Round 2, Vote 1 (HOH Top Goaltenders)

[sajmae]

Late 1940s saw some of the great Czech skaters offered tryouts in the NHL..Yet the first really good Czech goalies came about a generation later.

Not true, Bohumil Modry was first Czech goalie star and until Holeček/Dzurilla easily the biggest one. And after OG 1948 where he had shutout against Canada, he was offered contract in Canada. Well, communists sent him to jail instead.

Plus I know it is only one match, but Hašek was actually star of the match in round robin match versus Canada (4:4) at CC 1987.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Points

You have your years wrong, unless you're trying to make a point about the 1991-92 season, Hasek's second in the NHL. Hasek's first NHL training camp was in September 1990. The 1991 Canada Cup was in August and September 1991.

As for the 1991 Canada Cup, last place = 6th place, the same result as they had at the world championships the prior spring. The Czech program was in decline in the late '80s. They were winning bronze medals at the world championships in the years that Hasek was voted the best goalie there. Pointing to team success as evidence of Hasek's play is a weak argument.



Again, fourth place for the Czechs at a best-on-best at that point in time was a solid finish. Hasek did very well in the 1987 Canada Cup.



I'm assuming you mean 1994-95, because Hasek was at just .918 through his first 10 games played in '95-96. That was a lockout season that started in January, it's not exactly directly comparable and doesn't do much to oppose the argument that Hasek would start slow in September and October. Hasek was familiar with his defence for the rest of his Buffalo career and he still got out of the gate slowly almost every fall anyway.



Not necessarily, but it definitely can be. I'm not talking about late-season callups, though, I'm talking about situations where the backup becomes the starter by November or December, e.g. Cechmanek in 2001.

If it's such a crime to not immediately win the starting job, how come nobody is criticizing Jacques Plante for getting stuck for two years behind Gerry McNeil at the age of 24 and 25? Glenn Hall was stuck behind Terry Sawchuk for three years already, and if the Red Wings didn't start to get concerned about Sawchuk's personal life who knows how long it would have taken for him to emerge as a starting goalie. Dryden was the only goalie of the 7 we're debating here who pretty much just showed up and beat out good goaltending competition for the starting job, although Brodeur beating out Chris Terreri in his first season was not too bad either.



I stand corrected about Swedish North American tryouts.



I sort of agree with this statement. I highly doubt, for example, that a very low-tier hockey country would ever train an NHL Vezina candidate. But any first division country apparently can. All the top countries have gone through periods of booms and busts in terms of goaltending talent, and they don't seem to correlate with how good that country is overall or how good their domestic leagues are.

Point was that in his second NHL camp he could not press an advantage.

Yes, 1994-95 but then nothing seems to be directly comparable for Hasek. 1998-99 Hasek started the first ten games at .929 SV%, 4H/6A including a tough western swing. Regardless of the rest of the season .929 is excellent.

Plante was asthmatic plus he had a poorly set catching arm from a childhood accident - corrected by surgery in 1954, like Clarke a diabetic, this raised concerns about long term viability delaying either draft selection - Clarke second round or Plante - entry into the NHL,See link re Plante's early life and career:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Plante

Red Wings traded Harry Lumley from their 1950 SC team to make room for 21 year old Terry Sawchuk.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

An Analysis of Shot Quality During Patrick Roy's Prime

A. Style of Play

In the 1980s, Roy was playing on very strong defensive teams in Montreal. In the early '90s his teams were weaker overall, but still had some elite defensive players as well as Pat Burns, a noted defensive coach, who coached the Habs from 1989-1992. Newspapers and opposing teams from the late '80s talked often about Montreal's great defensive play:

"We knew they were strong defensively, but they've still surprised us at just how good they are. My hats off to the Montreal defense. They've shut us down. we haven't penetrated." (Neil Sheehy, Calgary Flames)

"We've never been the Edmonton Oilers, and we'll never be the Edmonton Oilers. We just play our style, and the Canadiens are built around defense." (Jean Perron, Montreal coach)

