Tuukka Rask vs Tim Thomas

[MadLuke]

In 20% of the games, Thomas gave up 4 or more.
In 9 of 25 he gave up 3 or more.

The reverse of that become more than half of the Bruins wins, they allowed a single goal or less.

Has for teh Bruins scoring more even strenght goals than the others team scored goals, that because the Canucks scored only 8 goals in 7 finals games.

 

[Felidae]

You are sugar coating or ignoring two key stats

Thomas wins 214 wins reg season 29 wins in the playoffs

Rask 308 wins playoffs 57 wins in the playoffs


But let's talk about games played eh?

Because wins are just about the most team based stat in hockey. It has mostly nothing to do with how good they were as goalies.

Games played was added in conjunction with their career sv%, since maintaining that over more games played is harder to do

 

[BraveCanadian]

At their bests it is Thomas for me. Whatever “it” is, he had it.. however briefly.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Sure. All goals count. It's just how much harder they had to grind their way to goals because they didn't have a power play that they could depend on. At least with the Oilers back in the day, you pop them on the power play and you erase a whole period of Grant Fuhr's mistakes. The Bruins had to score more goals 5v5 in 2011 than any other team had any other goals total. It's crazy what they had to do and very necessary.

In 20% of the games, Thomas gave up 4 or more.
In 9 of 25 he gave up 3 or more.
Folks that like save pct. in an individual game, will note that he had a <=.900 game in 7 games in 2011.

For comparison, the very next season, Jonathan Quick allowed:
4 or more...zero times.
3 or more...twice.
And despite not being in quite the same save pct. boosting system, only had three games at or below .900 with two of those being exactly .900.

Rask in the higher scoring 2019 season
4 or more...twice.
3 or more...eight times
At or below .900...twice

I can't find it now, but qpq did a deviation from mean run or something that showed that Thomas' game to game performance was very up and down in recent history. If they had a reliable goaltender, they wouldn't have needed seven games three times. He put every series in doubt, except the Philadelphia one that the Flyers didn't bother to lift a finger for...

Round 1, Thomas vs. the great Carey Price.

Thomas allowed 17 goals, Price 16.

Overtime games, Thomas 3-0, Price 0-3.

Round 2, sweep the Flyers, who embarrassed the Bruins in the playoffs the previous season with Rask in goal.

Round 3, Thomas allows 4 or more goals in 4 games. So he only gave up 4 goals in one other game in the other 3 rounds. However, Thomas also gave up 1 goal in Games 6 and 7 to win the series. With little support from the Bruins offensive. Game 6, 3-1 with an empty netter. Game 7, 1-0.

Finals, Thomas vs. the great Roberto Luongo

Allowed 8 goals in 7 games. Best ever. Enough said. Luongo allowed 20 goals, was pulled twice.

And yes, Jonathan Quick was remarkable in 2012. Compared to any other goalie in NHL history in a single playoff season. So not really a fair comparison.

 

[ON3M4N]

I know his stats are great. This isn’t a hill I’ll die on but from watching the games I felt he gave up some bad goals in crunch time if memory serves. Championship goalies lock it down all the way to the end.

Thomas was capable of that and it didn’t seem like Rask could do it in the SCF

If you go back and watch that collapse in the 2013 Game 6 vs CHI you'll see he got hung out to dry by the defense. Blown coverages and poor positioning is what did them in.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Round 1, Thomas vs. the great Carey Price.

Thomas allowed 17 goals, Price 16.

Overtime games, Thomas 3-0, Price 0-3.

Round 2, sweep the Flyers, who embarrassed the Bruins in the playoffs the previous season with Rask in goal.

Round 3, Thomas allows 4 or more goals in 4 games. So he only gave up 4 goals in one other game in the other 3 rounds. However, Thomas also gave up 1 goal in Games 6 and 7 to win the series. With little support from the Bruins offensive. Game 6, 3-1 with an empty netter. Game 7, 1-0.

