Patrick Roy -- Was he REALLY that good?

[quoipourquoi]

Btw yeah, Roy really was that good.

But Hasek was still better.

And I have this theory: If you sent the generally more insecure "Roy is the greatest goalie of all time" crowd on the polygraph test, they were asked if they believed Roy was a better goalie than Hasek and some of them, sweating and panting, still stubbornly replied "yes!", the polygraph would go bananas.

I think even most of these people subconsciously agree Hasek was better.

No goaltender is going to win every Stanley Cup or every series, but when you’re looking at two of the best to ever do it and one goaltender’s quality game percentage elevates to 77.7% when trailing in a series while another’s drops down to 53.6% when trailing, I think there’s a question of fight versus flight.

If the Stanley Cup Playoffs were contested under single-game elimination rules, it would probably re-shape a lot of our opinions as we’d have shocking 2006 Niittymaki-like tournaments every year. But I’m of the opinion that the best test of mental strength in sports is the best-of-seven format, because it’ll tell you how you respond to both kicking butt and getting your butt kicked.

There have been times when Hasek has battled back and there have been times when Roy hasn’t, but on the whole, I feel like I got my answer from the two: Patrick Roy wants the extra shot of lidocaine and Dominik Hasek might ignore a doctor’s clearance.

I won’t pretend that my answer is factually correct but I think what matters most is that even if his team was down in a series, even if he had just had an awful game or a bad goal, or even if he was injured, Patrick Roy would pass the polygraph test.

 

[Tuna Tatarrrrrr]

I suppose you're right.

I just don't see it. Hasek had an Orr/Gretzky level of dominance over the position and league that Roy never did - although Roy did show that he could get it done when it mattered, although his teams were mostly favorites in the finals regardless.

Certainly not 86 and especially 93 Habs team, 96 Avs sure but 01 Avs, a lot of people chose the Devils as the favorite in the finals.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Certainly not 86 and especially 93 Habs team, 96 Avs sure but 01 Avs, a lot of people chose the Devils as the favorite in the finals.

1986 - MTL had 87 pts Def BOS (86), HFD (84), NYR (78), Calgary (89,)
1993 - MTL had 102 pts. QUE (104), BUF (86), NYI (87)), LAK (88)
1996 - COL finished with 104 pts. VAN (79), Chi (94), Det (131), FLA (92)
2001 - COL finished with 118 pts. VAN (90), LA (92), STL (103), NJD (111)

So out of the 16 series that made up the 4 cup wins, Roy's team enjoyed home ice advantage 13/16 times. The times they were underdogs and won were Calgary (1986, 2 pts), Quebec (1993, 2 points) and Detroit (1996, 27 pts).

86 and 93 were miracle cups for the habs for multiple reasons. I'm not old enough to remember 1986 but things couldn't have fallen into place any better for Montreal than they did in 1993. It was insane.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

And I have this theory: If you sent the generally more insecure "Roy is the greatest goalie of all time" crowd on the polygraph test, they were asked if they believed Roy was a better goalie than Hasek and some of them, sweating and panting, still stubbornly replied "yes!", the polygraph would go bananas.

Keep these sort of theories to yourself, and if you can't make your points without taking broad swipes about people who disagree with you, then I'd strongly recommend re-reading the site rules.

 

[Frank Drebin]

1986 - MTL had 87 pts Def BOS (86), HFD (84), NYR (78), Calgary (89,)
1993 - MTL had 102 pts. QUE (104), BUF (86), NYI (87)), LAK (88)
1996 - COL finished with 104 pts. VAN (79), Chi (94), Det (131), FLA (92)
2001 - COL finished with 118 pts. VAN (90), LA (92), STL (103), NJD (111)

So out of the 16 series that made up the 4 cup wins, Roy's team enjoyed home ice advantage 13/16 times. The times they were underdogs and won were Calgary (1986, 2 pts), Quebec (1993, 2 points) and Detroit (1996, 27 pts).

86 and 93 were miracle cups for the habs for multiple reasons. I'm not old enough to remember 1986 but things couldn't have fallen into place any better for Montreal than they did in 1993. It was insane.

Just to add to this point

Hasek's teams finishes in the standings, starting in 1993-94 through 01-02. Hasek retired for the first time after this season at age 37. Same age that Roy retired. He (Hasek) came back to play in his 40's after a partial season in 03-04 but obviously was past his prime.

Blue with Buffalo, red with the Wings. Cup wins Bolded/Underline

10, 11, 20 (DNQ), 6, 10, 9, 16, 9, 1

Compare to Patrick Roy's career, starting in 85-86. Red with the Habs, Blue with the Avalanche. Cup wins Bolded/Underlined.

7, 5, 2, 2, 4, 6, 5, 6, 9, 16 (DNQ), 2, 1, 7, 4, 9, 1, 4, 6

So its clear to me at least that not only did Roy benefit from having a longer NHL career, he also benefited greatly from playing for cup contenders for nearly the entirety of his career. Ten times his team finished top 5 in the league, compared to just once for Hasek.

 

[Harry Kakalovich]

I'll also say that it would be a minority that would consider Roy to be greater than Hasek. Especially if you exclude Habs fans.

