Does Tim Thomas get too much credit for 2011?

[Chief Nine]

Considering people have consistently been trying to strip away credit from him as if he didn't see action behind a wall of defensive players, no, he does not get too much credit.

It's been six-and-a-half years, so take six-and-a-half minutes to remind yourselves.

That save on Downie was just pure robbery.

 

[danincanada]

His peak/prime may have been short but he was fantastic at the time. You don't post save percentages like that and get voter support that much from luck. .938 during the season and .940 during the playoffs? Those are peak Hasek numbers.

 

[sr edler]

Some of you guys really need to either move on, get therapy or just pick another diversion.

I have moved on. We're still allowed to discuss what happened though.

 

[sr edler]

His peak/prime may have been short but he was fantastic at the time. You don't post save percentages like that and get voter support that much from luck. .938 during the season and .940 during the playoffs? Those are peak Hasek numbers.

Boston went to the finals two years later with the exact same core and were 1 minute away from a game 7 against the Blackhawks (who weren't as injury riddled as the Canucks in 2011), without Thomas. The two conclusions one can draw from this is either 1) Boston had a pretty good team outside of Thomas in 2011, or 2) Tuukka Rask was also otherworldly behind an average suck squad.

 

[Chief Nine]

I have moved on. We're still allowed to discuss what happened though.

Yes you are absolutely allowed and encouraged to discuss what happened. However, crying about "Chara and his goon squad"is another animal. Lol, I'll just see that with Alex "Finger Biter"Burrows and leave it at that.

 

[danincanada]

Boston went to the finals two years later with the exact same core and were 1 minute away from a game 7 against the Blackhawks (who weren't as injury riddled as the Canucks in 2011), without Thomas. The two conclusions one can draw from this is either 1) Boston had a pretty good team outside of Thomas in 2011, or 2) Tuukka Rask was also otherworldly behind an average suck squad.

Put me down as having an opinion of it being a little bit of both. Those Bruins teams were very strong outside of Thomas and Rask was a very good goalie as well. Neither of those takes anything away from how good Thomas was in '11.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Boston went to the finals two years later with the exact same core and were 1 minute away from a game 7 against the Blackhawks (who weren't as injury riddled as the Canucks in 2011), without Thomas. The two conclusions one can draw from this is either 1) Boston had a pretty good team outside of Thomas in 2011, or 2) Tuukka Rask was also otherworldly behind an average suck squad.

Winning a Conn Smythe or putting up good numbers does not mean that you're on a bad team. Both of your conclusions are designed around the idea that as the team gets better, the goaltender must be worse OR as the goaltender gets better, the team must be worse.

The 2011 Boston Bruins were good. Tim Thomas was their best player. The 2013 Boston Bruins were good. Tuukka Rask was their best player.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Boston went to the finals two years later with the exact same core and were 1 minute away from a game 7 against the Blackhawks (who weren't as injury riddled as the Canucks in 2011), without Thomas. The two conclusions one can draw from this is either 1) Boston had a pretty good team outside of Thomas in 2011, or 2) Tuukka Rask was also otherworldly behind an average suck squad.

or 3) Tuukka Rask is a damn good goalie in his own right (career .923/2.24, Vezina winner)

get over your whiny salty hate, Thomas's 2011 run is an all time run.

you can't nitpick a .967 sv%/1.14 gaa/2 shut out Finals.

 

[sr edler]

The 2011 Boston Bruins were good. Tim Thomas was their best player. The 2013 Boston Bruins were good. Tuukka Rask was their best player.

Your goaltending bias shines through here.

Bigger question though is: was Myllys ever the best player on his team?

 

[quoipourquoi]

Your goaltending bias shines through here.

We're talking about the 5th (Rask) and 18th (Thomas) best four-round goaltending performances based on error rate vs expectation. Vezina winners. Save percentage title winners. One who actually won the Conn Smythe, and the other who went into the final game with a 10.4 GVT when the next best player had 7.8.

Saying that Thomas and Rask were their teams' best players isn't exactly a stretch.

 

[GreatGonzo]

He didn't stand on his head because Boston weren't dominated by Vancouver at any point during the finals. Thomas was steady (he also was pre-NHL when he played in Finland & Sweden) but he didn't stand on his head in the finals. The truth is somewhere in between him being a fraud and him standing on his head. He had a very good performance in the finals and probably got into some heads, but he weren't playing otherworldly standing-on-my-head-hockey behind a beige suck squad. Boston had a real deep roster (both defensively & offensively, with some stand out star players like Chara and Bergeron) and a well functioning system/machinery.

I never said anything about getting dominated, they were down 2 games to 0 and were always chasing them to even the series, that's why it went to 7 games.

