Dominik Hasek greatest goalie ever?

[Theokritos]

Hasek played 53 games in the IHL and exactly 53 games for Czechoslovakia in the WCs, Canada Cups, and Olympics that preceded his coming to North America - in case you were worried about sample sizes.

Yes, I'm worried about sample size, that's why I was not referring to WC All-Star nominations, but to the Izvestia Golden Stick which is taking into consideration the whole season: Domestic League (regular season + play-offs) and International Competition. All in yearly comparison and competition with Fetisov, Makarov and other players you can hardly dismiss as not good enough for the NHL.

 

[quoipourquoi]

HockeyDB doesn't have detailed goalie stats for the 1992 season and I'm not aware of any other place where they are readily available, so we are unfortunately limited in our ability to hyperanalyze the two months that Hasek was mistakenly sent to the IHL that season by an organization that despite all evidence thought he wasn't as good as Jimmy Waite.

Arturs Irbe: 2.46
Mike O'Neill: 3.13
Wade Flaherty: 3.23
Rob Dopson: 3.26
Jason Muzzatti: 3.30
Bob Mason: 3.39
Guy Hebert: 3.40
Rick Knickle: 3.46
Bruce Racine: 3.50
Larry Dyck: 3.54


I guess with Arturs Irbe's IHL success (as measured by GAA) and WC selection in 1990, he'd be winning some of Roy's Vezinas too...

 

[quoipourquoi]

Yes, I'm worried about sample size, that's why I was not referring to WC All-Star nominations, but to the Izvestia Golden Stick which is taking into consideration the whole season: Domestic League (regular season + play-offs) and International Competition. All in yearly comparison and competition with Fetisov, Makarov and other players you can hardly dismiss as not good enough for the NHL.

That EDIT wasn't directed at you - it was to prevent a triple-post.


EDIT: Just like this isn't...

It's 53 international games of which he earned by being his country's best player numerous times (and Czechoslovakia was a top hockey country at the time, competitive with any country but Canada), and in those condensed tournament games he played great, just as Roy performed great in his condensed playoff games. Not as significant, but still significant.

And I'm sure that he has a lot of World Junior and World Championship Gold Medals to show for it prior to coming to North America, considering Canada wasn't winning them too often with their best goalies in the NHL playoffs.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Of course - but surely dominating a second-tier league (which, at the time, was really only behind Canada and competitive with the Soviet Union) and piling up a lot of accolades at World and Junior Championships is worth something, right?

Are 3 Conn Smythes more valuable than 3 extra Vezinas, 2 Harts and an Olympics MVP? I don't think so but I suppose it is debatable. Add in that Hasek was no doubt a top goaltender in the world prior to his first starting role as a goalie at the age of 29, and I just don't see it being that close at all.

The Czech league was competitive with the Soviets in the 70s, but had declined quite a bit by the time Hasek came around. It was definitely well behind the Soviet league by then.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

I guess with Arturs Irbe's IHL success (as measured by GAA) and WC selection in 1990, he'd be winning some of Roy's Vezinas too...

Irbe played with #3 ranked Wade Flaherty on a team coached by Kevin Constantine. He no doubt had a very good year, but I'm not sure that's entirely the equivalent of destroying the reigning First Team All-Star and leading the league in GAA on a team that didn't win both the championship and the IHL equivalent of the Jennings.

But I really don't know why you seem to be continuing to attempt to play up the significance of 20 IHL games in 1991-92 while also trying to downgrade Hasek's international results because of the small sample size.

In an interesting coincidence, Hasek also played 53 regular season NHL games from 1990-91 to 1992-93 prior to the year he became a starter, to go with his 53 international games and his 53 IHL games. Hasek was in the top 10 in the NHL in save percentage over those three years combined of goalies with minimum 50 GP:

1. Felix Potvin: 52 GP, .912
2. Curtis Joseph: 158 GP, .909
3. Patrick Roy: 177 GP, .905
4. Ed Belfour: 197 GP, .904
5. John Vanbiesbrouck: 133 GP, .901
6. Bob Essensa: 169 GP, .899
7. Mike Richter: 124 GP, .897
8. Dominik Hasek: 53 GP, .896
9. Kelly Hrudey: 157 GP, .895
10. Tom Barrasso: 168 GP, .894

I don't know how many Vezinas Hasek might have won in the early '90s, I'm not prepared to make a concrete claim on that unknowable hypothetical, and I don't consider the number of Vezina trophies won to be as significant as a goalie's aggregate performance over a large sample size anyway. But I think the evidence from the NHL, international play and yes, even the IHL suggests that it was very likely that Hasek would have been an excellent goaltender in the NHL in the late '80s and early '90s if he had been given that opportunity.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Well, Hasek was judged as the best goalie in the IHL one out of the two years here was there, so it's tough to use that time against him given his overwhelming success at every other level.

