Will Jonathan Quick make the HHOF?

[SeanMoneyHands]

I say he does despite only winning one Vezina but he has two cups.

Click to read more...

 

[koyvoo]

Conn Smythe, Vezina, two rings and over 400 career wins. It would be shocking if he didn’t get in.

 

[JKG33]

I say he does despite only winning one Vezina but he has two cups.

I'm not sure whats more ridiculous... that this is even a question, or your description of his resume.

He has 3 cups, 1 Conn Smythe, and 2 Jennings. Unfortunately no Vezina which he was robbed of in 2012.

After Bob and Vasi, I have a very hard time finding an active goalie with a better case for the HOF.

 

[FoxyClean]

I'm not sure whats more ridiculous... that this is even a question, or your description of his resume.

He has 3 cups, 1 Conn Smythe, and 2 Jennings. Unfortunately no Vezina which he was robbed of in 2012.

After Bob and Vasi, I have a very hard time finding an active goalie with a better case for the HOF.

Saying he was “robbed” in 2012 when Lundqvist had a higher SV% and more wins is kind of insane.

 

[JKG33]

Saying he was “robbed” in 2012 when Lundqvist had a higher SV% and more wins is kind of insane.

Lundqvist also played on a team that was much better than the Kings were, at least before Sutter & Carter. Quick was the only reason they were even in playoff contention prior to those additions.

Quick got the hardware that really matters, but he should've had that Vezina too. Quick's SV% was .929 vs Hanks .930, Quick played more games and had a lower GAA.

 

[FoxyClean]

Lundqvist also played on a team that was much better than the Kings were, at least before Sutter & Carter. Quick was the only reason they were even in playoff contention prior to those additions.

Quick got the hardware that really matters, but he should've had that Vezina too. Quick's SV% was .929 vs Hanks .930, Quick played more games and had a lower GAA.

Saying Quick played on a worse team when they literally won the Cup really doesn’t hold water here lol.

 

[JKG33]

Saying Quick played on a worse team when they literally won the Cup really doesn’t hold water here lol.

Look at their record before and after February. Two completely different teams

 

[Whoot Whoot]

would risk my fortunes on this happening

 

[Regal]

Look at their record before and after February. Two completely different teams

Kings not being able to score before the trade hurt Quick’s record but they were always great defensively that year. Vezina isn’t most valuable goalie. They were extremely close.

 

[JKG33]

Kings not being able to score before the trade hurt Quick’s record but they were always great defensively that year. Vezina isn’t most valuable goalie. They were extremely close.

Quick had the better GAA, Quick played more games, and their SV% difference (.001) is as negligible as you can get. Hank having more wins in fewer games shows the Rags were a better regular season team than the Kings, which is where the award is voted

 

[JaegerDice]

Quick had the better GAA, Quick played more games, and their SV% difference (.001) is as negligible as you can get. Hank having more wins in fewer games shows the Rags were a better regular season team than the Kings, which is where the award is voted

Meh, GAA is a team stat, just like wins.

Quick doesn't need the Vezina to get in, he ascended beyond the trophy with his Conn Smythe performance in 2012. The point of the Vezina (however flawed the execution) is to put a stamp on the historical record affirming 'this goalie was the best goalie in the league this season'. Quick's playoff performance was so strong, people were calling him the best goalie in the league for years afterwards, trophies be damned.

"Who do you want in the playoffs this season, the Vezina winner or Quick?"

"Quick, obviously."

Was common thinking among fans and pundits alike.

And at the end of the day, that's why he'll get in. Because nobody in their right mind would argue that peak Quick wasn't one of the very best in the league at his position for a solid chunk of time.

 

[JKG33]

Meh, GAA is a team stat, just like wins.

Quick doesn't need the Vezina to get in, he ascended beyond the trophy with his Conn Smythe performance in 2012. The point of the Vezina (however flawed the execution) is to put a stamp on the historical record affirming 'this goalie was the best goalie in the league this season'. Quick's playoff performance was so strong, people were calling him the best goalie in the league for years afterwards, trophies be damned.

"Who do you want in the playoffs this season, the Vezina winner or Quick?"

"Quick, obviously."

Was common thinking among fans and pundits alike.

And at the end of the day, that's why he'll get in. Because nobody in their right mind would argue that peak Quick wasn't one of the very best in the league at his position for a solid chunk of time.

I agree with you 100%. He won the most important hardware twice (as a starter) and got the MVP while doing it.

He absolutely was the best goalie in the league for a few years, and even in his final playoff run in LA a couple years ago he looked like he still had it (unfortunately the team didn't). There's an argument to be made hes one of the best playoff goalies of all time.

It's just too bad he got robbed of that Vezina, would've been a cherry on top of a great career. But for Lundqvist thats all he has, for Quick thatd be the 3rd or 4th most impressive win.

 

[Coffee]

Of course dude

 

[barkovcanfinnish]

Yep, he deserves it.

 

[JaegerDice]

It's just too bad he got robbed of that Vezina, would've been a cherry on top of a great career. But for Lundqvist thats all he has, for Quick thatd be the 3rd or 4th most impressive win.

