Doesn't matter really. Either way works equally well.
Did Montreal take significantly more penalties than other teams of that time? This is the first I've really heard that they were a highly penalized team.
Getting to the semis+ 8 times is about the team, not just the goalie. Didn't/Doesn't Jose Theodore have a streak of never losing in the first round (meaning he made the semis every time)? Is that something you attribute completely to a goalie? Also a 40-19 OT record again is a team statistic. Roy can only lose the game, but he can't win it. You need your team to score, no matter how great your goalie is.
Isn't comparing players at different positions the entire point of this list?
I also fail to see how it matters what the quality of LWs on the league at the time really has to do with anything. Is it your contention that the LWs on all the teams were tasked to shadow him? Doesn't your LW argument severely hamper just about every RW on this list considering the historical weakness of that position? Do we have to re-evaluate th accomplishments of M.Richard now? Lafleur?
The evolution of defensive systems in the modern era is far above what is was when Esposito played. Maybe head-to-head the LWs were not as strong as the Cs, but overall team defense was more advanced, plus Jagr didn't have anything near the rapidly expanding and diluting talent base that occured for Esposito. Also, as you've mentioned before, when Jagr played the goalies overall were much better with far better overall technique and far larger equipment, making it even harder to score.
In the end, teams focused their entire defense around trying to contain/shut down Jagr. That to me is the most important thing, not who the opposing LW was.
Just a question, but is there ANY era that you can show a list of LWs comparable to the Cs of that (or any other) era for that matter? I'd love for you to prove me wrong but I just can't think of any time where the LW depth was better than C depth, even when comparing across eras.
Slight comment on the bolded. From what I recall reading (I'll try to find the exact source) but Kelly was switched from defense to forward because he got too slow to play on D. This IIRC was a rather common practice is that time, as it happened to Ebbie Goodfellow as well. Skilled defensemen as they got older and slowed down were often moved to center.
Here's one of the quotes I remember:
Source:
Red Kelly
Not much, but I'll try to find a few more when I have some time.
Keep in mind there are quite a few mitigating factors:
1) Hasek lost quite a few of his "prime" seasons in Czechoslovakia and stuck in a backup role in the NHL.
2) Hasek played significantly longer than Roy. Hasek was 6 years older than Roy when he played his final game. In fact, Hasek has played in 4 seasons where he was older than Roy's final season.
3) It should be noted at Hasek at the same age Roy retired led the NHL in wins. He was 6th in the league in wins when he was 42 (some people value this stat, I don't).
4) 3 times finished in the top 10 in shutouts after the age of 40 (2nd, 4th, 6th).
Bobby Orr doesn't need an assist to be an offensive force on the ice. His mere presence out there, even if he didn't touch the puck, sucked up the defense and opened up a lot of room for other players.
You seem to be a big proponent of comparing players on equal levels. This comparison completely ignores the factors I listed above. How do they compare over the same time span? Roy simply played more games in the NHL so career totals will obviously be skewed in his favor. Ironically, Hasek played hockey and a high level for more YEARS than Roy did, considering he retired 6 years older than Roy did. Using just career NHL numbers is heavily penalizing a player for factors outside of his control.
Plus you one again compare wins. How many goals does a goalie score? A goalie cannot win a game without a team. He can improve his teams chances of winning. He can't win the game.