Finals, Thomas vs. the great Roberto Luongo

Allowed 8 goals in 7 games. Best ever. Enough said. Luongo allowed 20 goals, was pulled twice.

And yes, Jonathan Quick was remarkable in 2012. Compared to any other goalie in NHL history in a single playoff season. So not really a fair comparison.

Yeah, I know I saw them. He was awful against Montreal (he should have lost the series, it was a Kostitsyn post away if I recall - then he'd officially be Cechmanek, where he belongs historically). He did little better against Tampa. Then he personally put the Bruins behind against Vancouver by diving out of the net in the midst of a SCF overtime...even if you aren't up on goaltending trends, remaining near the net when the other team has possession of the puck is critical.

What's the "best ever" remark? There must have been less. The '97 Wings only allowed six goals vs Philadelphia, for instance.

It's not fair? It was the very next day and they had the same averaging stats haha. One didn't allow any series to get into doubt with a ton of bad goals and sloppy play...and, as such, didn't put his team (and his fans) through any seventh games unnecessarily.

That run didn't make you want to pull your hair out? Really? It was completely unpredictable from one game to the next, from one period to the next, from one shot to the next. This is coming from someone that had Marc-Andre Fleury to settle his stomach for the better part of 10 playoffs haha

We've gone down this road a thousand times, but I'm still always so surprised...I watch Thomas and my most common thought is, "this could go in" or "he's gonna have trouble with this..."

 

[Video Nasty]

Thomas had a hip surgery the following summer rather than before the season. But whatever their condition, rookie Rask massacred Thomas that year despite him not even being particularly bad. Coincidentally both faced exactly 1221 shots that season, Rask allowed 84 and Thomas 104 goals.

	GS	SA	GA	SV%	GAA	GSAA
Rask	39	1221	84	.931	1.97	24.3
Thomas	42	1221	104	.915	2.56	4.3

So Rask did that as a 22 year old to a 35 year old and then got massacred himself the following season. So what?

 

[Jumptheshark]

Because wins are just about the most team based stat in hockey. It has mostly nothing to do with how good they were as goalies.

Games played was added in conjunction with their career sv%, since maintaining that over more games played is harder to do

Wins and minutes played are more important games played. Games played hide games started or finished. Wins and minutes help tell the bigger story

 

[Albatros]

So Rask did that as a 22 year old to a 35 year old and then got massacred himself the following season. So what?

Thomas at 22 had been a lightyear away from being an NHL goalie and once he became one he could only resist young Rask for a year. He was no better than a rookie even though that coincides with his absolute peak. A lot of mileage from a couple of hot streaks.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Yeah, I know I saw them. He was awful against Montreal (he should have lost the series, it was a Kostitsyn post away if I recall - then he'd officially be Cechmanek, where he belongs historically). He did little better against Tampa. Then he personally put the Bruins behind against Vancouver by diving out of the net in the midst of a SCF overtime...even if you aren't up on goaltending trends, remaining near the net when the other team has possession of the puck is critical.

What's the "best ever" remark? There must have been less. The '97 Wings only allowed six goals vs Philadelphia, for instance.

It's not fair? It was the very next day and they had the same averaging stats haha. One didn't allow any series to get into doubt with a ton of bad goals and sloppy play...and, as such, didn't put his team (and his fans) through any seventh games unnecessarily.

That run didn't make you want to pull your hair out? Really? It was completely unpredictable from one game to the next, from one period to the next, from one shot to the next. This is coming from someone that had Marc-Andre Fleury to settle his stomach for the better part of 10 playoffs haha

We've gone down this road a thousand times, but I'm still always so surprised...I watch Thomas and my most common thought is, "this could go in" or "he's gonna have trouble with this..."

Thomas was awful against Montreal yet he gave up only one more goal than Cary Price. And with games on the line (OT) Thomas won all 3 times. Including a double OT with the series tied at 2 apiece.

