The 10 best listed players are ... You can vote for 10.

[Connor McConnor]

Gretz
Mario
Orr
Howe
Sid
McDavid
Jagr
Ovi
Hasek
Bourque

 

[nowhereman]

Ovechkin has 3 seasons that are all better than Crosby's best season.

I love how no one even mentioned Crosby vs. Ovechkin and you immediately come out of the gate arguing with yourself, only to have Video Nasty join in with a few extra shots.

The routine almost feels scripted.

 

[dgibb10]

Looks like I was wrong, Lemaire actually only coached Roy for a whopping 20 minutes of his career. He retired in 85 and returned to coach New Jersey in 94.

Brodeur's 03 run is stellar, but it's not better than 86, 89, or 93; it's right there with 01 and I wouldn't be upset if someone said it was a bit better.

The Habs were not trapping like New Jersey. It was a collective effort from their players (especially in 93), they definitely weren't a structural boa constrictor like NJ.

Brodeur's puck handling and the trap indeed played a role in his sv%, and he does get credit for being a workhorse (However, I don't think that's a good explanation for his numbers being lower, and actually suggests it's a bad thing. The Devils weren't making the playoffs by the skin of their teeth, he could've very easily taken games off if it actually impacted his performance). All that being said, it was very much a two-way street with Brodeur and NJ's system, and outside of his GP and win totals, nothing about his resume suggests he's better than Roy and Hasek let alone on their level. I'd actually slot him right in with Belfour as far as peak performance is concerned. He gets credit for his durability and outside factors, but that's what separates him from a Belfour/Lundqvist/Price, not what puts groups him with Roy/Hasek.

Also, if Brodeur was robbed of a prime season (which I can only assume would matter if this was about trophy counting), then it all evens out by that logic considering Luongo was robbed blind in 04 (Turco too more than likely but I won't even get into that).

Just because roy's backups won their games (and even were in vezina consideration), and he played in a league where virtually every single team made the playoffs, doesn't mean brodeur had that luxury.

By your own admission broduer has the best playoff run of all time, but let's pretend his peak wasn't all that.

Ignoring brodeurs similar playoff results, pretending massive game differences don't matter, and ignoring the impact of Brodeur's puckhandling.

 

[Dingo]

Points without context is not a good way of evaluating the quality of a season.

so, unlike that guy, i AM aware of the powerplay opportunities that existed those first two seasons after the big strike. However, Crosby's 104pt season goes the other way in terms of context. Those two seasons of Crosby's are definitely arguably up there with Ovi's crazy peak. And, also to be fair, Crosby was awesome, maybe at his best, in his broken seasons. To me, Ovechkin's peak was better, and there was actually more of it, but it also came sooner due to him being older, and Crosby didnt really get his - that lone 104pt season reminds me a lot of Forsberg's 106... at least they got to punch in their numbers at their best, one time.

I hate the Crosby Ovie bickering. Ive got a Crosby-loving buddy who makes me pretty much hate Crosby, but i can still see that both players are 10/10 historically. They just play different roles and had different career arcs, due to so many things. And all the attempted detractions are sad -

Ovie doesnt backcheck or have nearly as many assists! Ya, i know, he is a power winger who murders the offensive zone and probably the best scorer ever.

Secondary Sid! Not physical! Goals count more! Ya, totally, I want my centreman sticking around the offensive zone looking for goals and getting injured. Secondary assists come from winning faceoffs and backchecking.

They both played their roles to a T. Ovechkin is the best scoring, physical winger i have ever seen, and he CAN pass quite well, thanks, but id prefer that he shoot, because he is the best at it,

Sid can score goals very well, actually, but id prefer he play an all around game. Gretz and Mario produced more than Sid, but the game was different, their assignment wasnt like a centreman nowadays. Only McDavid is probably better

Since hockey became lucrative and modernized and salary-capped - Ovie is THE best at what he does. Not close. Full stop. Sid is second at what he does, id say. But centreman are typically the stronger players growing up.

Im gonna call it a wash. Both 10/10. stop the madness.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Looks like I was wrong, Lemaire actually only coached Roy for a whopping 20 minutes of his career. He retired in 85 and returned to coach New Jersey in 94.

Brodeur's 03 run is stellar, but it's not better than 86, 89, or 93; it's right there with 01 and I wouldn't be upset if someone said it was a bit better.

The Habs were not trapping like New Jersey. It was a collective effort from their players (especially in 93), they definitely weren't a structural boa constrictor like NJ.

Brodeur's puck handling and the trap indeed played a role in his sv%, and he does get credit for being a workhorse (However, I don't think that's a good explanation for his numbers being lower, and actually suggests it's a bad thing. The Devils weren't making the playoffs by the skin of their teeth, he could've very easily taken games off if it actually impacted his performance). All that being said, it was very much a two-way street with Brodeur and NJ's system, and outside of his GP and win totals, nothing about his resume suggests he's better than Roy and Hasek let alone on their level. I'd actually slot him right in with Belfour as far as peak performance is concerned. He gets credit for his durability and outside factors, but that's what separates him from a Belfour/Lundqvist/Price, not what puts groups him with Roy/Hasek.

