

 

[Bear of Bad News]

This is unreal, people always talk a it gretzky scoring on **** goalies now we have people saying they were all hof"s

WHAT IS IT

You surely understand that it's different groups of people espousing those opinions, right? It's not that confusing.

Of course, you're probably also referring to opinions elsewhere. The level of discourse is (usually) higher here.

 

[Sens Rule]

i've never heard that argument before, but my initial hunch is there's a lot of truth to that. really thought-provoking point.

Hasek would not play if he wasn't 100%. He just wouldn't. That is his perogative. Maybe he was very afraid of getting more injured by playing if he wasn't nearly perfectly healthy because of his insane style?

Roy. Played a day after (or soon after) Emergency an emergency appendectomy. In the playoffs.

Roy retired as the all-time leader in playoff games... By anyone. In a much shorter career. Chelios and Lidstrom have since passed him and that's it.

Roy was a stud his whole career. He would have been the first pick of many GMs to have as their goalie every season of his career. He never had a slump, never was injured or inconsistent. Always an elite, MVP or co-MVP of his team. Every season.

The first post acts like he wasn't consistent or something because he only led the league in certain things you can count on one hand. So what? After the playoffs in his rookie season he was a legend. Literally... Then he lived up to that billing his entire career. No decline. Made the playoffs every season but the half lockout season.

Is he the greatest ever? I think so. He definitely is in the argument without a doubt.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I wouldn't necessarily say that, particularly as today's goaltenders are learning and incorporating elements of Hasek's technique now.

Hasek's style was difficult to emulate - I used to teach the vertical angles element in particular.

Hasek's command of the angles was insane. I wonder if it was an innate pattern matching like Gretzky had going on after spending so much time drawing the lines on the paper following the puck or if it was something else.

Roy looks technically sound - now. At the time, coaches were asking if he wanted a pillow while he was lying on the ice. We know now that Roy was ahead of his time. We'll see that (collectively) about Hasek some day.

You're right that people used to criticize goalies for going down too early.. but that was partly because in those days players could get shots away for those top corners more often.

Not only did Roy popularize using the butterfly more often, but the clamping down in the game all around made it even more effective because players aren't winding slapshots from the top of the circle and hitting the top corner any more etc. Players rarely have the time to take a well aimed shot top shelf these days.

It has turned into an almost virtuous cycle of feedback for goaltending. A lot of goals now are of the garbage rebound tip bounce variety because that is all there is available!

Hasek is almost inhumanly flexible. He had to be taken to the doctors at a young age because they thought his bones were broken. I don't think you can teach what Hasek did.

I don't think people can be taught to play like Hasek at all.

He was very unique. I think of him as the Gretzky of goalies.

His style certainly catered to his gifts, but the principles can be taught.

For sure the principles of all those angles can be taught to a goalie of any style.

hasek was a genius in the way he saw the game. i remember watching hasek and thinking he was like paganini-- as a non-goalie i couldn't understand his technique it just looked like he'd made a deal with the devil so that some limb would always be in the right place at the last moment.

but you're right, dr. no: he was ahead of his time, he could understand the game in a way that no one at the time did, but we are all coming to understand how to synchronize body movement and reading the play, how to move in a way that leaves yourself an out even if you aren't a flexible freak like hasek was.

The Gretzky of goalies, imo.

I don't see it that way.
His principles at their core were pretty normal and mostly along the lines of what all butterfly goalies subscribe to.
He definitely had an advanced understanding of vertical angles but his style relied on taking chances and being extremely aggressive.
A style that really only he could effectively employ though because of being double-jointed and flexible like a Gumby doll.

I think you're right to a point that aspects of his style can be taught and Tim Thomas IMO is about the closest thing you will find to Hasek's style today but really at the end of the day, only Hasek could truly do what Hasek did.
I mean he put himself in positions that no other goalie could have recovered from.
You and I both know that technique only goes so far and that at some point it becomes a one on one battle where you have to give the shooter something, only to take it away.
That, along with how to properly poke check, is definitely an aspect I also tried to impart in any goalies I have worked with but I would never advocate trying to do as much or to the degree Hasek did.