The '97 Wings only played 4 games in the finals. Thomas 8 goals in a 7-game finals is best ever.

Yes, we've been down this road a thousand times. I understand that you are a true student of the art of goaltending. I believe that goalie gurus like yourself are the reason a Tim Thomas never really got a shot at the NHL until he was 31. And he only got that chance because the legendary Hannu Toivonen got injured and the Bruins had no other choice. Much like Hasek sat on his butt for 3 seasons in the NHL because of the way he played the position. In what should have been his prime years, no NHL goalie coach thought he could be a starting goalie, let alone perhaps the best goalie ever. Buffalo went out on a limb and gave up a 4th round draft pick for him to be their number 3 goalie.

 

[Albatros]

Thomas could have got his NHL opportunity earlier if he wasn't the worst goalie out of five in both the AHL and the IHL.

He could definitely make a save as good as anyone, but there wasn't that much method to it. He just frequently overcommitted and then relied on his defense or his own athleticism to bail him out. Luckily for him in Boston he had that extremely tight team defense (he wasn't any better than Toivonen before they brought in Chára & co.).

 

[Michael Farkas]

Thomas was awful against Montreal yet he gave up only one more goal than Cary Price. And with games on the line (OT) Thomas won all 3 times. Including a double OT with the series tied at 2 apiece.

The '97 Wings only played 4 games in the finals. Thomas 8 goals in a 7-game finals is best ever.

Yes, we've been down this road a thousand times. I understand that you are a true student of the art of goaltending. I believe that goalie gurus like yourself are the reason a Tim Thomas never really got a shot at the NHL until he was 31. And he only got that chance because the legendary Hannu Toivonen got injured and the Bruins had no other choice. Much like Hasek sat on his butt for 3 seasons in the NHL because of the way he played the position. In what should have been his prime years, no NHL goalie coach thought he could be a starting goalie, let alone perhaps the best goalie ever. Buffalo went out on a limb and gave up a 4th round draft pick for him to be their number 3 goalie.

Carey Price's total goal count has nothing to do with Thomas' play.

So...Thomas gets a "record" because he blew two of the games with his asinine nonsense? Mid game, he dives into the middle of Comm Ave...he then drives his car back to the net and a puck happens to hit his car antenna and we're praising him for it...? Come on haha

Thomas had a number of opportunities, he's just really bad. He was fortunate that the rule changes eliminated a number of goalies and unleashed a small horde of weirdos that we had to suffer through in DPE 2.0. Cechmanek got in, Bill Ranford was a cleaned up Mike Palmateer, Hrudey had some goof in him, even Brodeur - who didn't play until 4 years after he was drafted - wasn't really "in the mold"...

So guys got in. I'm not gonna have a pity party for him, he was technically abysmal and was extremely fortunate to have a couple seasons against weak goalie competition in the best situation around for goalies and because it happened recently, we're forced to talk about it...

If this same situation happened in 1947 and 1949 or whatever, we'd never have heard of this player.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Carey Price's total goal count has nothing to do with Thomas' play.

So...Thomas gets a "record" because he blew two of the games with his asinine nonsense? Mid game, he dives into the middle of Comm Ave...he then drives his car back to the net and a puck happens to hit his car antenna and we're praising him for it...? Come on haha

Thomas had a number of opportunities, he's just really bad. He was fortunate that the rule changes eliminated a number of goalies and unleashed a small horde of weirdos that we had to suffer through in DPE 2.0. Cechmanek got in, Bill Ranford was a cleaned up Mike Palmateer, Hrudey had some goof in him, even Brodeur - who didn't play until 4 years after he was drafted - wasn't really "in the mold"...

So guys got in. I'm not gonna have a pity party for him, he was technically abysmal and was extremely fortunate to have a couple seasons against weak goalie competition in the best situation around for goalies and because it happened recently, we're forced to talk about it...

If this same situation happened in 1947 and 1949 or whatever, we'd never have heard of this player.

You make it sound like only bad goalies give up bad goals.