You have a very very odd perception of his play in that finals and see it as two entirely different and very odd perspectives....all while building strawmen like crazy. Pick a side and stick with it, but enough with these strange extremes that you love.

No one ever said that he was playing behind a "sucky" team or system, and playing behind great players doesn't suddenly mean his performance means less. He did stand on his head, he did make a lot of great saves, and yes, he did let in some stinkers...but in the end he did his job and secured wins for his team.

Of course they had a deep roster, that's what it takes to win a stanley cup. Right? But Thomas was their best player and that shouldn't all of a sudden mean that Chara and Bergeron were chumps and didn't contribute. Thomas was their MVP, either accept that and get over it, or continue finding ways to rewrite the books that best suits your needs.

Boston went to the finals two years later with the exact same core and were 1 minute away from a game 7 against the Blackhawks (who weren't as injury riddled as the Canucks in 2011), without Thomas. The two conclusions one can draw from this is either 1) Boston had a pretty good team outside of Thomas in 2011, or 2) Tuukka Rask was also otherworldly behind an average suck squad.

The Oilers won a cup 2 years after Gretzky left, I guess that means Gretzky was a product of the Oilers and their core/system.

 

[sr edler]

Saying that Thomas and Rask were their teams' best players isn't exactly a stretch.

It may not be a stretch but it's not necessarily a given either. Chara was a Norris caliber defenseman and Bergeron is consider by many people to be the best defensive forward of his generation while still being more than capable offensively.

 

[quoipourquoi]

It may not be a stretch but it's not necessarily a given either. Chara was a Norris caliber defenseman and Bergeron is consider by many people to be the best defensive forward of his generation while still being more than capable offensively.

Chara or Bergeron over Rask, Krejci, or Horton for the 2013 Conn Smythe. That sure would have been a minority opinion.

 

[sr edler]

A Conn Smythe doesn't necessarily = best player. Was Nieuwendyk the best player on the 99 Stars Cup run? No, he wasn't. Vernon on the 97 Red Wings? Meh.

 

[GreatGonzo]

A Conn Smythe doesn't necessarily = best player. Was Nieuwendyk the best player on the 99 Stars Cup run? No, he wasn't. Vernon on the 97 Red Wings? Meh.

It's takes a talented team with many talented players to win a stanley cup and your only proving that without even noticing. Was Nieuwendyk THE best player? Up for debate, but he did lead his team in goals with 11, with 6 GWG, finishing with 21 points(2nd on team) so is it some sort of Robbery? No. Vernon in '97? Not some crazy Robbery.

Fact is, the last few Conn Smythe winners can and will be argued regardless. Crawford has a great argument over Kane(2013) Kopitar or even Doughty over Williams(2014) Kessel or Murray over Crosby(2016) and even Malkin over Crosby(2017)

Does it matter? No not really, But your so hell bent on proving a point that your having a hard time proving yourself. Fact is, Thomas had the numbers, had the big games and moments, as well as breaking some pretty outstanding records along the way. He deserved it. His value to that team during that run isn't arguable. Did he have the help of a great team with great players....DUH. Much like every other conn smythe winner had, and much like many of the all time greats had. This shouldn't be new to anyone, it's how the game is played....as a TEAM, just because one player gets more credit doesn't suddenly mean all the players under him aren't valuable.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

It was one hell of a flash...I agree. It happened to fall into a time of weak competition (Lundqvist and...uhh...?) and he had the storyline backing (media votes, media needs stories...so fat slob American comes out of nowhere after being drafted in the 100th round a million years ago and toiling in the minors for forever rises up and does whatever he does...it's one of those "feel good" stories...until he middle fingered a democrat that is haha...then he became a grand wizard dragon thing or whatever...anyway, the headlines are there in a league that has few)...not saying he was wholly undeserving of this stuff, I get it's a numbers game...but that doesn't change that he was a flash in the pan who could only hang in the league behind Julien/Chara/Bergeron...outside of that, he remained not NHL caliber, this made up the majority of his career. Maybe he practiced really, really hard for those two non-consecutive seasons and got really, really good...or maybe...just spitballing here, maybe there were other factors at play...some of us may never know...

Nice.

Yes, a ninth round pick from the University of Vermont. Took them to the final 4 for the first time. Scouts may have overlooked UV at that time. Consider their top scorer, Martin St Louis, who wasn't drafted at all. Small kid, unorthodox kid. Forget 'em. When given a shot they did OK.

Sometimes even goalie experts like yourself can miss the boat. Hasek was unorthodox and it took some time for him to get a chance. Johnny Bower spent 11 years in the AHL and was 34 when he got his second shot at an NHL job. Hall of Famers each.