"Their backchecking has become so second nature that perfect positional play can almost be taken for granted. And behind all of that, their goaltender is competent, confident, and very appreciative of the rarity of rebounds around his net. "We play a patient game, and that way we can make no mistakes," said Roy, whose play is reminding his teammates of the form he showed as a rookie in 1986, the last year the Canadiens won the Stanley Cup." (New York Times News Service, May 9, 1989)

"Whoever first said a good defense is the best offense must have had the Montreal Canadiens in mind. Going into last night's game, Montreal led its Stanley Cup semifinal series with the Philadelphia Flyers, 2-1, because of a suffocating defense." (Associated Press, May 8, 1989)

B. Defensive Talent

One situation in which it is natural to expect a team's best defensive players to be utilized is on the penalty kill. Without ice time statistics, the best proxy to estimate which players were used most often on the PK is to look at on-ice goals for and against. Here are the top four Canadiens forwards and defencemen in power play goals against on the ice (i.e. the likely #1 and #2 PK units) for each of Roy's seasons in Montreal:

1986: Carbonneau, Gainey, McPhee, DeBlois; Ludwig, Robinson, Green, Lalor
1987: Carbonneau, Skrudland, Gainey, McPhee; Green, Chelios, Lalor, Ludwig
1988: Carbonneau, Gainey, Skrudland, McPhee; Ludwig, Chelios, Green, Robinson
1989: Carbonneau, Skrudland, Gainey, Walter; Ludwig, Chelios, Svoboda, Green
1990: Carbonneau, Walter, Keane, Skrudland; Ludwig, Chelios, Schneider, Lefebvre
1991: Carbonneau, Courtnall, Skrudland, Keane; Svoboda, Schneider, Desjardins, Lefebvre
1992: Carbonneau, Gilchrist, Muller, Corson; Desjardins, Daigneault, Schneider, Lefebvre
1993: Carbonneau, Muller, Keane, Damphousse; Desjardins, Daigneault, Schneider, Odelein
1994: Carbonneau, Muller, Keane, Wilson; Desjardins, Schneider, Odelein, Daigneault
1995: Keane, Lamb, Brunet, Ronan; Racine, Daigneault, Odelein, Brisebois
1996: Koivu, Damphousse, Rucinsky, Bureau; Popovic, Brisebois, Quintal, Odelein

And here's Hasek in Buffalo:

1994: Hannan, Wood, Khmylev, Presley; Muni, Smehlik, Bodger, Moller
1995: Presley, Khmylev, Hannan, Plante; Bodger, Smehlik, Galley, Muni
1996: Plante, Peca, LaFontaine, Holzinger; Shannon, Galley, Zhitnik, Wilson
1997: Peca, Holzinger, Ward, Plante; Wilson, Zhitnik, Shannon, Smehlik
1998: Plante, Peca, Holzinger, Ward; Smehlik, Zhitnik, Shannon, Wilson
1999: Peca, Ward, Holzinger, Satan; Smehlik, Zhitnik, Shannon, McKee

Two things are obvious from those lists:

1. Roy had much better defensive players in front of him.
2. The quality of Montreal's defensive players fell off very dramatically after 1994, roughly around the same time that his save percentages did.

By 1996, the Montreal Canadiens' top six defencemen in the playoffs were Patrice Brisebois, Stephane Quintal, Lyle Odelein, Peter Popovic, Rory Fitzpatrick and David Wilkie. It shouldn't be surprising, given the talent loss, that the team's save percentages declined over time as well.

C. Shot Prevention

Roy's shots against per 60 minutes numbers reinforce the story of Montreal's gradual defensive decline from elite to mediocre (league average in brackets):

1985-86: 26.8 (31.0)
1986-87: 27.0 (30.0)
1987-88: 29.0 (30.4)
1988-89: 26.9 (30.4)
1989-90: 28.8 (30.3)
1990-91: 28.8 (29.7)
1991-92: 27.5 (30.4)
1992-93: 30.3 (30.9)
1993-94: 30.3 (30.2)
1994-95: 31.7 (29.3)
1995-96: 31.8 (30.2)

Note that when there is less parity around the league, as there was in the 1980s, shots against are generally negatively correlated with save percentage, i.e. lower shots against tends to mean it is easier to achieve higher save percentages. For comparison's sake, here are Hasek's shots against per 60 numbers:

1994: 27.7 (30.2)
1995: 30.3 (29.3)
1996: 35.3 (30.2)
1997: 32.4 (29.7)
1998: 30.6 (27.3)
1999: 29.5 (27.8)

The Sabres were a good team in 1993-94. That also happens to be Hasek's best single regular season save percentage relative to league average. However, all observers would rate his absolute peak as 1998 or 1999, which again shows how save percentage relative to league average is not an all-defining metric.