And to be clear, I'm not shitting on Lundqvist. I think he's also a sure-fire hall of famer with a hell of a career.

 

[jbeck5]

Lundqvist also played on a team that was much better than the Kings were, at least before Sutter & Carter. Quick was the only reason they were even in playoff contention prior to those additions.

Quick got the hardware that really matters, but he should've had that Vezina too. Quick's SV% was .929 vs Hanks .930, Quick played more games and had a lower GAA.

.928 not .929 unless hockeydb is wrong, your stat isn't correct.

Lmao and Lundqvist was off by 1 too.

Either you wrote both stats wrong, or different sites are using different numbers.

 

[Toby91ca]

Lundqvist also played on a team that was much better than the Kings were, at least before Sutter & Carter. Quick was the only reason they were even in playoff contention prior to those additions.

Quick got the hardware that really matters, but he should've had that Vezina too. Quick's SV% was .929 vs Hanks .930, Quick played more games and had a lower GAA.

If Quick has the lower SV% but lower GAA, that doesn’t exactly suggest the other guy played on a much better team….sort of says the exact opposite. I know this isn’t exact proof or anything, but it certainly doesn’t support a view you are suggesting.

 

[JKG33]

.928 not .929 unless hockeydb is wrong, your stat isn't correct.

Lmao and Lundqvist was off by 1 too.

Either you wrote both stats wrong, or different sites are using different numbers.

I got mine from NHL.com

 

[jbeck5]

I got mine from NHL.com

HA! Different sites have different stats posted..weird. lol

 

[Toby91ca]

HA! Different sites have different stats posted..weird. lol

hockeydb got the rounding wrong I guess. Both sites have the 1,730 saves....math works out to 0.9286....rounds to 0.929....so I guess they didn't round up.

 

[jbeck5]

hockeydb got the rounding wrong I guess. Both sites have the 1,730 saves....math works out to 0.9286....rounds to 0.929....so I guess they didn't round up.

Weird coding for them not to round up...or is the input manual and user error?

 

[Toby91ca]

Weird coding for them not to round up...or is the input manual and user error?

No idea, wondering if they always have it set to round down with the view that you can round up to something that didn't happen? If it was less than 0.929, we can say .929? Who knows? I'm guessing this isn't the case, but I have no idea how everything gets loaded, etc. There has to be a formula used though....hard to imagine a manual error here.

EDIT: Super interesting...it actually looks like it may be a glitch for that particular season only. I haven't checked this at all other than to look at Quick's stat for every year of his career, hockeydb and nhl.com match....it seems super unlikely that every single year his stat would be below "5" in the rounding digit, but didn't check.

For 2011/12 though, I did check the top guys:

Elliott - actual 0.9403, 0.940 on both sites
Schneider - actual 0.9365, 0.937 on nhl.com and 0.936 on hockeydb
Smith - actual 0.9303, 0.930 on both
Lundqvist - actual 0.9298, 0.930 on nhl.com and 0.929 on hockeydb
Rask - actual 0.9291, 0.929 on both
Quick - actual 0.9286, 0.929 on nhl.com and 0.928 on hockeydb
Halak - actual 0.9257, 0.926 on nhl.com and 0.925 on hockeydb

 

[wetcoast]

I'm not sure whats more ridiculous... that this is even a question, or your description of his resume.

He has 3 cups, 1 Conn Smythe, and 2 Jennings. Unfortunately no Vezina which he was robbed of in 2012.

After Bob and Vasi, I have a very hard time finding an active goalie with a better case for the HOF.

The thing is that I didn't even need to look it was a big no for me.

How many all star selections does he have as the top goalies in the league?

These are his finishes.

2,3,5,5,

Is that a HHOF resume?

I guess people will say wins but that's just staying power and there are two guys in Winnipeg and tB with elss wins that will be HHOFers and MAF and BOB as well it seems.

How many HHOF goalies can there be playing at the same time?

I'm not a goalie guy but he seems like a longshot.

 

[Voight]

The thing is that I didn't even need to look it was a big no for me.

How many all star selections does he have as the top goalies in the league?

These are his finishes.

2,3,5,5,

Is that a HHOF resume?

I guess people will say wins but that's just staying power and there are two guys in Winnipeg and tB with elss wins that will be HHOFers and MAF and BOB as well it seems.

How many HHOF goalies can there be playing at the same time?

I'm not a goalie guy but he seems like a longshot.

I'm guessing his case was made easier by the induction of Mike Vernon.

HHOF seems to be less stringent on goalies these days.

 

[Regal]

Quick had the better GAA, Quick played more games, and their SV% difference (.001) is as negligible as you can get. Hank having more wins in fewer games shows the Rags were a better regular season team than the Kings, which is where the award is voted

I agree that Hank’s wins are affected by team but by the same token, so is Quick’s GAA, which was just as negligible as their SV% (0.02 better). So I’m still confused how Quick was robbed. Different sites have either ahead in terms of goals saved above expected. It was really a pick-em. Hell, Mike Smith had a good case as well. It was a tough year to have your best year as a goalie.