Anyway, the idea that a "really bad goalie" could win two Vezina trophies and a Conn Smythe trophy is just really absurd. He was "extremely fortunate for a couple of years" is equally foolish.

 

[Michael Farkas]

You make it sound like only bad goalies give up bad goals.

Anyway, the idea that a "really bad goalie" could win two Vezina trophies and a Conn Smythe trophy is just really absurd. He was "extremely fortunate for a couple of years" is equally foolish.

No, but they're more prone. And that's why it matters. You don't want to expose risk, when it's not backed by upside. Being erratic in net doesn't usually have a good ROI. If Ray Bourque played defense like Marc-Andre Bergeron...would he still play? Yes, of course. Because there's upside in what Bourque could do and it's worth suffering through the negatives.

I want "plus" goaltending. I don't want Steve Mason or Jean-Sebastien Giguere. Hasek was very calculated. Thomas and Cechmanek, much less so. That's why the bottoms fell out so quickly. If we flip Thomas and, say, Johnny Mowers...no one would bat an eyelash (I don't know if Mowers was technically repugnant or not).

The last sentence is like when you lose your keys and you go, "they were in the last place I looked!" Yeah, because after that, you stopped looking. He got away with a couple of ~50 game seasons in a save percentage pump situation. Cechmanek had to deal with Hasek/Brodeur/Belfour etc. otherwise he has at least one Vezina himself. It's too binary.

Assuming that save pct and Vezinas are 100% the product of the goaltender...isn't it foolish that you think that you had the two best goalies - interchangeably - at the same time? In a 30-team league...

From 2008 to 2015 (min. 10 games) the save pct leaders are:
1. Hammond
2. Darling
3. Pickard
4. Talbot
5. Rask
6. Schneider
7. Grubauer
8. Thomas
9. Jones
10. Vokoun
11. Lundqvist
12. Holtby
13. Mrazek
14. Svedberg
15. Price
16. Rinne
17. Luongo
18. Khudobin

Man, four of the top 18 are Bruins...that's lucky. Especially because two of them were hardly NHL caliber away from Boston/Julien. Only one was really starter quality (Rask).

I see Lundqvist and Cam Talbot as Rangers, but does any other team have two there? The next guys are John Gibson and Craig Anderson, so I guess that would add a second Senator with Hammond. But Boston with 4...man, that's lucky I guess. They must practice really, really hard there...and then, not...umm, as much elsewhere...

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

No, but they're more prone. And that's why it matters. You don't want to expose risk, when it's not backed by upside. Being erratic in net doesn't usually have a good ROI. If Ray Bourque played defense like Marc-Andre Bergeron...would he still play? Yes, of course. Because there's upside in what Bourque could do and it's worth suffering through the negatives.

I want "plus" goaltending. I don't want Steve Mason or Jean-Sebastien Giguere. Hasek was very calculated. Thomas and Cechmanek, much less so. That's why the bottoms fell out so quickly. If we flip Thomas and, say, Johnny Mowers...no one would bat an eyelash (I don't know if Mowers was technically repugnant or not).

The last sentence is like when you lose your keys and you go, "they were in the last place I looked!" Yeah, because after that, you stopped looking. He got away with a couple of ~50 game seasons in a save percentage pump situation. Cechmanek had to deal with Hasek/Brodeur/Belfour etc. otherwise he has at least one Vezina himself. It's too binary.

Assuming that save pct and Vezinas are 100% the product of the goaltender...isn't it foolish that you think that you had the two best goalies - interchangeably - at the same time? In a 30-team league...

From 2008 to 2015 (min. 10 games) the save pct leaders are:
1. Hammond
2. Darling
3. Pickard
4. Talbot
5. Rask
6. Schneider
7. Grubauer
8. Thomas
9. Jones
10. Vokoun
11. Lundqvist
12. Holtby
13. Mrazek
14. Svedberg
15. Price
16. Rinne
17. Luongo
18. Khudobin

Man, four of the top 18 are Bruins...that's lucky. Especially because two of them were hardly NHL caliber away from Boston/Julien. Only one was really starter quality (Rask).

