What happened to Brodeur's legacy?

[Doctor No]

Whataboutism is when something totally unlinked to the topic is used to counter someones point. You brought up the fact that Montreal's conference standings before the playoffs wasn't good and means that the team surrounding Roy was bad.

using that argument about conference position clearly opens you to people countering your point by pointing out other teams who were low in the standings and also won the cup.

Seems like people throw around "fallacies" willy nilly without actually understanding what they actually are.

I never mentioned Quick so I don't know why you think I need to defend him? seems like you are trying to strawman me.

Hey, I appreciate you. I'm quite aware of logical fallacies, TYVM - I used to teach college level logic courses.

You brought up the 2012 Kings as an example of "if Roy's 1993 team was bad, then imagine how bad this team was", and it seems natural that you wanted to talk about how great Jonathan Quick was that spring (which is 100% true).

 

[AfroThunder396]

Hey, I appreciate you. I'm quite aware of logical fallacies, TYVM - I used to teach college level logic courses.

You brought up the 2012 Kings as an example of "if Roy's 1993 team was bad, then imagine how bad this team was", and it seems natural that you wanted to talk about how great Jonathan Quick was that spring (which is 100% true).

The point is that other teams being good does not mean that the team we're examining is bad.

Look at the 2021-22 Tampa Bay Lightning, who also finished 5th in their conference. I don't think anyone would claim they were a weak team considering they had won two consecutive Cups and were in the SCF for their third consecutive season.

Florida just made the Stanley Cup Finals as the 8th seed, and they certainly would have been higher in the standings if poor/inconsistent goaltending in the regular season didn't hold them back. They had (have) an excellent 18 skater roster that, while certainly not able to challenge the 2023 Bruins in points, almost certainly could have made a run at #2/#3 in the Atlantic had Knight been healthy and Bobrovsky showed any kind of consistency.

So yeah, saying "they were 5th in their conference, therefore they were a bad team, therefore Roy singlehandedly carried them" is unnecessarily dismissive, and quite frankly just factually incorrect. The '86 Habs had a +50 goal differential (3rd best in the league! Higher than three of the four conference teams with more points than them), were 7th best out of 21 teams in goals scored and 4th best in terms of goals against. 3rd best PP% and 7th best PK%.

And multiple Hall of Famers in front of him - including Chris Chelios and Larry Robinson, who the History of Hockey board consistently ranks higher than both Scott Stevens and Scott Niedermayer. Obviously Robinson was a bit long in the tooth at this point, but there were also two of the best defensive forwards of all time in Bob Gainey and Guy Carbonneau, also both Hall of Famers (and far better players than John Madden or Bobby Holik or any of the other shutdown forwards the Devils deployed). I always find it interesting how Brodeur seems to be the only goalie that gets punished for having good team mates, but I digress.

It's also worth noting that while the 1986 Habs were 7th in the league in points, they were tied for 5th in wins. They were tied in wins with CGY and one win ahead of NYI, but lower than both of them in the standings because they had more ties. Top 33% in points and top 25% in wins seems pretty good to me?

I don't know where this narrative about the '86 Habs being a beer league team full of talentless amateurs that Roy dragged kicking and screaming to an undeserved Cup comes from. Because it's not at all consistent with reality. I guess French Canadian fans wanted a good story so they just invented one? The '86 Habs were at worst an above-average team and at best a really great one that simply fell under the shadow of other great teams.

And to be clear - I'm not saying Roy didn't deserve the Conn Smythe or that he sucks or anything like that. It's very impressive for a rookie to come in and perform like he did in the playoffs. But the idea that it's the greatest playoff performance of all time and such is pure myth, and I feel like that myth is the bedrock of his reputation and grossly oversaturates all-time goalie discussion.

 

[Doctor No]

This is one of the problems with these threads - there's no nuance allowed. You're either ON ONE SIDE or you must be ON THE OTHER SIDE.

I agree with (most) of what you said above, but you're ascribing opinions to me that I certainly haven't said here in the thread (and don't believe), such as the comments on "Roy was the only reason the 1986 or 1993 Canadiens won the Cup".

It's one big reason I took a step back from these arguments for awhile, because once you jump in, you must TAKE A SIDE and not show any weakness or admit that this shit is complicated.

I'm unfortunately in the middle - I'm not ON ONE SIDE. Take everything I say in that light, please. And this stuff is complicated.

