The SV% is pretty negligible (.001 difference). But Quick maintaining that SV% with a lower GAA over 7 more games is impressive. The fact that Hank had more wins in fewer games (with a higher GAA) is proof of his team being better.
See my point above regarding their stats. I just don't see what Hank had over Quick that negates the games played, GAA, and difference in team strength. A .001 SV% doesn't do it.
The reality is the voters gave it to Hank for two reasons: A "lifetime achievement" Vezina since he had been more consistent in prior years, and an east coast media bias which very much exists when the majority of Quick's games were on past the voters bedtime.
Do all-star finishes really matter all that much? Especially for a guy with the cups and a playoff MVP?
My first thought was Barrasso. Two cups, a Vezina and a Jennings. Quick has two cups as a starter (a third as a backup), 2 Jennings, and a Conn Smythe that should negate the lack of a Vezina. Pretty much identical resumes.
Vernon's resume seems weaker than Quick's. He has 1 Jennings where Osgood played more games, 2 cups as a starter but in his Conn Smythe year Osgood also played more games in the regular season. I'm not sure if that was due to injury or rest but he was obviously fresher for that playoff run than Quick was in 2012.
Funny enough, it looks like all 3 have a similar number of seasons where they played 50% (or more) of the games in a given season. Barrasso (13), Quick (12), Vernon (12).