 

[Michael Farkas]

We've been down this road before, DB. But to clarify for our new readers who didn't have the fortune to see us slapbox each other in the Top 40 goalie thread haha, it's not unorthodox that I don't like. I had the biggest Dominik Hasek poster on my bedroom wall, I'm a big fan. It's the sustainability that I want. I want a player to be reliable. Thomas not only wasn't reliable, but he proved he wasn't. He couldn't hack in the league for 10 years.

He came up, had his couple of seasons and washed away...

NHL career without Julien: 63-67-18, 2.96 GAA, .908 save pct., 4 SO
NHL career with Julien: 180-99-31, 2.24 GAA, .927 save pct., 33 SO

He desperately needed those cushy confines to pretend to be NHL caliber...on either side of that, three goals per game...not good enough. I'm not trying to vacate those wins or get him to pawn off his ring. He won it fair and square. The idea is that comparisons to Hasek or Martin St. Louis, oddly enough, are just not jiving with reality. A fair comparison is Cechmanek, big in the regular season, just wasn't gifted a HOF shutdown d-man, HOF caliber shutdown center, a coach who inflates save pct. in every spot and 62 (!) even strength goals in a playoff...that's the meat of it. Just flip the script...Cechmanek got exactly two goals of run support from his first place team in 2002. Thomas got twenty million in 2011. Cechmanek is laughed at and was laughed out of the league. Thomas has this weird hero fetishism associated with him and is on an otherwise-very-respectable top-40 goalie list...and I know I'm playing a whale of a what-if card here, one guy did it and one guy didn't...I got it. The idea is that when you have such a limited scope to work with because of the player's own inabilities and weaknesses, you really slice it awfully close with other flashes...I mean, I see some talk here about Timmeh being a HOFer...that's absolutely bananaland...

If it was more along the lines of "hey remember that time that minor league scrub Michael Leighton played in a Stanley Cup Final? Or that time (times?) that really annoyingly bad goalie Brian Elliott led the ******* planet in save pct. or whatever? Yeah, that was funny...heh heh" I wouldn't care...but all these "all time" type terms get thrown around in this case and it's really off-putting...something of a slap to actual all time efforts and players...

 

[quoipourquoi]

Still ignoring the first season without Julien and Chara where Tim Thomas joined the 26th ranked team for 38 of their final 41 games and posted a .917 (Vezina winner and Hart nominee Kiprusoff had a .923). The only other Boston season without Julien is 2006-07 where he was killed on power plays but still had a .920 at even-strength (Vezina winner and Hart nominee Brodeur had a .927).

But I'm glad we solved the mystery of how the 39-year-old who took a year off during the 2013 lockout and came back on the Florida Panthers (who allowed 11 more GA than any other team in that 48-game season) saw his numbers decrease. What detectives we are here at HOH.

 

[Michael Farkas]

This is the old "leaving the bathroom" thing that C1958 referenced before...Thomas is a hero despite a 3.13 GAA and we tip-toe around that not being good enough. Then he gets credit for winning 12 of 38 games down the stretch in the previous season. Florida gives up a ton of goals with him in net, but it's Florida...the state...that just happens to give up a lot of goals. Not the guy in the net.

I can't help but to point to the WOWY Julien for Thomas again...it's all there. It's not good because he's not good. Being a detective does not include reverse justifying horrific and/or sub-NHL performances for 15 of his 20 years of noteworthy hockey to account for two years of relevance, three years of relevance, whatever it was...it doesn't make sense that way. The two years were the exception, not the rule. What next? Jonathan Cheechoo didn't become a 500-goal scorer because of bad weather? No, it was just that Thornton set them up on a platter for him in a Thornton-God season...this is where proper talent evaluation needs to become center focus or you spend a lot of time chasing ghosts...

 

[x Tame Impala]

Man, that TT playoff save compilation was not kind to the Bruins D however, that's expected with highlight videos and of course doesn't tell the whole story.

People always try and categorize a player or a system being better than the other when in reality it's usually both. The Bruins and TT were perfect fits. The D would funnel most normal chances to the outside, making it relatively easy for Thomas to make the save, and then make the other team work really hard for anything in high-danger areas. They'd punish you for getting in close and if you finally overcame all of that you had to make a fantastic play to get the puck past Thomas. It was beautiful.

but now that people have finally been able to take themselves out of the moment, we're starting to see how unimpressive, uneven and unbecoming that playoffs and goalie was...

I really think the only ones doing that are bitter Vancouver fans and yourself who seems to have a fetish for destroying Thomas.

and his standing in the eyes of many has rightly gone down since then. The reason that it has happened for many people though is so irrelevant to his hockey level that I can't help but find it annoying. People are right for the wrong reasons.

Sadly from what I remember in 2012 that seemed to be a moment to pinpoint as his decline. He lost a lot of favor with the public (maybe his teammates too?) and I think people have held it against him ever since.