 

[Xirik]

This is one of the problems with these threads - there's no nuance allowed. You're either ON ONE SIDE or you must be ON THE OTHER SIDE.

I agree with (most) of what you said above, but you're ascribing opinions to me that I certainly haven't said here in the thread (and don't believe), such as the comments on "Roy was the only reason the 1986 or 1993 Canadiens won the Cup".

It's one big reason I took a step back from these arguments for awhile, because once you jump in, you must TAKE A SIDE and not show any weakness or admit that this shit is complicated.

I'm unfortunately in the middle - I'm not ON ONE SIDE. Take everything I say in that light, please. And this stuff is complicated.

Perhaps explaining more in depth what you meant by the "5th in the conference" post would be helpful. If you don't fully explain what you mean in a post then people are going to go to the most logical conclusion.

Ergo

5th in the conference = the Hab's team was bad and Roy carried them the to the

Maybe some of it because nuance isn't allowed in threads but I think that quick 5 word posts that have no depth to them so other posters fill it in as best as they can is also an issue

 

[dirtydanglez]

his stint with st. louis kinda ruined it a bit.

hes still one of the best goalies of that era but clearly behind hasek and roy.

 

[MikeK]

It's been mentioned a few times already but I'll repeat it because I feel it has a lot to do with the perception and the reason this is even a discussion. That is, he hung around too long. His greatness, and he truly was great, was diminished because he stayed too long. Not knowing when to hang it up is one of the toughest things for an athlete. We see here with Brodeur that him trying to hang around well past his expiration date actually hurt the perception people have of his entire career.

Make no mistake about it though, he was one of the best goalies to ever play the game and easily in the discussion of top goalies.

 

[Doctor No]

Perhaps explaining more in depth what you meant by the "5th in the conference" post would be helpful. If you don't fully explain what you mean in a post then people are going to go to the most logical conclusion.

Ergo

5th in the conference = the Hab's team was bad and Roy carried them the to the

Maybe some of it because nuance isn't allowed in threads but I think that quick 5 word posts that have no depth to them so other posters fill it in as best as they can is also an issue

See, you most certainly are ON ONE SIDE, and therefore there must be winners and losers, and therefore you must do everything in your power to WIN THIS ARGUMENT.

Keep grinding this into the ground, pal; I'm not joining you.

 

[Brodeur]

his stint with st. louis kinda ruined it a bit.

hes still one of the best goalies of that era but clearly behind hasek and roy.

It still kinda bums me out that I attended Brodeur's last game (STL@ANA). The palette cleanser for me was that the Devils had a 1995 reunion game a couple months later that he participated in, although oddly he played as a forward for two periods.

 

[Doctor No]

Gotta admire the guy skating out in goal skates. It took me way too long to get Level 4 in USA Hockey because I insisted on reffing with my goal skates on.

 

[NJDevilsFan21]

Series went 7 games, relatively close series, but the goaltending was note close, Roy outplayed Brodeur handily.

He was terrible that series. If he played like he did against Belfour a year earlier, he would have back to back cups (but of course that changes a lot and maybe he doesn't win again in 2003).

I think if he didn't play what ended being 192 games over the course of 2 seasons he may have done better that series.

 

[Matty Sundin]

His playoff track record after Stevens and Nieds left wasn’t very good even in the years he won the Vez. I know he went to the finals 2012 but he was passed his prime and it was more of a team effort to get there from what I remember.

Obviously I’m probably wrong but I don’t recall Marty really carrying a team on his own or stealing important games. Not he was was bad, he wasn’t but he played on a very defensive system with two legendary defenders in-front of him. His puck skills also contributed to their system being so effective. It seemed like though when his team as a whole was off or got figured out and though it wasn’t really his fault, he just went down with them as well.

 

[Xirik]

See, you most certainly are ON ONE SIDE, and therefore there must be winners and losers, and therefore you must do everything in your power to WIN THIS ARGUMENT.

Keep grinding this into the ground, pal; I'm not joining you.

I'd like for you to explain how you got to that conclusion as it doesn't really make sense to me. All I did was point on the conclusive fact that if someone doesn't fully explain their position then you are leaving for others to try and piece together what you mean.

Is asking you to clarify what you meant from that post really that big of a deal for you?

 

[Video Nasty]

No one remembers Orr wearing a Blackhawks uniform for the final 3 seasons and 26 games of his career.