That was also a drawback to Hasek as well. That unless he was completely 100%, his level of play dropped off sharply which was one of the reasons he was so quick to shut himself down over the years.


Best example I can think of of a goalie being taught these aspects later on is Carey Price.
He came into the league almost perfect technically but that only takes you so far. Now under Waite over the last couple of years, Price has become more aggressive and he's playing more give and take especially 5-hole and glove.
Want an amazing non-stat so far this season? Price has yet to be beaten 5-hole on a shot this season. And of course I just jinxed it but still.

i've never heard that argument before, but my initial hunch is there's a lot of truth to that. really thought-provoking point.

I hadn't really thought of that either but it does seem to make sense. You couldn't play like Hasek did if you weren't 100%.

 

[Sadekuuro]

I hadn't really thought of that either but it does seem to make sense. You couldn't play like Hasek did if you weren't 100%.

Comparing goaltenders to skaters isn't a perfect analogy, but I can think of at least one other player that becomes uniquely ineffective when not totally healthy--Pavel Datsyuk. In other words, at 90% health he's nowhere near 90% as effective as normal, because he can't pull off (for instance) those ankle-breaking cuts and other moves that allow him to create room to make plays. Playing hurt he's still a smart and capable player, but no longer a game-breaker.

It's hard to say to what degree this was the case with Hasek, since we so rarely saw him play through when he was not 100%, but I don't find it hard to believe. Presumably there are other players in this category, likely also heavily dependent on the unique way they can move to be as good as they are.

 

[The Panther]

Just to clarify, my OP is not to argue that Roy was a bum. As I said off the top, I've always rated him very high and he was one of the best of his time. I'm his fan. I enjoyed watching him very much at all stages of his career and I think he was terrific. There was a time when I'd have said he was one of my six or seven favorite players in pro-hockey. This thread was not intended as a rant.

I just personally have never thought of him as "the best of all-time" (the "THAT good" in my thread-title refers not to merely being great but to being "the best of all-time").

It's interesting to read everyone's perspectives on here, and it's been very informative. Thanks to all for commenting.

I keep coming back to how difficult it is to evaluate goaltenders. Somehow, it seems like it should be just as difficult to evaluate skaters, and yet it isn't (or at least we think it isn't).

 

[bobholly39]

Just to clarify, my OP is not to argue that Roy was a bum. As I said off the top, I've always rated him very high and he was one of the best of his time. I'm his fan. I enjoyed watching him very much at all stages of his career and I think he was terrific. There was a time when I'd have said he was one of my six or seven favorite players in pro-hockey. This thread was not intended as a rant.

I just personally have never thought of him as "the best of all-time" (the "THAT good" in my thread-title refers not to merely being great but to being "the best of all-time").

It's interesting to read everyone's perspectives on here, and it's been very informative. Thanks to all for commenting.

I keep coming back to how difficult it is to evaluate goaltenders. Somehow, it seems like it should be just as difficult to evaluate skaters, and yet it isn't (or at least we think it isn't).

Hasek has better regular seasons than Roy.

By a LOT - it's not close. People saying it's close, are wrong.

Hasek had Gretzky/Lemieux like regular seasons for a goalie, whereas Roy is like barely in "jagr" territory, if that. Might even be more Sakic-like territory for regular seasons.

So at his best - Hasek's regular season were insane. Roy - was always amongst the best in league (like Jagr, Sakic) - even won a few vezinas, but he's no Hasek.

I agree that if you look at regular season, Roy is closer to an Ed Belfour than a Hasek. But his playoffs were just off the charts good. He was a competitor - and his forte was winning. He could win a 3-2 games by letting in 2 goals on 10 shots, or win a 2-1 game by letting in 1 goals on 50 shots. So in playoffs, GAA/SV% non-withstanding, he found ways to win, whatever it takes. And he did so his WHOLE CAREER.