The OP seemed to be saying that more people see Roy as #1. I don't really care either way, but I'm sure there are polls on this somewhere.

Whatever the case, everyone's opinion is bound to be subjective on the matter. I think those who prefer Roy probably prefer him because of his superior playoff success, which I think is fair to place more importance on the playoffs than the regular season.

 

[quoipourquoi]

One of the times the Montreal Canadiens were a top-5 team with Patrick Roy, they finished 14th out of 22 teams in scoring. One of the times the Colorado Avalanche were a top-5 team with Patrick Roy, they finished 18th out of 30 teams in scoring.

I understand your point, but I don’t think an argument that does not separate the goaltenders’ performance from their teams’ success is necessarily going to show it. More than that, top-5 naturally means different things in a 21-Team league and a 30-Team league.

 

[Harry Kakalovich]

1986 - MTL had 87 pts Def BOS (86), HFD (84), NYR (78), Calgary (89,)
1993 - MTL had 102 pts. QUE (104), BUF (86), NYI (87)), LAK (88)
1996 - COL finished with 104 pts. VAN (79), Chi (94), Det (131), FLA (92)
2001 - COL finished with 118 pts. VAN (90), LA (92), STL (103), NJD (111)

So out of the 16 series that made up the 4 cup wins, Roy's team enjoyed home ice advantage 13/16 times. The times they were underdogs and won were Calgary (1986, 2 pts), Quebec (1993, 2 points) and Detroit (1996, 27 pts).

86 and 93 were miracle cups for the habs for multiple reasons. I'm not old enough to remember 1986 but things couldn't have fallen into place any better for Montreal than they did in 1993. It was insane.

The main help in 93 was that the Islanders beat the Pens. But without Roy I doubt the Habs win against Quebec - they fell down 0-2 in that series and Roy willed a win in game 3 - put the team on his back. So without Roy the Habs probably don't get to take advantage of the Pens losing in round 2.

 

[Frank Drebin]

One of the times the Montreal Canadiens were a top-5 team with Patrick Roy, they finished 14th out of 22 teams in scoring. One of the times the Colorado Avalanche were a top-5 team with Patrick Roy, they finished 18th out of 30 teams in scoring.

I understand your point, but I don’t think an argument that does not separate the goaltenders’ performance from their teams’ success is necessarily going to show it. More than that, top-5 naturally means different things in a 21-Team league and a 30-Team league.

Yes nothing is black and white but it does paint a pretty clear picture of the caliber of teams that each goalie played for during their primes.
Patrick Roy likely doesn't win a cup either if he's the starter for Buffalo between 1994 and 2001.

Hasek put up .938 and .939 sv% in the 1998 and 1999 post seasons. Its hard to imagine a goalie being better than that. So was it Hasek's fault that he didn't win, or was he just a victim of circumstance?

 

[quoipourquoi]

Hasek put up .938 and .939 sv% in the 1998 and 1999 post seasons. Its hard to imagine a goalie being better than that. So was it Hasek's fault that he didn't win, or was he just a victim of circumstance?

I don’t think anyone is assigning blame, but it’s also important to remember that Olaf Kolzig had a .935 to Hasek’s .928 in the Eastern Conference Finals while Ed Belfour had a .941 to Hasek’s .939 in the Stanley Cup Finals, so we can’t just pretend that no goaltender in history could equal his performance when there’s a strong argument for the ones whose teams eliminated Hasek’s Sabres in those very series.

 

[Neutrinos]

I don’t think anyone is assigning blame, but it’s also important to remember that Olaf Kolzig had a .935 to Hasek’s .928 in the Eastern Conference Finals while Ed Belfour had a .941 to Hasek’s .939 in the Stanley Cup Finals, so we can’t just pretend that no goaltender in history could equal his performance when there’s a strong argument for the ones whose teams eliminated Hasek’s Sabres in those very series.

On average, Hasek faced 30 shots per game in that series vs 28.33 for Kolzig, so the difference was negligible

However, in the Finals vs Dallas, Hasek faced 33 shots per game on average compared to under 24 shots against per game for Belfour

 

[Nerowoy nora tolad]

One of the times the Montreal Canadiens were a top-5 team with Patrick Roy, they finished 14th out of 22 teams in scoring. One of the times the Colorado Avalanche were a top-5 team with Patrick Roy, they finished 18th out of 30 teams in scoring.

I understand your point, but I don’t think an argument that does not separate the goaltenders’ performance from their teams’ success is necessarily going to show it. More than that, top-5 naturally means different things in a 21-Team league and a 30-Team league.

I think the thing I find more concerning about Roy though is that the only time he did play on a team that was struggling to win, he bailed on his teammates.

 

[The Panther]

I think the thing I find more concerning about Roy though is that the only time he did play on a team that was struggling to win, he bailed on his teammates.

That really rubs me the wrong way, too. Just on a personal level, I was quite a fan of Roy (and the Canadiens) until about 1995, but that one fateful night at the Forum in '95 really soured me on Roy for the rest of his career. I just cannot think the same way of goaltenders who glare at teammates and then mock themselves/the franchise, esp. when they're playing for as storied a franchise as Montreal.