I'm not saying Hasek would have 12 Vezinas and 4 Harts if he was Canadian, but he certainly would have been in the mix for more, as I believe his international success does clearly show. Wasn't it you who said Roy's success should be measured beyond the 3 years he won the Vezina?

If Hasek was anywhere near as good as he was from 1994-99 (dominating Vezina voting), don't you think he'd have won best goalie in the IHL 2 out of 2 years?

 

[RabbinsDuck]

The Czech league was competitive with the Soviets in the 70s, but had declined quite a bit by the time Hasek came around. It was definitely well behind the Soviet league by then.

Yeah, you're right - but they still racked up a lot of medals in the 80s with Hasek at the helm.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

But when Hasek was being named the All-Star, 16 out of 21 NHL teams were making the playoffs...

This is a very good point. Only the true bottom of the barrel NHl players were playing in the WCs at the time, so who exactly was Hasek's competition?

 

[Theokritos]

The Czech league was competitive with the Soviets in the 70s, but had declined quite a bit by the time Hasek came around. It was definitely well behind the Soviet league by then.

This is a very good point. Only the true bottom of the barrel NHl players were playing in the WCs at the time, so who exactly was Hasek's competition?

All legitime points, but in the Izvestia Golden Stick voting his competition was better. Again, I don't have the data available, but I seem to remember Hašek repeatedly finishing pretty high. Unfortunately, only results of the years 1981-1984 are to be found on HFBoards. In 1984, Hašek was in third place, right behind Fetisov and Tretiak and in front of Makarov and Krutov. Good enough competition? I believe he has similiar results in 1986-1989.

 

[Hobnobs]

And his save percentage went down and he didn't get nominated for the Vezina or the Hart. Is it honestly any more "funny" than Roy winning a Stanley Cup in his first season without the 2001-02 Detroit Red Wings?

How many times were Roy nominated for the vezina during his Avs years? How many when he was 37+ years old? Sorry that I dont elevate Roy for winning a stanley cup for with a solid habs team in 86.

Rhiessan, Iä'm getting pretty tired of you calling everyone a revisionist everytime someone doesnt agree to your assessments of players. Can't you come up with something new?

 

[Hobnobs]

All legitime points, but in the Izvestia Golden Stick voting his competition was better. Again, I don't have the data available, but I seem to remember Hašek repeatedly finishing pretty high. Unfortunately, only results of the years 1981-1984 are to be found on HFBoards. In 1984, Hašek was in third place, right behind Fetisov and Tretiak and in front of Makarov and Krutov. Good enough competition? I believe he has similiar results in 1986-1989.

Those arent canadian players so no, its not good enough competition.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

looks like i missed another all night jam session. belated response:

Did you categorically deny that Hasek was "better" than Fuhr and Puppa as early as '92/93, and support that by providing a record showing Hasek had the best stats of the 3 on that team? That's kinda funny.



Yeah, Chicago (or any team) would have an easy time deciding to sit their Vezina winning goalie to give the rookie with a "weird" style a more serious chance. And Fuhr was brought in at the trade deadline to replace Puppa, obviously, and not Hasek. Buffalo decided to start using their 4-time Stanley Cup champion in goal as soon as they got him instead of Puppa (hence his only 8 appearances since Fuhr joined them), and who could blame them? It was Grant Fuhr. Obviously it was still just a case of Hasek being a bit misunderstood and thus not trusted, because look what happened the very next year.

It took 3 years for Hasek to really get his chance to prove how good he was. Pointing to his stats and saying "he proved nothing for 3 years" is laughable, since it's basically a small sample of single periods stopping "only" roughly 8/9 of 10 shots in relief dragging down the stats from the few full games he was able to actually start. Hasek was only given 3 full games in '90/91, and he won 2 of them, and stopped 28/29 to preserve a tie. In '91/92, he played 15 full games and won 10 of them and tied another, posting a SV% over 0.940 in 5 of those games. Buffalo chose to go with Fuhr instead of Hasek in the '92/93 playoffs (not a failure on Hasek's point to "prove" anything), and that obviously turned out to be a misguided decision.