Also, if Brodeur was robbed of a prime season (which I can only assume would matter if this was about trophy counting), then it all evens out by that logic considering Luongo was robbed blind in 04 (Turco too more than likely but I won't even get into that).

In case you find this interesting - here's a thread where I looked at goalie regular season performance, adjusted for how high (or low) leaguewide save percentages are. It's the same concept as looking at goals or points - 50 goals in 1982 means quite a bit less than it did in 2012, for example. A 90% save percentage was considerably more valuable during Roy's peak compared to Brodeur's.

Roy looks very strong according to these metrics. Over the span of about 70 seasons, Roy had the 3rd highest career save percentage (tied), and also the 3rd highest peak save percentage (tied - based on a goalie's best seven years). There a couple of different tables that look at a goalie's career value (Roy ranks 2nd under one method, 1st under the other). And in terms of peak value (ie weighing performance with games played), he ranks 4th and 5th. In the regular season, Roy is much closer to Hasek than he is to Brodeur (and he's pretty clearly ahead of both of them in the playoffs).

 

[dgibb10]

In case you find this interesting - here's a thread where I looked at goalie regular season performance, adjusted for how high (or low) leaguewide save percentages are. It's the same concept as looking at goals or points - 50 goals in 1982 means quite a bit less than it did in 2012, for example. A 90% save percentage was considerably more valuable during Roy's peak compared to Brodeur's.

Roy looks very strong according to these metrics. Over the span of about 70 seasons, Roy had the 3rd highest career save percentage (tied), and also the 3rd highest peak save percentage (tied - based on a goalie's best seven years). There a couple of different tables that look at a goalie's career value (Roy ranks 2nd under one method, 1st under the other). And in terms of peak value (ie weighing performance with games played), he ranks 4th and 5th. In the regular season, Roy is much closer to Hasek than he is to Brodeur (and he's pretty clearly ahead of both of them in the playoffs).

"Save percentage doesn't take into account goalie skills other than stopping the puck. For example, puckhandling is completely ignored. So are intangibles such as a team being willing to take more risks and (hopefully) generate more offense, since they have confidence in their goalie."

To quote you.

Brodeur was the best puck handler of all time, bar none.

Easy to reach a peak playing 45 games a year lmao. That is what roy's peaks were.

 

[FMichael]

No Lidstrom?

 

[Finnen]

No Lidstrom?

Top 30 throughout the times.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

"Save percentage doesn't take into account goalie skills other than stopping the puck. For example, puckhandling is completely ignored. So are intangibles such as a team being willing to take more risks and (hopefully) generate more offense, since they have confidence in their goalie."

To quote you.

Brodeur was the best puck handler of all time, bar none.

Easy to reach a peak playing 45 games a year lmao. That is what roy's peaks were.

The comment that Roy was playing 45 games during his best years is obviously false. He was a Vezina finalist seven times. During those years, he played 68, 67, 63, 62, 54, 48 and 48 games (for an average of 59 games).

You don't seem to be familiar with how goalies were typically deployed at the start of Roy's career. Back then, coaches tended to give their main goalies far fewer starts compared to the mid 1990's and 2000's. His 54 games in 1990 (for example) might not seem like a lot by the standards of the DPE, but he was 5th in the league in games played (two games away from 3rd place).

Overall, during his time in Montreal (1986 to 1995), Roy played more games than any other goalie in the NHL. That should shut down the notion that Roy lacked durability. (Plus, as coaching strategies evolved, so did Roy's deployment. He played 60+ games every year from ages 30 to 37. It's not like Roy suddenly became a more durable athlete in the second half of his career - his deployment reflected changes in how coaching strategies evolved).

Ultimately, I agree that Brodeur played in more games than Roy (even though part of that was due to leaguewide coaching strategies, which is beyond Roy's control). Still, even if we ignore that important context, Roy is still ahead of Brodeur in each and every one of the tables that I posted (even the "career value" tables which should, at least in theory, make it easier for Brodeur to look better, simply by playing more games).

I agree that Brodeur was a better puck handler than Roy, but I've never seen anything that suggests that it makes up for the significant difference in Roy's superior ability to stop the puck. Present the data, if you have any, and I'll review it.

 

[tarheelhockey]

My only departure from the current top-10 is that I have Bourque over Jagr, and that’s mainly because it doesn’t sit quite right that the top-10 would consist of 1 goalie, 1 defenseman, and 8 forwards.

 

[Janvonpobben]

Top 30 throughout the times.

lol what a joke, Ray Bourque is on the list but not lidstrom

 

[Finnen]

lol what a joke, Ray Bourque is on the list but not lidstrom

I'm not joking. Kurri and Selänne was better than Lidström.

 

[nowhereman]

lol what a joke, Ray Bourque is on the list but not lidstrom

You say this as if Ray Bourque isn't better than Lidstrom. And Harvey should probably be there before both of them.

 

[Habssince89]

Where the hell is Nik Lidstrom????

 

[Habssince89]

I'm not joking. Kurri and Selänne was better than Lidström.

wow

 

[Run the Gauntlet]

If you dont agree with Lidstrom not being on the list then make your own list.