D. Defensive Effort During the Regular Season in the 16 Team League

I presented data earlier that showed that the gap between regular season and playoff save percentages was higher in the 1980s than at any other point in the official save percentage era. A possible theory for this is that since 16 of 21 teams made the playoffs, it was not necessary for many teams to give a full defensive effort every night. Here's Ken Dryden on the topic from the New York Times in May 1986:

"At the point of the season when the drudgery of defense becomes mandatory, the goaltender is the beneficiary. "The number of goals goes down," Dryden said. "The number of chances goes down. The number of rebounds goes down. The number of unharassed shooters - far fewer. The circumstances become far more cope-able, and you're far better able to succeed."

Many teams likely saw the drudgery of defence as only mandatory in the playoffs, but some coaches would have been likely to demand a defensive effort from their players every night. Disciplinary, defence-focused coaches like Pat Burns. For example, Patrick Roy's monthly splits during the Burns years do not tail off towards the end of the year as happened to some goalies on other teams that apparently lowered their effort after securing their playoff positioning.

There were also differences between the divisions and conferences, both in terms of strength and style of play. Between the start of the official save percentage era (1983-84) and the end of the divisional playoff rounds (1992-93), the average save percentage in the Wales Conference was .882 compared to .879 in the Campbell Conference. That is not a huge gap, but over that kind of sample size and that many teams it is a significant difference, and reinforces the general perception at the time that the Wales was the more defensive conference.

E. Backup Goalies

It is tough to estimate exactly what kind of impact Montreal's defence had on its goalie numbers. Patrick Roy strongly outperformed his backups from 1991 to 1994, and much of that was surely because of his own terrific play, but at the same time it is difficult to assess how good the other goalies were as nearly all of them had no playing time outside of Montreal. It's quite possible that they were all replacement level goalies, or even sub-replacement level, particularly Andre "Red Light" Racicot and his career .880 save percentage.

Prior to 1991 Roy was platooning with Brian Hayward, and the two often posted similar numbers. Hayward was probably a decent goalie, but his Montreal numbers were much better than what he managed to put up in Winnipeg. Because of a series of trades between the Jets and Habs, three goalies (Hayward, Steve Penney and Doug Soetaert) all played for both Winnipeg and Montreal in the 1980s.

Hayward: .866 on 4833 SA in WPG, .889 on 3655 SA in MTL
Penney: .828 on 320 SA in WPG, .865 on 1906 SA in MTL
Soetaert: .869 on 3896 SA in WPG, .873 on 1155 SA in MTL
Combined: .866 on 9049 SA in WPG, .880 on 6716 SA in MTL

Winnipeg was not always a strong team and had to face the Oilers and Flames very often, so they probably were below-average in shot quality against. Yet even if we assume that half of the combined difference is because of Jets' subpar play, that would still represent a .007 boost to save percentages in Montreal.

As for Dominik Hasek, every study I've ever seen on the topic shows he outplayed his backup goalies by a greater margin than any goalie ever.

F. Team Discipline

PPOA = Power Play Opportunities Against

Roy in Montreal:
1986: 307 PPOA (1st), 370 Avg
1987: 304 PPOA (2nd), 344 Avg
1988: 394 PPOA (2nd), 437 Avg
1989: 326 PPOA (1st), 403 Avg
1990: 295 PPOA (1st), 367 Avg
1991: 282 PPOA (1st), 366 Avg
1992: 320 PPOA (1st), 402 Avg
1993: 427 PPOA (8th), 443 Avg
1994: 390 PPOA (9th), 407 Avg
1995: 191 PPOA (5th), 209 Avg

Hasek in Buffalo:
1994: 380 PPOA (5th), 407 Avg
1995: 220 PPOA (17th), 209 Avg
1996: 461 PPOA (23rd), 413 Avg
1997: 364 PPOA (24th), 336 Avg
1998: 413 PPOA (24th), 380 Avg
1999: 399 PPOA (24th), 359 Avg
2000: 361 PPOA (21st), 331 Avg
2001: 334 PPOA (5th), 376 Avg

Once again it is notable that Montreal was less disciplined starting in 1992-93, the year that Roy's regular season numbers started to decline relative to league average.

