I do hate that as well....but it is a thing. So and so hung on too long, so he really isn't as good of a player as everyone thought....if the player is still a quality player and able to contribute, why retire simply because you aren't at the level you used to be.
What happened to Brodeur's legacy?
- Thread starter 895
- Start date
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 newswww.theglobeandmail.com
What the hell is that supposed to even mean or have to do with the post you quoted?
And in this instance, I would say the grass was certainly greener for him considering he's still married to his former sister-in-law.
people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones?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
- Feb 10, 2010
- 14,333
- 11,200
We have 100+ years of hockey history. Any time someone tries to claim the top 3 of one category or other all played at the same time - the bar is very high to prove that.
Cause its soooo easy to objectively compare players from the 50's to ones in the 2000's.
Doctor No
Registered User
The twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth words of the thread were "of all time". It's not like people shouldn't know what's in here.
njdevils1982
Hell Toupée!!!
about the site...i figured it out... i have an 11 year old mac, site doesn't work when using chrome but i have no issues when trying it on safari
so, problem solved
cheers
Doctor No
Registered User
Oh that's weird! I do all of my site updates in Chrome although it's on a Windows computer (with no issues).
I really do need to further refine the site design - I'm self taught (and it shows), and I spend way too much time on research (such as NHL Backup Goaltenders, (nearly all) 1963 to present (and a call for help)) and not enough time on presentation.
Fire Sweeney
Registered User
njdevils1982
Hell Toupée!!!
JAS 39 Gripen
Registered User
How come so many [mod edit: ...hockey fans still...] use team stats like WINS and Stanley Cup rings when comparing players? Does anyone really think that Hill/Kuemper/Binnington/Murray/Martin Jones/Holtby/Khudoblin for example are the reasons their teams won the Cup and that there weren’t other goalies that would’ve won their team the SC if they swapped goalies?
I mean, really?
Some people are still even using PIMS and +/-….what are you?
I mean, really?
Some people are still even using PIMS and +/-….what are you?
Last edited by a moderator:
- Feb 10, 2010
- 14,333
- 11,200
If you want to claim he's a top 3 goalie of all time, there is no way to do that without comparing across generations.
If you want to claim he isn't a top 3 goalie of all time, there is no way to do that without comparing across generations.
It seems to me comparing across generations is inevitable regardless.
What's your point?
Hill = No
Kuemper = No
Binnington = Yes, He was a main contributer to winning the cup. Bruins couldn't solve him.
Murray = yes...ish? He definitely was one of the reasons but definitely others played a bigger part
Jones was a backup
Holtby = yes, Him and finally having center depth with Kuznetsov was one of the main reasons they finally got over the hump and won the cup
Khudobin didn't win the cup
That it's simply a very hard or impossible task to do and any talk of a "top goaltender of all time list" is a waste of time.
- Feb 10, 2010
- 14,333
- 11,200
A perfect list may be unlikely.
A reasonable list can be made.
Talking sports is fun.
I don't see the problem.
As I've said on the HOH board, for basically his entire career my eye test told me that he simply wasn't at the level of guys like Hasek/Roy and that he was getting propped up in a big way by NJ's consistently elite system. But he was so incredibly durable (his biggest strength, incidentally) that it was difficult to prove that right or wrong when he was playing 70+ games every year.
Then in 08-09 he finally got hurt and a Scott Clemmensen/Kevin Weekes tandem took over and those two journeymen put up basically the same numbers that a Vezina-winning Brodeur put up in the previous two years.
And yeah, at that point it became impossible for me to rate him anywhere near the elite goalies of his era.
Then in 08-09 he finally got hurt and a Scott Clemmensen/Kevin Weekes tandem took over and those two journeymen put up basically the same numbers that a Vezina-winning Brodeur put up in the previous two years.
And yeah, at that point it became impossible for me to rate him anywhere near the elite goalies of his era.
Talking sports is fun but putting hard work into making lists and then having in being insulted or mocked is not "fun" Sure there are some people who give their own insights and thoughts in a friendly matter but sadly that is just a small amount of people.
BigEezyE22
Continuing to not support HF.
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 10,663
- 6,173
With a bit of the revolving door the position became since Brodeur stopped to be one of the top, I feel it is aging extremelly well. So one won 2 vezina in a row since Brodeur, only Thomas-Bobrovsky won more than one and they are not in the conversation.
He was never really a consensus Top 3 of all time over the Plante, Sawchuk and co.
His win record could have failed with goaltender playing 100% of their career in the no tie league, but with the workhorse 70 games years after years having became rare it could live on for a very long time, Fleury being like 150w away.
He was never really a consensus Top 3 of all time over the Plante, Sawchuk and co.
His win record could have failed with goaltender playing 100% of their career in the no tie league, but with the workhorse 70 games years after years having became rare it could live on for a very long time, Fleury being like 150w away.
I talked about this argument in the 2nd post of this thread. I watched Peter Budaj put up basically the same numbers as Jonathan Quick, but my takeaway was never that this was proof that Quick was a byproduct of some system. I figured Budaj was a house of cards and Kings management made the same conclusion.
David Aebischer put up great numbers when he backing up / taking over initially for Patrick Roy. I don't think that detracts from Roy at all.
2018 Keith Kinkaid was kinda like Clemmensen 2.0 for us.
I mentioned this in a different thread but my memory from watching was that despite the save percentage, Kevin Weekes struggled that season which is what allowed Clemmensen to get the number of starts that he did.
Brodeur got hurt on November 1. Weekes was expected to carry the load after Brodeur got hurt.
Weekes
Starts 1-6: November 3 - December 13 - 2 wins, 4 losses, .897 sv%
Starts 7-11: January 10 - February 19 - 5 wins, 0 losses, .956 sv%
Weekes played great for those 5 starts, but I'd be remiss to point out the opponents: LAK (would pick #5), CBJ, ATL (would pick #4), NYI (would pick #1), TBL (would pick #2). Columbus was the only playoff team of the bunch and they were 21st in GF. They only entrusted Weekes to go against the dregs. Similarly, this is mostly the reason why Corey Schwab (.971) and Clemmensen (.952) had amazing save percentages in small sample sizes in 2003-04.
Most Devils fans were upset with Lou when Clemmensen got demoted when Brodeur returned in late February. Despite finishing the season with a .920 save percentage, Weekes would go unsigned as a free agent and announced his retirement in September 2009.
Doctor No
Registered User
Weekes was most definitely deployed carefully - I calculate that his average opponent was 0.33 goals/game worse than average (this is quite low for anyone with sample size) while Clemmensen was +0.02 and Brodeur was -0.06 (both effectively league average):
And at least Clemmensen was back for the playoffs:
JAS 39 Gripen
Registered User
So what you’re saying with your “yes”s is that waaaay better goalies in the league than the ones I mentioned would NOT get those teams those cups, eh? Price/Lundqvist/Luongo/CuJo would not be able to replace those above, or get cups on actual good teams according to you?
MessierII
Registered User
- Aug 10, 2011
- 28,607
- 18,097
Dryden and Plante are the two old guys I have firmly ahead of Brodeur. The only real argument against Dryden is his career was extremely short but those years were so absolutely ridiculous he’s still one of the best ever.