And when exactly did Jaime Waite start "instead of" Hasek? lol. I mean, he got his chance to play now and again like any promising young goalie under contract, but he was still a distant 3rd with Hasek in the mix (hence being dumped to SJ that very off season for little more than "future considerations").

being stuck behind belfour has become a big myth, and a good story for hasek's legend. but remember, in training camp of 1990 belfour wasn't belfour yet. the blackhawks chucked their three veteran goalies from the previous year, and let the three kids go at it with jacques cloutier as insurance. the blackhawks, and everyone else, expected the '91 season to be jimmy waite's. but hasek had the same shot at that job as belfour or waite did.

Hasek going from World Championship best goalie to NHL backup to immediate multi-Vezina and Hart winner suggests the backup years were more 'down' years (possibly due to culture, different style of game, coaching, Hall of Famer goalies in front of him, etc.) than years which should define him. Find me a player with similar international accolades to Hasek that was not amongst the best goalies in the NHL. You make it sound like Tretiak would never have been able to hack it in the NHL.

Fact is, Hasek blew away NHL competition the very first year he was given starter minutes, and went on to win 6 Vezinas in the next 7 years, plus 2 Harts, all after the age of 29, when the vast majority of goalies are past their prime. Hasek's numerous accolades, playing with and against NHL level competition, prior to 1994 strongly suggests he was amongst the best goalies in the world prior to the age of 29, and did not make a quantum leap from 'decent IHL goalie' to 'greatest player in the world' in a few years.

Find me a 1st Team World Junior Championship player with 3 1st Team World Championship selections who was *not* one of the best players in the world at his position.

Rick Nash has a Rocket Richard and is a star in the NHL despite playing for arguably the worst team in the league. How does that imply Hasek, with a better resume, would not be competing for Vezinas (especially at a time when goalie competition was at a low ebb)?

Oh, goodie. Hasek has one more World Championship 1st Team than Rick Nash. You sure dodged that bullet...

this exchange shows two things. 1. that some of us are forgetting that we are not comparing hasek to players the calibre of rick nash or tommy salo, or sean burke, or roman turek, or any other players who dominated the WC multiple times and were pretty good NHLers too. we are comparing hasek to the best five goalies of all time. there is no precedent for a player going from that kind of WC success to top five all-time status, which proves nothing either way.

2. but what it does show is that rabbinsduck is trying really hard to force a chicken/egg argument here. maybe it's the law and order episode i watched last night, but all this talk of the IHL and WJC and WC indicating that hasek could have been a vezina nominee in the NHL in those years seems like trying to establish reasonable doubt rather than trying to establish anything concrete. well fine, we don't know for sure that hasek from '87-'93 wasn't the same as hasek from '94-'02. but i have to say, casting reasonable doubt isn't the same thing as providing evidence. and it sure looks to me like if hasek from 1990-'92 was really the same hasek who was setting records later on, then he wouldn't have been sent to the IHL and at the very least he would have shared the net with belfour to start.

 

[toob]

what makes the World Championship teams any worse than some (maybe quite a bit) of NHL teams especially before the early 90s?

Also using Rick Nash as an example to diminish Hasek's accomplishments doesnt fly so well because Rick Nash is a pretty damn good player who is especially good on the big ice for various reasons.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

what makes the World Championship teams any worse than some (maybe quite a bit) of NHL teams especially before the early 90s?

Also using Rick Nash as an example to diminish Hasek's accomplishments doesnt fly so well because Rick Nash is a pretty damn good player who is especially good on the big ice for various reasons.

i'm not using rick nash to diminish hasek. i'm saying that rick nash is not sufficient evidence to suggest that hasek was in his prime-- one of the handful of greatest goalie primes in hockey history-- pre-94. the benchmark is extremely high and much higher than rick nash, even at his best.

 

[toob]

i'm not using rick nash to diminish hasek. i'm saying that rick nash is not sufficient evidence to suggest that hasek was in his prime-- one of the handful of greatest goalie primes in hockey history-- pre-94. the benchmark is extremely high and much higher than rick nash, even at his best.

You werent who i had in mind.