I see Lundqvist and Cam Talbot as Rangers, but does any other team have two there? The next guys are John Gibson and Craig Anderson, so I guess that would add a second Senator with Hammond. But Boston with 4...man, that's lucky I guess. They must practice really, really hard there...and then, not...umm, as much elsewhere...

Be serious, please.

Over 7 seasons and Svedberg played 19 games for the Bruins. Talk about cherry picking.

Khudobin was hardly NHL caliber? He led the NHL in save percentage for Dallas in 2019-20. His save percentage in Dallas was better than in Boston and was exactly the same in his time in Carolina. Both places he played more games than in Boston. So playing for Boston/Julien did nothing for his numbers.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

No, but they're more prone. And that's why it matters. You don't want to expose risk, when it's not backed by upside. Being erratic in net doesn't usually have a good ROI. If Ray Bourque played defense like Marc-Andre Bergeron...would he still play? Yes, of course. Because there's upside in what Bourque could do and it's worth suffering through the negatives.

I want "plus" goaltending. I don't want Steve Mason or Jean-Sebastien Giguere. Hasek was very calculated. Thomas and Cechmanek, much less so. That's why the bottoms fell out so quickly. If we flip Thomas and, say, Johnny Mowers...no one would bat an eyelash (I don't know if Mowers was technically repugnant or not).

The last sentence is like when you lose your keys and you go, "they were in the last place I looked!" Yeah, because after that, you stopped looking. He got away with a couple of ~50 game seasons in a save percentage pump situation. Cechmanek had to deal with Hasek/Brodeur/Belfour etc. otherwise he has at least one Vezina himself. It's too binary.

Assuming that save pct and Vezinas are 100% the product of the goaltender...isn't it foolish that you think that you had the two best goalies - interchangeably - at the same time? In a 30-team league...

From 2008 to 2015 (min. 10 games) the save pct leaders are:
1. Hammond
2. Darling
3. Pickard
4. Talbot
5. Rask
6. Schneider
7. Grubauer
8. Thomas
9. Jones
10. Vokoun
11. Lundqvist
12. Holtby
13. Mrazek
14. Svedberg
15. Price
16. Rinne
17. Luongo
18. Khudobin

Man, four of the top 18 are Bruins...that's lucky. Especially because two of them were hardly NHL caliber away from Boston/Julien. Only one was really starter quality (Rask).

I see Lundqvist and Cam Talbot as Rangers, but does any other team have two there? The next guys are John Gibson and Craig Anderson, so I guess that would add a second Senator with Hammond. But Boston with 4...man, that's lucky I guess. They must practice really, really hard there...and then, not...umm, as much elsewhere...

Dobby's 3 best seasons came in Dallas and Carolina, the only times he was Top 10 in SV%, GAA or GSAA.

2013-14 CAR - .926/2.30, 12.7 GSAA
2018-19 DAL - .923/2.57, 16.0 GSAA
2019-20 DAL - .930/2.22, 17.8 GSAA

Although by using your logic, poor Price wasn't thrown to the wolves like some love to claim. Here's what his backups posted for sv% in Montreal behind that supposed firing squad defense:

Huet - .920
Halak - .919
Auld - .914
Tokarski - .910
Budaj - .910

 

[Michael Farkas]

I set the criteria. That's how it turned out.

It was Thomas that was hardly NHL caliber. Khudobin is a fine backup or even 1B in a pinch. I have time for Khudobin.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Although by using your logic, poor Price wasn't thrown to the wolves like some love to claim.

I don't think Price generally had poor team defense. I think it's well short of what Boston and New York had in those times, but it wasn't bad. It's that if Price gives up more than 2, his offense can't help him. I think Thomas won half his games where he gave up 3 or more in 2011. Price won 2 of 8 in a higher scoring era (2021) with the same criteria.