The NHL's tracking of special teams stats since 1998 shows that the average save percentage on penalty kill shots is around .050 lower than it is at even strength. Goalies that face fewer opposing power plays therefore face relatively fewer shots on the dangerous PK, which boosts their save percentage. The typical range for teams at extreme ends of the team discipline scale is a .002-.003 gain or loss on their overall save percentage compared to an average goalie.

To illustrate, let's look at Hasek's 1997-98 and compare it to Martin Brodeur the same year, as the mid-'90s Devils were a disciplined defensive team that took few penalties (3rd fewest PPOA in the league that year), just like the 1980s Canadiens.

Hasek: .946 at EV, .891 on the PK, .932 on the PP, .932 overall
Brodeur: .928 at EV, .868 on the PK, .915 on the PP, .917 overall

Hasek faced 22.2% of his shots against on the penalty kill, Brodeur just 15.2%. The average goalie faced 20.4% on the PK.

If we take Hasek and Brodeur's situational save percentages and apply them to the average goalie's situational breakdown (i.e. 75.5% at EV, 20.4% PK, 4.1% PP), Hasek's save percentage would improve to .934 while Brodeur's drops to .915. I think +.002 for Roy and -.002 for Hasek is probably pretty close to the impact special teams factors had on their primes (although it might even be higher for Roy, because his great Montreal PK units likely suppressed PK shots against much better than the average team as well).

In summary, Roy likely gained .002-.003 on his save percentage in Montreal compared to an average goalie because of special teams factors, and likely at least that much again because of the team's shot quality at even strength. He also may have gained around .003 compared to a typical goalie in the Campbell Conference, which would be .001 or .002 compared to an randomly chosen goalie leaguewide.

Dominik Hasek almost certainly lost a couple of points for facing more power plays than average in most of his prime years. He may have faced easier than average shot quality in 1993-94, but there does not appear to be much evidence of it for his other seasons.

Summary

Roy benefitted from a defensive style of play in Montreal, playing behind excellent defensive talent that took fewer penalties than average.

Overall, shot quality factors seem to have inflated the difference between Roy and Hasek's primes. The special teams numbers alone seem to suggest that the difference between them is understated by .004-.005. Factoring in the style of play differences at even strength and what Montreal goalies did on other teams, the true difference could be as much as .010.

As a result, while Roy was very good from 1988 to 1992, I think the evidence suggests that his performance was not on the same level as Dominik Hasek from 1994-1999.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Between that and him losing out on his fight for the starting job in Chicago in 1990-91 and 1991-92 - and tanking in Indianapolis in 1991-92 - I don't see how that point would be in contention.

Still making so much out of "losing" his starting job in those first two seasons. Yeah, he wasn't transitioned into one of the top 2 spots in Chicago despite posting better numbers than the other 5 guys they tried between the pipes over the period (including Belfour)... why exactly?

I know it's way more fun to pretend that Hasek still wasn't "capable" at the time, or that his consistency was somehow worse than all the guys putting up worse numbers around him behind the same team, but truth is that he simply wasn't capable of convincing Chicago to look beyond their franchise guy in Belfour, and their 8th overall pick future star in Waite. Who could blame them, though, when it comes to Belfour, at least?

And since his numbers were significantly better than everyone around him after arriving on the "Norris/Selke Superstars" (aka the '92/93 Sabres...lol), I don't think the absolute magnitude of them (3+ GAA, <0.900 SV%) speak as much to his individual talent as the lack of defense in front of all 4 goalies that year.

So you guys can keep going on about "losing" the starting battle and try to reconcile that with your statistical research, but it's like he lost a popularity contest more than anything else.

edit: Great work on that post CG.