I also am definitely not buying that Hasek would be in the discussion for greatest player ever or even that he would be the best goalie in the 80s but those WC performances do have to count for something.

Hasek was named the best goalie at WCs in 87,89,90. These were the teams that Canada sent over:

1987 Men's World Ice Hockey Championships

Head coach: Dave King
Keith Acton
Brian Bellows
Doug Bodger
Sean Burke
Dino Ciccarelli
Kevin Dineen
Bruce Driver
Mike Foligno (C)
Bob Froese
Dirk Graham
Craig Hartsburg
Kirk Muller
Larry Murphy
Troy Murray
Barry Pederson
James Patrick
Dan Quinn
Paul Reinhart
Pat Riggin
Bob Rouse
Al Secord
Scott Stevens
Tony Tanti
Zarley Zalapski

1989 Men's World Ice Hockey Championships

Head coach: Dave King
Glenn Anderson
Brent Ashton
Dave Babych
Brian Bellows
Sean Burke
Randy Carlyle
Ken Daneyko
Kevin Dineen
Dave Ellett
Ray Ferraro
Grant Fuhr
Gerard Gallant
Dale Hawerchuk (C)
John MacLean
Mario Marois
Andrew McBain
Mark Messier
Kirk Muller (C)
James Patrick
Peter Sidorkiewicz
Scott Stevens
Pat Verbeek
Steve Yzerman (C)

1990 Men's World Ice Hockey Championships

Head coach: Dave King
Keith Acton
Greg Adams
Brian Bellows
Shawn Burr
Paul Coffey (C)
Murray Craven
John Cullen
Bob Essensa
Theoren Fleury
Doug Gilmour
Rick Green
Curtis Leschyshyn
Doug Lidster
Al MacInnis
Jamie Macoun
Kirk McLean
Joe Nieuwendyk
Michel Petit
Mark Recchi
Ron Sutter
Rick Tocchet
Ken Wregget
Steve Yzerman (C)

 

[Theokritos]

If Hasek was anywhere near as good as he was from 1994-99 (dominating Vezina voting), don't you think he'd have won best goalie in the IHL 2 out of 2 years?

I don't know what actually happened in the second IHL year, but look at it the following way: Hašek was considered one of the best players outside of the NHL around 1990, nearly on par with the best Soviet players. When he came to North America, his aim was surely not to play in the Minors. What does Chicago do? They send him down to the Minors for a season. Hašek is a stand out in that season. What does Chicago do? They send him down again the next season. Not hard to imagine Hašek was demotivated in his second IHL year.

Edit: I'm not arguing Hašek was on Vezina-level pre-1994, I just attempt a possible explanation why he wasn't as outstanding in the second IHL year as in the first.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Demotivated

I don't know what actually happened in the second IHL year, but look at it the following way: Hašek was considered one of the best players outside of the NHL around 1990, nearly on par with the best Soviet players. When he came to North America, his aim was surely not to play in the Minors. What does Chicago do? They send him down to the Minors for a season. Hašek is a stand out in that season. What does Chicago do? They send him down again the next season. Not hard to imagine Hašek was demotivated in his second IHL year.

Tim Thomas, Les Binkley, Johnny Bower and others with long minor league careers were not demotivated. They just worked harder.

 

[Theokritos]

Tim Thomas, Les Binkley, Johnny Bower and others with long minor league careers were not demotivated. They just worked harder.

Good for them. I didn't say Hašek showed exemplary self-discipline.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Hasek was named the best goalie at WCs in 87,89,90.

But he wasn't named best goalie in 1990; Arturs Irbe was. Hasek was named best goalie twice, just like Tommy Salo - former IHL MVP and Turner Cup Champion.

So if RabbinsDuck wants to use Hasek's play in non-best-on-best tournaments prior to coming up to North America as evidence of him being equal to the top NHL goaltenders - specifically because he was a star in the World Championship - how far does that take Tommy Salo (who, again, I stress is an IHL MVP and Turner Cup Champion)?

 

[toob]

But he wasn't named best goalie in 1990; Arturs Irbe was. Hasek was named best goalie twice, just like Tommy Salo - former IHL MVP and Turner Cup Champion.

So if RabbinsDuck wants to use Hasek's play in non-best-on-best tournaments prior to coming up to North America as evidence of him being equal to the top NHL goaltenders - specifically because he was a star in the World Championship - how far does that take Tommy Salo (who, again, I stress is an IHL MVP and Turner Cup Champion)?