That has nada to do with Roy's ability to play goal, however, it's just a personal thing.

 

[sr edler]

However, in the Finals vs Dallas, Hasek faced 33 shots per game on average compared to under 24 shots against per game for Belfour

Almost 10 shots per game, that's significant. Then add the quality of shots dimension to it.

 

[rfournier103]

Four Stanley Cup championships.
Three Conn Smythe trophies.
On two different teams.

Yeah. He was that good.

As a hardcore New Englander and Bruins fan, I ALWAYS respected him. Heck, I even liked him a little. Nobody quite like him before or since.

As for 1995... he had a bad night and lost his sh*t. It happens. He just lost it on TV in his home rink. It’s too bad, and there was plenty of blame to go around on both sides. I don’t hold it against him, though. He’s only human.

 

[sr edler]

Hasek didn't win against Dallas in 99 with Peca as his best teammate and Pronger didn't win against Carolina in 06 with Peca as his best teammate. Roy in 93 had a Peca like/calibre player in Guy Carbonneau plus players like Desjardins, Damphousse, Bellows, Muller, Keane. Dallas Stars in 1999 was a significantly better team than any team the Canadiens beat en route to their 1993 Stanley Cup victory.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I think the thing I find more concerning about Roy though is that the only time he did play on a team that was struggling to win, he bailed on his teammates.

...they had gone 12-3-1 in their last 16 games.

 

[The Panther]

...they had gone 12-3-1 in their last 16 games.

Yeah, but they were winless in 4 coming in, and then lost 11-1.

Jocelyn Thibault's numbers, in both wins/losses and save-percentage/GAA, are better than Roy's for 1995-96. Why was that?

 

[Doctor No]

Jocelyn Thibault's numbers, in both wins/losses and save-percentage/GAA, are better than Roy's for 1995-96. Why was that?

For one, Thibault's average opponent in 1995-96 with Montreal was 0.20 goals/game below average. Roy's average opponent was 0.01 goals/game below average.

That's a meaningful difference for goaltenders on the same team (even if they weren't on the same team at the same time).

 

[EpochLink]

One of the most clutch goaltenders of all time.

 

[The Panther]

For one, Thibault's average opponent in 1995-96 with Montreal was 0.20 goals/game below average. Roy's average opponent was 0.01 goals/game below average.

That's a meaningful difference for goaltenders on the same team (even if they weren't on the same team at the same time).

That might explain it, yes. The back-up generally gets "easier" opponents.

I'm trying to remember the public perception of Roy at the time. He obviously felt the pressure; hence, his little meltdown against Detroit that night.

 

[Staniowski]

That might explain it, yes. The back-up generally gets "easier" opponents.

I'm trying to remember the public perception of Roy at the time. He obviously felt the pressure; hence, his little meltdown against Detroit that night.

That season was a roller coaster, they lost their first 5 games of the season, then went on a nice winning streak, then were winless in the last 5 games Roy was on the team (4 losses, one tie). And don't forget that the Habs didn't make the playoffs the previous season for the first time in 25 years.

The fans were getting restless. The team was getting booed regularly during those 2 seasons, and Roy was getting booed more than anybody.

This really stems from the decline of the team. They traded away most of their best players from the '89 and '93 teams. In 1990, they had Chelios, Desjardins, Ludwig, Svoboda, Lumme, Schneider, Lefebvre, Daigneault on defense. The deepest group of quality D in the NHL no doubt. They traded all of them before Roy left the team in 1995. Not to mention many of their quality forwards, including defensive stalwarts like Carbonneau. The team was badly managed.

The narrative you sometimes hear, that the Habs declined because they traded Roy, is false. The team was going down with or without him. They could've had a top team throughout the '90s and into the 2000s if they hadn't dismantled the team. They would have been strong in the DPE.

 

[Staniowski]

Four Stanley Cup championships.
Three Conn Smythe trophies.
On two different teams.

Yeah. He was that good.

As a hardcore New Englander and Bruins fan, I ALWAYS respected him. Heck, I even liked him a little. Nobody quite like him before or since.

As for 1995... he had a bad night and lost his sh*t. It happens. He just lost it on TV in his home rink. It’s too bad, and there was plenty of blame to go around on both sides. I don’t hold it against him, though. He’s only human.

4 Stanley Cups and 3 Conn Smythes

Yes, but these are all team accomplishments. Montreal was the 2nd best team overall during his time with the team (basically tied for 1st). Colorado was also the 2nd best team overall during his time with the team. He was very fortunate to play with these teams, both of which were already top teams when he joined them, both with many really good young players heading into their primes.

If he played his entire career on below-average teams, even if he played the exact same quality, he would have zero Stanley Cups and zero Conn Smythes.

And the same is true of my favourite childhood player, who was probably the most fortunate goaltender in NHL history - 7 full seasons, 6 Stanley Cups, 5 1st-Team All-Stars. None of this would've happened if he played for just about any other team.

 

[geisterpanthers]

prime Hasek was by far the best ever. no one comes close. if you look at the entire career it's closer though.

 

[Iapyi]

I think he is probably the most over-rated player in history.