 

[quoipourquoi]

As a result, while Roy was very good from 1988 to 1992, I think the evidence suggests that his performance was not on the same level as Dominik Hasek from 1994-1999.

And if their careers were six regular seasons long and did not include playoffs instead of bordering on twenty years with a healthy amount of post-season responsibility, I would be voting for Dominik Hasek. That's not the case though.

Patrick Roy is not going to be defined in this debate by his regular season peak.

 

[seventieslord]

Are there any particular hangups we have in regard to Patrick Roy's career? I recall seventieslord saying something a year or two ago to the effect about him having some ho-hum regular seasons. Is this something we need to explore prior to the vote?

If someone said that, it probably wasn't me. I'm well aware Roy only failed to make the top-10 in sv% three times - once in a lockout year with little time for the numbers to rebound, and twice in seasons in which he went on to win the Smythe.

Also, consider Grant Fuhr put up career best numbers as a washed-up part timer in the mid-'90s. Numbers superior in both GAA and Save% to a prime Fuhr in the mid to late-'80s. Suddenly Fuhr is a much better goalie when he's washed than he was in his prime? Common sense says there's another dynamic at work here and it isn't the quality of the goaltenders.

They weren't really his "best" numbers when compared with the league average, though. Fuhr's best adjusted season was 1985-86.

No one doubts that this bigger, lighter equipment made goalies more likely to stop pucks that were fired at them. But it affected them all equally. As long as compare goalies' numbers to the standards of their time, we are washing equipment out of the equation.

I'm going to ask one more time in the hope that it get answers before the vote:

What are the adjustments that a European goaltender must make in order to become a successful NHL goaltender? I can buy Hasek coming over and contending for some top-ten save percentage spots in the regular season to bridge the gap between himself (11) and Patrick Roy (15), but given what we saw from him in 1990-1993 - whether it was confidence, drive, the weight of his pads, refinement, or simply his talent level at that age - I don't see him being a Vezina contender.

But why were things so much different for Roman Cechmanek? Why was he able to come to North America in 2000-01, dominate what extremely little time he spent in AHL, steal Brian Boucher's job, post the highest save percentage among the starting goalies who made the playoffs, accumulate 10 SOs in 59 Games, finish 4th in Hart voting, and narrowly lose out in the Vezina and 1st Team All-Star races (which I personally disagree with) in his first season out of Europe?

If you believe that Hasek was good enough to be competing for Vezina Trophies when he was winning the Golden Stick and Best Goaltender awards, how do you rectify Cechmanek coming into the NHL and becoming arguably the best goaltender in the league in his first year while Hasek could not? I think the adjustment argument is overblown. I believe that if Hasek was truly in his prime (as Cechmanek was in 2000), then he would have made a similar impact in his first season as opposed to his fourth.

I think the simple answer - as a few have already mentioned - is that one had to outplay the reigning Vezina winner, Ed Belfour, and the other only had to outplay Brian Boucher. Not really the same thing.

Brodeur 1191 NHL Regular Season + 205 Playoff games (1396)
Roy 1029 NHL Regular Season + 247 Playoff games (1276)
Hasek 735 NHL Regular Season + 119 Playoff games (854)

Are you honestly trying to contend that Hasek's 460 or so Czech league + KHL + IHL games should make up the 294+128 NHL game gap to Roy or the 456+86 NHL gap to Brodeur?

I certainly wouldn't say that 460 games in lesser leagues (I actually see 558 other games in total) are worth 294 NHL games, but they are worth something, and when you consider it's quite arguable that his 735 NHL games were played at a higher level than Roy played his 1029 at, it isn't hard to imagine Roy being ahead.

As for Brodeur, I don't think it's even a question. Even if his supporters are making a great case here.

edit: Great work on that post CG.

Agree.

 

[Rhiessan71]

NHL.com, wikipedia and many other sites agree with my numbers for Patrick Roy. See http://www.nhl.com/ice/player.htm?id=8451033. What is your source?

It wasn't the numbers for Roy that were wrong though, it was Hasek's numbers that were as Sanf already corrected.
Though they still don't seem right to me and I included tourny games from each season for Hasek.