Hasek's Wikipedia lied to me

Anyway the point was to show the quality of teams Canada could still send over from the 5 non playoff teams (even accounting that these teams were most likely less than the sum of their parts as compared to other teams which played together more).

Your second point stands as we just dont know how Hasek would play in the NHL. Maybe he comes over earlier and has the same several year adjustment period before becoming elite sometime around 1990. Maybe he has a nice career as a good goalie though not like he would become. Maybe he flounders never becomes what he became. But Hasek's longevity shouldnt be much of a knock on him. Roy wasnt the best goalie after the mid 90s and beyond but he was still one of the good ones.

 

[Theokritos]

Hašek or Irbe in 1990?

Hašek was voted the All-Star goaltender by the journalists, but Irbe received the best goaltender award by the IIHF directorate. Hence the confusion.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Your second point stands as we just dont know how Hasek would play in the NHL. Maybe he comes over earlier and has the same several year adjustment period before becoming elite sometime around 1990. Maybe he has a nice career as a good goalie though not like he would become. Maybe he flounders never becomes what he became. But Hasek's longevity shouldnt be much of a knock on him. Roy wasnt the best goalie after the mid 90s and beyond but he was still one of the good ones.

But I don't think it's an adjustment at all. I mean, we wouldn't mulligan Patrick Roy's 1998 Olympic because they were his first 6 games away from North American ice, would we? Roman Cechmanek came in from Europe at 29-years-old and was the best goalie in the NHL with no adjustment (losing the Vezina because he played just 59 games). I simply think Hasek hit his prime at a later age than Patrick Roy hit his but at an earlier age than Martin Brodeur hit his.

I didn't say Hašek showed exemplary self-discipline.

That's kind of an important trait to have as a goalie, since they're not just handed a starting job. Even Patrick Roy had to platoon with Brian Hayward until 1989-90, getting the hook from the starting job each time he lost a single playoff game. He didn't sit around, waiting for Brian Hayward to get injured so the team would have no choice but to play him as often as he wanted; he stopped losing home games. Like... all of the home games.

 

[Hobnobs]

But I don't think it's an adjustment at all. I mean, we wouldn't mulligan Patrick Roy's 1998 Olympic because they were his first 6 games away from North American ice, would we? Roman Cechmanek came in from Europe at 29-years-old and was the best goalie in the NHL with no adjustment (losing the Vezina because he played just 59 games). I simply think Hasek hit his prime at a later age than Patrick Roy hit his but at an earlier age than Martin Brodeur hit his.



That's kind of an important trait to have as a goalie, since they're not just handed a starting job. Even Patrick Roy had to platoon with Brian Hayward until 1989-90, getting the hook from the starting job each time he lost a single playoff game. He didn't sit around, waiting for Brian Hayward to get injured so the team would have no choice but to play him as often as he wanted; he stopped losing home games. Like... all of the home games.

So we are now speculating about Haseks self-discipline because of 20 odd games in the IHL? Jeez...

 

[Rhiessan71]

Rhiessan, Iä'm getting pretty tired of you calling everyone a revisionist everytime someone doesnt agree to your assessments of players. Can't you come up with something new?

Read the context my friend.
The poster is actually attempting to revise history by saying Hasek would of competed for the Vezina and been in contention for the best player ever with the likes of Gretzky, Orr and Lemieux if Hasek had of been in the NHL in like 1985.
And the rational he is using for this is his International record against lesser than NHL quality competition and his record from a second tier Czech league.
All this despite the fact that once he did reach the NHL, it took him till around X-mas of 1994 to become a standout.
It's the very definition of revisionism. Feel free to look up the definition for yourself.

No one is arguing that Hasek wasn't a good goalie prior to '94.
What's being argued is that there is far from enough credible or reliable evidence that Hasek was a great goalie prior to '94.
It's absolutely no different than what people repeatedly try and do for Lidstrom pre-'97.
Trying to re-write history with facts not in evidence by projecting the player they would become onto the player they actually were.

Whoever used the Law and Order analogy was bang on.
You aren't trying to put reasonable doubt into Hasek not being a Great goalie back then.
You have to PROOVE that he was a Great golaie and there just simply isn't enough credible evidence to do so.

 

[Fred Taylor]

After reading through most of this thread I am starting to question Hasek over Roy.