During playoffs - Roy is not even in Gretzky territory, I think Roy is above Gretzky Territory (or real close).

Hasek? Hasek is a good playoff goalie, great even, but he's nowhere near the #2 best goalie of all-time in playoffs.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Hasek has better regular seasons than Roy.

By a LOT - it's not close. People saying it's close, are wrong.

Hasek had Gretzky/Lemieux like regular seasons for a goalie, whereas Roy is like barely in "jagr" territory, if that. Might even be more Sakic-like territory for regular seasons.

You're letting the era's characteristics bias you.

Just to pick one year, in 1989-90, Patrick saved pucks 3.8 standard deviations better than league average.

The next highest? Daren Puppa, a full standard deviation below him.

 

[Killion]

His style certainly catered to his gifts, but the principles can be taught.

Yes, certainly Hasek's skills & knowledge base at the elemental level were those taught to all Goaltenders. What made him particularly outstanding was his vision, being able to read a play, a player, and most importantly, being able to read how the puck was leaving the blade. In addition to understanding the East~West & North~South Angles, he was ahead of the game in also understanding, working with Vertical Angles, something only fairly recently being taught to Goaltenders which previously was more an innate skill, largely misunderstood. Chest almost always square to the puck & shooter. While he appeared at times to be completely unorthodox, thats not really a fair nor objective assessment I dont think as he performed the same unorthodoxy repetitively & consistently, like his body prone on the ice Barrel Roll save selection for example. Ultra aggressive, if for example he was facing a guy on a breakaway & he saw the player had his head down, proactively charge him (great skater) and either go for the poke check or just double stack the pads in a slide & take him out, face first or whatever. Always thought ahead, thought about the 2nd, 3rd save if necessary.... For fun, prolly bent spoons with his mind on flights when bored.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I agree that if you look at regular season, Roy is closer to an Ed Belfour than a Hasek.

Gotta disagree with that, because of the difference in consistency between the two. Belfour managed to record six top-ten save percentage seasons - which is actually quite good for the era (only four goalies have had more since they started recording the statistic in 1984). Patrick Roy had six top-five save percentage seasons in his first seven years in the league, and fifteen top-ten save percentage seasons overall.

I think some of Belfour's playoff performances did a really good job in erasing some ho-hum regular seasons and Jeff Hackett from people's memories. In retrospect, Belfour and Roy would have greatly benefited from annual awards voting that would have included both regular season and playoff performance, because their combined three Vezina nominations after 1995 was not at all reflective of their reputations at the time. For instance, in all of 1999-2000, Ed Belfour was likely the best goaltender, but he doesn't really have anything to show for it on an individual level.

 

[quoipourquoi]

And yet, discounting a vote that was as "based in pure fact" as an Antonin Scalia ruling, the majority had Hasek slightly ahead.

It kinda bums me out that after all of the work we did during Vote 1 of Round 2 (777 posts!), the takeaway for most people from that project was the two low votes for Roy and Hasek instead of the fact that Roy trailed by 19 voting points in Round 1 and ended up leading by 3 voting points in Round 2 because after two weeks of going through their careers with fine-toothed combs, all of the voters had to re-evaluate long-standing opinions.

 

[terribleteddy]

Roy was great, but there will never be a player like Dom. Great+1.

That being said, Roy is the best playoff goalie I have ever seen.

 

[Sens Rule]

I love Hasek. An Ottawa fan. Saw him live here and he was a freak. Was a freak in Buffalo but still post 40 on the Sens. So glad I really "saw" him.

But playoffs. Playoffs. Big 4 of Gretzky, Orr, Howe and Mario in the regular season.

Playoffs there is a big 3. IMO. Gretzky, Roy and Rocket. That is it. IMO. Hasek was better but then... Playoffs. Playoffs is what gets Rocket into the #5 conversation all time. Gretzky was better at clutch time then he was normally... And normally he is #1. Roy. Roy is the money goalie of all time. Every single season.