I have...
85/86 Hasek 54 (Roy 67)
86/87 Hasek 52 (Roy 52)
87/88 Hasek 42 (Roy 53)
88/89 Hasek 57 (Roy 67)
89/90 Hasek 48 (Roy 65)

Granted, I couldn't find any playoff games for the Czech league in the 80's and just assumed they didn't have them back then or they were already incorporated into Hasek's GP per season.

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

They weren't really his "best" numbers when compared with the league average, though. Fuhr's best adjusted season was 1985-86.

No one doubts that this bigger, lighter equipment made goalies more likely to stop pucks that were fired at them. But it affected them all equally. As long as compare goalies' numbers to the standards of their time, we are washing equipment out of the equation.

I agree, that's why I believe in using adjusted numbers. What I was getting at is people taking the raw numbers and saying "goalies sucked in the '80s because the save% was in the .880s and in the '90s it was over .900". That sort of thing. The problem crops up when I see people making comparisons and they AREN'T using the standards of the time to inform their conclusions.

 

[seventieslord]

I agree, that's why I believe in using adjusted numbers. What I was getting at is people taking the raw numbers and saying "goalies sucked in the '80s because the save% was in the .880s and in the '90s it was over .900". That sort of thing. The problem crops up when I see people making comparisons and they AREN'T using the standards of the time to inform their conclusions.

ok, gotcha. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

Patrick Roy is not going to be defined in this debate by his regular season peak.

I'm not expecting him to. I think the discussion about his peak is important because some voters rate peak very highly in their evaluations. It also is a response to TDMM's argument that if Hasek and Roy are close in terms of regular season peak, then Roy's superior career playoff achievements mean he should be ranked ahead.

Anyway, that post is just part one in a three part series on Roy, and I think you'll be most interested in the third one, the one that focuses on evaluating how much each goalie contributed to his team winning in the playoffs.

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

ok, gotcha. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Nothing to be sorry for. It's all good

 

[Rhiessan71]

I certainly wouldn't say that 460 games in lesser leagues (I actually see 558 other games in total) are worth 294 NHL games, but they are worth something, and when you consider it's quite arguable that his 735 NHL games were played at a higher level than Roy played his 1029 at, it isn't hard to imagine Roy being ahead.

That 460 or so is just regular season non-NHL games(Czech/KHL/IHL). I made a separate post for his international tourny/games (I thought it best to separate them and not lump them into his regular season totals as they were the more important ones) and I certainly didn't count the World Junior games like it appears you did to reach 558

 

[quoipourquoi]

I think the simple answer - as a few have already mentioned - is that one had to outplay the reigning Vezina winner, Ed Belfour, and the other only had to outplay Brian Boucher. Not really the same thing.

But Belfour wasn't the reigning Vezina winner in September 1990. And when he was the reigning Vezina winner in September 1991, he was a restricted free agent and didn't play until November 2nd (Game #15). Hasek didn't have to outplay Ed Belfour in 1991; he just had to outplay Jimmy Waite.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Anyway, that post is just part one in a three part series on Roy, and I think you'll be most interested in the third one, the one that focuses on evaluating how much each goalie contributed to his team winning in the playoffs.

And now I'm really interested.

 

[Rhiessan71]

And now I'm really interested.

As am I.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

Anyone know why Roy was not on Canada's World Junior team? It's hard to find even rosters for back then.

Not trying to make a point, just curious...

 

[seventieslord]

That 460 or so is just regular season non-NHL games(Czech/KHL/IHL). I made a separate post for his international tourny/games (I thought it best to separate them and not lump them into his regular season totals as they were the more important ones) and I certainly didn't count the World Junior games like it appears you did to reach 558

I did not.

372 Czech league RS
53 IHL RS
46 KHL RS
38 WC
16 Olympics
15 Can-Cup
13 Czech league PO
4 KHL PO
1 IHL PO

I didn't count the 18 combined WJC and EJC games.

 

[seventieslord]

But Belfour wasn't the reigning Vezina winner in September 1990. And when he was the reigning Vezina winner in September 1991, he was a restricted free agent and didn't play until November 2nd (Game #15). Hasek didn't have to outplay Ed Belfour in 1991; he just had to outplay Jimmy Waite.

and it appears that he did - agree?