Brodeur's 7 games with St. Louis are much more recent and I pretty much forget it even happened until I'm looking at his career stats.

Brodeur's time with the Blues didn't taint anything. I'm also of the mind that a player can hang around long past their expiration date, look ordinary or worse, and it does nothing to diminish the time they were great.

 

[Xirik]

His playoff track record after Stevens and Nieds left wasn’t very good even in the years he won the Vez. I know he went to the finals 2012 but he was passed his prime and it was more of a team effort to get there from what I remember.

Obviously I’m probably wrong but I don’t recall Marty really carrying a team on his own or stealing important games. Not he was was bad, he wasn’t but he played on a very defensive system with two legendary defenders in-front of him. His puck skills also contributed to their system being so effective. It seemed like though when his team as a whole was off or got figured out and though it wasn’t really his fault, he just went down with them as well.

Brodeur wins multiple cups and has great statistical seasons = its the team and system! Brodeur was getting carried

Brodeur when he doesn't have a great team surounding him = It's all his fault! Not the teams!

 

[Toby91ca]

Brodeur wins multiple cups and has great statistical seasons = its the team and system! Brodeur was getting carried

Brodeur when he doesn't have a great team surounding him = It's all his fault! Not the teams!

Welcome to the goaltending position

To be fair, I don't think he ever led the league in SV%....but could be wrong.

 

[Brodeur]

His playoff track record after Stevens and Nieds left wasn’t very good even in the years he won the Vez. I know he went to the finals 2012 but he was passed his prime and it was more of a team effort to get there from what I remember.

Obviously I’m probably wrong but I don’t recall Marty really carrying a team on his own or stealing important games. Not he was was bad, he wasn’t but he played on a very defensive system with two legendary defenders in-front of him. His puck skills also contributed to their system being so effective. It seemed like though when his team as a whole was off or got figured out and though it wasn’t really his fault, he just went down with them as well.

The post-lockout playoff results were disappointing, but Lou assembled some meager blue lines and a series of mediocre drafts caught up to the franchise eventually. The Devils winning division titles ought to be a feather in the cap for Brodeur making some of these D groups look better than they were.

2005-06: Lost in second round to eventual champion Hurricanes. Playoff D:

Lukowich (21:28) - Rafalski (27:26)
White (17:39) - Martin (24:17)
Matvichuk (16:41) - Klee (12:05)
------
Hale (12:06) - Albelin (10:38)

Rough year post-lockout, Lou signed Vladimir Malakhov and Dan McGillis to "replace" Niedermayer/Stevens. Midway through the year, he realized his error and removed them from the team. Brad Lukowich was a serviceable depth defender but it's still surprising that he was getting 20+ minutes a game in the playoffs.

2006-07: Lost in second round to eventual conference champion Senators. Playoff D:

White (21:16) - Rafalski (22:54)
Lukowich (19:57) - Martin (25:09)
Matvichuk (19:11) - Greene (17:04)
-------
Oduya (12:59)

I'm trying to remember if Oduya was hurt at the end of the year since he played 18 minutes during the regular season. Richard Matvichuk missed almost the entire regular season recovering from back surgery and was thrust into the playoff lineup. This would be Matvichuk's final time in the NHL as he was unceremoniously demoted to the AHL the following year. Andy Greene was a rookie with 23 games of NHL experience going into the playoffs.

2007-08: Lost in opening round to Rangers

Oduya (20:40) - Martin (25:35)
White (20:27) - Mottau (21:24)
Salvador (17:55) - Vishnevski (13:29)
-------
Greene (15:11)

Lou lowballed Rafalski who left for Detroit. He was "replaced" with Mike Mottau who had last played in the NHL in 2003. Still surprising to me that we picked somebody off the AHL scrap heap and played him 20 minutes on his weak side. Having every D being left handed even back then was a bit of an oddity.

Not sure if Greene was hurt but he only dressed in two games and Vitali Vishnevski played in the other three. Vishnevski would be loaned to the KHL and this would be his last games in the NHL.

2008-09: Lost in opening round to Hurricanes

Oduya (20:19) - Martin (26:20)
White (19:46) - Mottau (17:59)
Salvador (15:29) - Havelid (17:31)
--------
Greene (15:18)

Frustrating series with the Game 4 buzzer beater loss and a blown Game 7 lead. I forget if Andy Greene was hurt but he only played in three of the seven games.