Boston was a better defense and a way better offense on the whole...and that's why you guys were always around it.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I don't think Price generally had poor team defense. I think it's well short of what Boston and New York had in those times, but it wasn't bad. It's that if Price gives up more than 2, his offense can't help him. I think Thomas won half his games where he gave up 3 or more in 2011. Price won 2 of 8 in a higher scoring era (2021) with the same criteria.

Boston was a better defense and a way better offense on the whole...and that's why you guys were always around it.

Even though he had the lowest goals against average (2.00) and highest save percentage (934) and 2nd most shutouts (9) that season. In actuality, Thomas gave up 3 or more goals in 4 of his 35 wins.

As the backup, Rask was 11-14-2, 2.67 and .918. Night and day compared to Thomas.

You make the Bruins sound like the 80's Oilers. They were only 8th in goals scored.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Even though he had the lowest goals against average (2.00) and highest save percentage (934) and 2nd most shutouts (9) that season. In actuality, Thomas gave up 3 or more goals in 4 of his 35 wins.

As the backup, Rask was 11-14-2, 2.67 and .918. Night and day compared to Thomas.

You make the Bruins sound like the 80's Oilers. They were only 8th in goals scored.

I was referring to the playoffs with the wins and GA.

80's Oilers? Nah, not to that level. They did outscore the '83 Oilers. The 81 goals Boston scored in the 2011 playoffs is the 22nd highest highest goal scoring total in playoff history (it was 16th most when it happened, with only teams from 1981 to 1992 ahead of them). Pretty heroic effort to overcome the goaltending.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I was referring to the playoffs with the wins and GA.

80's Oilers? Nah, not to that level. They did outscore the '83 Oilers. The 81 goals Boston scored in the 2011 playoffs is the 22nd highest highest goal scoring total in playoff history (it was 16th most when it happened, with only teams from 1981 to 1992 ahead of them). Pretty heroic effort to overcome the goaltending.

5 of the 16 wins. Not quite over half.

 

[Michael Farkas]

5 of the 16 wins. Not quite over half.

He won 4 of 8 when giving up 3+. Price, in an easier scoring environment, was only permitted to win 2 of 8 under that circumstance. Rask in 2013, only got 2 wins in 7 games of 3+ goals against. 2 of 8 in 2019 for Rask as well.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Non-loaded question, DB...Reggie Lemelin or Andy Moog? Who did you hate less or trust more?

 

[JackSlater]

Round 1, Thomas vs. the great Carey Price.

Thomas allowed 17 goals, Price 16.

Overtime games, Thomas 3-0, Price 0-3.

I don't know why this is suppose to be a positive for Thomas. Price had a mediocre team in front of him and played against a strong team, Thomas had a strong team in front of him and was facing a mediocre team. Switch them and Price still allows fewer goals, but there would be a sizable gap.

As an aside, that was a pretty underrated year for Price. Quite possibly (probably?) should have gotten the Vezina that year but without checking I doubt he finished top five.

I was referring to the playoffs with the wins and GA.

80's Oilers? Nah, not to that level. They did outscore the '83 Oilers. The 81 goals Boston scored in the 2011 playoffs is the 22nd highest highest goal scoring total in playoff history (it was 16th most when it happened, with only teams from 1981 to 1992 ahead of them). Pretty heroic effort to overcome the goaltending.

I find it strange that how many goals a team scores in the playoffs does not seem to factor in much when it comes to people declaring that a goaltender carried a team. Not that it's really been claimed in this specific thread but it is interesting. Comes up with Hasek allegedly carrying Buffalo in 1999 as well. Of course Hasek 1.0 was at least an excellent goaltender. Hasek 2.0 not so much.

 

[Erik Alfredsson]

When both were performing at their best it was Thomas, by a considerable amount. Rask was reliable and consistently good, but when Tim Thomas was at his best he was virtually unbeatable.