I like Hasek. I respect him. The 4,66,99 if goalies. I am a Sens fan. I love Hasek. His play for 40ish games post 40 years old is absurd. Buffalo is more absurd. I still think 90% of GMs and coaches all-time pick Roy in the playoffs. Hey 100% pick Gretzky at centre. Most pick Richard at RW. But goalie.... It is Roy.

Roy was such a playoff goalie. So clutch. If I am brain trust for Team Canada... I start him every year.

I love Hasek. I think he is a 99/66 talent at goal. But I still take Roy. Playoffs... He is neck and neck with Gretzky.

 

[CpatainCanuck]

I usually pick Hasek as the best goalie of all time, but I also think Roy's regular-season dominance gets underrated:

During Roy's first seven years, 1985-1992 (when he won all his Vezinas), his save percentage was 11 points better than his nearest competitors — Jon Casey and Ron Hextall. (I'm limiting to goalies who played at least 200 games in that span.)

By comparison, during Hasek's first seven years as starter, 1993-2000, he was fourteen points better than his nearest competitor — Patrick Roy.

So Roy basically had a seven-year stretch of near-Hasek-like regular-season dominance, plus another seven years when he was second in save percentage behind only Hasek.

Obviously save percentage isn't everything. And you could add that Roy played behind stronger teams and arguably had weaker competition than Hasek, etc. (Like I said, I rate Hasek higher.) But the answer to the initial question is yes. Even before you get into his playoff heroics, Roy really was that good.

Well, this post just made my estimation of Hasek go up, and my estimation of Roy go down. Goalies in the 80s sucked. This wasn't all their fault, as they were using outdated goaltending techniques, but they sucked. The fact that Hasek was more dominant over his peers which included the likes of Roy, Brodeur, and even Belfour than Roy was over his 80s colleagues like Fuhr and Vernon is incredible.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Goalies in the 80s sucked.

Or the rules, style of the game, and equipment made it more difficult to do their job.

 

[The Panther]

Goalies in the 80s sucked. This wasn't all their fault, as they were using outdated goaltending techniques, but they sucked.

Goalies in the 80s did not suck. I suggest you go back and watch game 7 of the 1987 Stanley Cup Final to see two great goaltenders going at it. Or game 1 of the 1983 Stanley Cup Final. The goalies in these games are stopping nearly everything and they're not doing it dressed as Astronauts.

Nowadays all goals are scored by speed or luck (deflection, rebounds), not by skilled passing and shooting. Therefore goaltending is much simpler now -- flop and cover the corners. But in the 80s skilled shooters would pick the top corners, the far posts, the near posts, the five-hole, or score off incredible passing plays. Therefore goaltenders could not simply flop and cover the ice like today. They had to gamble whether to come out or stay in the net, whether to stand up or go down. It was harder then.

Not to mention that the goaltending equipment is bigger now and much lighter, which drastically increases goalie mobility.

The average team today scores about 0.84 more goals per game than in 1987. Do you really think if a young Grant Fuhr or Pete Peeters was in the League today, they'd have a 3.40 GAA? Patrick Roy, in his rookie year, had a 3.35 GAA and in 1999 his GAA dropped below 2.30 for the first time. Did Roy suddenly become superior at age 33? No, the equipment and the team-philosophy of the game changed.

Finally, let's recall that Hasek did play in the 80s and at a very high level. He faced Gretzky and Lemieux in the '87 Canada Cup and in games he played had a 3.33 GAA. Then, the same guy had a 0.98 GAA at the Olympics in 1998. Did he suddenly become great the moment the 80s ended? No, the era and the equipment changed.

 

[Moose Head]

i'm 99% certain that he's talking about '91-2004, not the '80s.

Yep. Basically from the time Belfour and Hasek joined the NHL to Roy's retirement, the NHL had a second golden age of goaltending. The late 50's, early 60's being the first, with Plante, Sawchuk, Gump, Hall and Bower all eventually becoming HOFers.

 

[tony d]

Roy nowhere near the top of the all-time goalies of all time? Come on now. Guy is the best goalie ever.