2009-10: Lost in opening round to eventual Conference champion Flyers

Greene (19:42) - Martin (22:24)
White (18:56) - Mottau (17:57)
Salvador (16:04) - Skoula (16:39)
-------
Fraser (5:52) - Corrente (5:51)

Flyers forecheck did a good job exploiting the all left shot D. Martin Skoula's final games in the NHL. Mottau's last time as a regular NHL D.

2011-12: Lost in SCF to Kings

Salvador (22:25) - Zidlicky (23:47)
Greene (22:02) - Fayne (20:19)
Volchenkov (16:04) - Harrold (15:31)
--------
Tallinder (19:16) - Larsson (16:25)

The first half of the 2010-11 season was a trainwreck. The silver lining was that Lou finally acknowledged he needed to add some RHD. Harrold spent most of the season in the AHL but was pressed into action with Henrik Tallinder being hurt and Pete DeBoer not trusting Adam Larsson (who had hit a wall as a rookie).

 

[Doctor No]

I'd like for you to explain how you got to that conclusion as it doesn't really make sense to me. All I did was point on the conclusive fact that if someone doesn't fully explain their position then you are leaving for others to try and piece together what you mean.

Is asking you to clarify what you meant from that post really that big of a deal for you?

You can't figure out how I came to the conclusion that you are on TEAM MARTIN BRODEUR and that you'll come after anyone with even a mildly dissenting opinion like Pierre McGuire on a college scouting report?

You really can't figure out where that conclusion came from?

 

[Channelcat]

It always felt like the Devils org tried to do everything possible to keep him happy but it was never enough.

 

[Xirik]

You can't figure out how I came to the conclusion that you are on TEAM MARTIN BRODEUR and that you'll come after anyone with even a mildly dissenting opinion like Pierre McGuire on a college scouting report?

You really can't figure out where that conclusion came from?

Our entire conversation has to do about Roy, The Canadians, and the 5th in the conference comment. Me being pro Brodeur has nothing to do with anything.

why is it so hard for you to explain your 5th in the conference comment after I kindly asked for you to clarify it in case we were misunderstanding each other?

 

[Doctor No]

Our entire conversation has to do about Roy, The Canadians, and the 5th in the conference comment. Me being pro Brodeur has nothing to do with anything.

why is it so hard for you to explain your 5th in the conference comment after I kindly asked for you to clarify it in case we were misunderstanding each other?

No problem - happy to help!

 

[tucker3434]

Played too long. I get why professional athletes are reluctant to hang ‘em up, but once the fans start hoping you leave, the legacy is tarnished.

Same with Iginla. Watching both of those guys become shells of their former selves is what’s freshest in the mind.

 

[Xirik]

It always felt like the Devils org tried to do everything possible to keep him happy but it was never enough.

Are you talking about the end of his career? Because Brodeur took discount contracts just so Lou could make the team better. That's definitely not someone who "wasn't happy enough" acts.

 

[TheNumber4]

I always viewed Roy/Hasek as better than Broduer. Not sure if the numbers back it up, cause Brodeur has some insane numbers, but that’s always been my perception and I stand by that to this day.

 

[HBK27]

This whole "played too long" argument is stupid. For starters, if you can't distinguish between the last couple seasons of his career versus the rest of it, that's on you.

Brodeur made $9M over his final two seasons with the Devils and seemed to genuinely enjoy playing the game. He was also just coming off leading his team to a Stanley Cup Finals appearance when he signed that contract. But nah...he should've walked away from being paid a shit ton of money to go out a play a game he loved at the highest level because he wasn't as good as he once was and this may somehow one day tarnish his legacy, right?

Brodeur was underpaid throughout his career and sure as hell deserved that last contract from NJ. My only complaint was that Lou didn't let him go out on his own terms with the franchise. Trading for Schneider was a boneheaded move by Lamoriello for a franchise that had a fantastic 20-year run, but was old, had perhaps the worst farm system and was in desperate need of a rebuild. Having a past-his-prime Brodeur in nets as they entered that phase would've been the perfect ending to his career.

 

[Curufinwe]

It always felt like the Devils org tried to do everything possible to keep him happy but it was never enough.

The grass was always greener on the other side to Marty.

Brodeur deals with marriage breakup

The Globe and Mail offers the most authoritative news in Canada, featuring national and international news

www.theglobeandmail.com