 

[quoipourquoi]

Anyone know why Roy was not on Canada's Wirld Junior team? It's hard to find even rosters for back then.

Not trying to make a point, just curious...

It's in the book his father wrote (so we'll have to take it with a grain of salt). I'm on campus right now, so I don't have access to it. I do recall his father saying the experience soured Roy on international hockey.

 

[quoipourquoi]

and it appears that he did - agree?

They split the first four games of the season, and then Jimmy Waite played 9 of the remaining 12, so Hasek didn't outplay Waite at the beginning of the year, when he had a chance to become the #1 in Chicago.


Hasek's season statistics rebounded after he returned to the team in January from the IHL.

 

[overpass]

Re: ContrarianGoaltender's point about power play opportunities faced, some of us had a discussion on the ATD board some time ago about how the cost of skaters taking minor penalties. Looking at the career GA records and penalty records for Nick Lidstrom and Chris Pronger, it appears that even-strength GA and minor penalties against are substitutes to some degree. Lidstrom has been on the ice for
more goals against than Pronger, and Pronger takes way more minorppenalties. One can easily create a model where GA and minor penalties in the defensive zone are substitutes. The defensive player gets beaten and either concedes a scoring chance or takes a penalty.

Could this be true on the team level as well? Are teams with low PPOA conceding dangerous scoring chances at EV as well, or vice versa?

 

[RabbinsDuck]

It's in the book his father wrote (so we'll have to take it with a grain of salt). I'm on campus right now, so I don't have access to it. I do recall his father saying the experience soured Roy on international hockey.

Thanks, I'd definitely be inerested. I sometimes forget Roy and Hasek are the same age (Hasek a little older, actually), and probably would have been facing each other.

Too bad they didn't grow up on opposite sides of the same town - what a rivalry that would have been (because you know they would have hated each other). Sort of like if Lennon and McCartney each formed separate bands.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I did not.

372 Czech league RS
53 IHL RS
46 KHL RS
38 WC
16 Olympics
15 Can-Cup
13 Czech league PO
4 KHL PO
1 IHL PO

I didn't count the 18 combined WJC and EJC games.

Ok, it's the 372 Czech league games that were screwing me up. For some reason, the resource I was using only has it at 351 and it's missing the 2 games from '95.
What's even more funny is when I actually add up the totals it has listed, it is indeed 370 (missing the 2 in '95) but the total at the bottom says 351 lol

Either way, when I double checked it with NHLcom, you are correct.
What a mess.

 

[Canadiens1958]

WJC Team Canada Rosters

Anyone know why Roy was not on Canada's World Junior team? It's hard to find even rosters for back then.

Not trying to make a point, just curious...

As requested, back to the beginning:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_national_ice_hockey_team_rosters

Ray Bourque was not named to the 1978 team. Basic issue was that there was no U17 entry level program. Goalies like Patrick Roy, Martin Brodeur, and others were overlooked because they were drafted by weak organizations, had quirky coaches, etc.

 

[Rhiessan71]

So at this point (before CG posts his next 2 evaluations of Roy) I see it like this....

Absolute Peak
Hasek owns this. Roy made up a lot of ground up with the adjusted numbers but that was then tempered by team factors. In the end, the gap between the two is not nearly as large as was being made at the beginning of this thread but I think Hasek still has a noticeable advantage, mostly in regular season peak.

Overall Peak
I think this is Roy over all, His Conn Smythe's 16 years apart with one more in between and almost a 4th in '96. He was pretty much considered amongst the leagues best from his first playoffs in '86 until his last game with the Av's in '02.

Career
I think Hasek has made up some ground on this front since the beginning of the thread but IMO, Roy still has the edge here.
To be honest, they are both prolly behind Brodeur on this one.

Playoffs
Roy period! His playoff record and accomplishments are just untouchable by Hasek or anyone else for that matter.


Anyway, that's what I see so far.
As for who I would rank GOAT at this point...Roy making up ground on the absolute peak front has swung me back into the Roy camp for now. Hasek's absolute peak advantage has always been his biggest factor for me.
This of course could change again, as it has for me half a dozen times over the last 5 years.
It's just so damned close between these two.