Boston went to the finals two years later with the exact same core and were 1 minute away from a game 7 against the Blackhawks (who weren't as injury riddled as the Canucks in 2011), without Thomas. The two conclusions one can draw from this is either 1) Boston had a pretty good team outside of Thomas in 2011, or 2) Tuukka Rask was also otherworldly behind an average suck squad

Yeah, and the Bruins lost. Rask gave up 12 goals in games 4, 5, and 6 and (from the perspective of a Hawks fan) wasn't a threat to make the big save. Rask has always been a very good goalie, but he wasn't in the 2013 SCF. Thank god we got to go against 2013 Rask instead of 2011 Thomas or the Hawks wouldn't have won anything.
--------------------

The #'s don't lie. That 2011 playoff run was EXCELLENT

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Man, that TT playoff save compilation was not kind to the Bruins D however, that's expected with highlight videos and of course doesn't tell the whole story.

People always try and categorize a player or a system being better than the other when in reality it's usually both. The Bruins and TT were perfect fits. The D would funnel most normal chances to the outside, making it relatively easy for Thomas to make the save, and then make the other team work really hard for anything in high-danger areas. They'd punish you for getting in close and if you finally overcame all of that you had to make a fantastic play to get the puck past Thomas. It was beautiful.



I really think the only ones doing that are bitter Vancouver fans and yourself who seems to have a fetish for destroying Thomas.



Sadly from what I remember in 2012 that seemed to be a moment to pinpoint as his decline. He lost a lot of favor with the public (maybe his teammates too?) and I think people have held it against him ever since.



Yeah, and the Bruins lost. Rask gave up 12 goals in games 4, 5, and 6 and (from the perspective of a Hawks fan) wasn't a threat to make the big save. Rask has always been a very good goalie, but he wasn't in the 2013 SCF. Thank god we got to go against 2013 Rask instead of 2011 Thomas or the Hawks wouldn't have won anything.
--------------------

The #'s don't lie. That 2011 playoff run was EXCELLENT

A lot of that was from the Bruins playing through significant injuries, which weakened that relentless defense you described earlier in your post. No longer did the Hawks have to fight through the waves to get to the keeper, and that opened up a ton of space for them to get the quality scoring opps.

- Bergeron separated ribs in game 4, separated shoulder game 5, and had a punctured lung in game 6

- Chara had a lower body injury and could barely move games 4, 5, 6 (hence him being on ice for 10+ goals in those 3 games).

and the Hawks, being as great of a team as they were, took full advantage and exploited it to the max.

And games 4, 5, 6 are a testament to how great Rask was overall those playoffs. Despite those 3 games, he still finished .940 sv%/ 1.88 GAA and held the favored Penguins to 0.50 GAA and .985 sv%

 

[sr edler]

A lot of that was from the Bruins playing through significant injuries, which weakened that relentless defense you described earlier in your post. No longer did the Hawks have to fight through the waves to get to the keeper, and that opened up a ton of space for them to get the quality scoring opps.

- Bergeron separated ribs in game 4, separated shoulder game 5, and had a punctured lung in game 6

- Chara had a lower body injury and could barely move games 4, 5, 6 (hence him being on ice for 10+ goals in those 3 games).

and the Hawks, being as great of a team as they were, took full advantage and exploited it to the max.

And games 4, 5, 6 are a testament to how great Rask was overall those playoffs. Despite those 3 games, he still finished .940 sv%/ 1.88 GAA and held the favored Penguins to 0.50 GAA and .985 sv%

Your post implies that Rask had decent help in the Penguins series from one Z. Chara and one P. Bergeron.

 

[McGuillicuddy]

I don't like the Cam Ward comparison. Bill Ranford is closer in that their Finals were clearly their best round, but Thomas' 2nd Round is better than any of Ranford's first three rounds, and that should draw some separation between the two.

EvE by Round
Thomas (66.5%) | 90.5% | 47.9% | 90.8% | 33.2%
Ranford (71.4%) | 82.5% | 51.0% | 97.5% | 46.2%
Ward (78.5%)| 61.4% | 85.1% | 89.6% | 78.4%

Sorry, this is probably a stupid question, but what is "EvE"?

Edit: Oh hang on. I found this: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/threa...able-goaltenders-error-rate-analysis.1728107/ Is that EvE?

 

[x Tame Impala]

Bergeron separated ribs in game 4, separated shoulder game 5, and had a punctured lung in game 6

That's still the craziest thing I've ever heard in sports. I can't believe Bergeron played through that, he could've died

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Your post implies that Rask had decent help in the Penguins series from one Z. Chara and one P. Bergeron.

stop the presses! a goalie benefits from having the top 2 defensive players on his team healthy? who knew?