Ol Dirty Bstrd
Registered User
- Nov 25, 2007
- 1,784
- 396
As far as I understand, the consensus is Roy is the best of these three, then Hasek, the Brodeur. I never understood this thinking. I will try and break down my thinking.
Roy vs. Brodeur - the same old Brodeur excuses cant be used to downplay him because Roy played behind some stellar teams as well. Also, Brodeur has a slightly higher career sv%, so Brodeur haters can throw that out the window. So Roy is generally considered as better because of his playoff success. While I agree, I will just give some numbers to show brodeur isnt too far behind:
Win% SO SV% GAA Cups Conn Smythes
Roy .616 23 .918 2.30 4 3
Marty .582 21 .921 1.89 3 0
The only category Roy blows Marty away in is Conn Smythes and Marty EASILY could have won it any three times he won the cup especially when he was robbed of it by Giguere. Here are his stats in those playoffs:
Year SO GAA SV%
94-95 3 1.67 .927
99-00 2 1.61 .927
02-03 7* 1.65 .934
*record for shutouts, including 3 in finals
Those are phenomenal numbers and the "good team" excuse is only so valid because look at his save percentages. For example, he lost in the first round in 01-02 with a 1.42 GAA and a .938 sv%, so his team in front of him couldnt have been that good at all. I could see some people picking Roy for one game as more of a "money goalie," but Brodeurs postseason numbers are pretty close to Roy's and he was slightly better in the regular season. Keep in mind ROy never even started 70 games. Marty's durability and puckhandling should definitely be taken into account.
As the numbers show, its pretty close so I can see people taking ROy over Marty. But heres the real headscratcher. People then rank Hasek in between Roy and Marty. Hasek in his prime was the most dominant goalie ever, easily better than both of them. But his prime was very short and that causes you to choose longevity vs. prime when discussing these goalies. How can someone choose longevity (or clutchness) when comparing Roy and Hasek, but choose prime when comparing Hasek and Brodeur. Keep in mind Brodeur and Roy BOTH played behind great teams, while Hasek didn;t for the most part. Also, once again Hasek only started 70 games once while Marty does it ever year. Brodeur had Hasek like numbers through January last year, leading the league in every major goaltending category, but those numbers fell because he started many more games than the dominator typically would in his career.
Sorry for the rant, but do I make valid points? Does Brodeur get downplayed by some? Can someone without bias explain the Roy then Hasek then Broduer logic? THanks.
Roy vs. Brodeur - the same old Brodeur excuses cant be used to downplay him because Roy played behind some stellar teams as well. Also, Brodeur has a slightly higher career sv%, so Brodeur haters can throw that out the window. So Roy is generally considered as better because of his playoff success. While I agree, I will just give some numbers to show brodeur isnt too far behind:
Win% SO SV% GAA Cups Conn Smythes
Roy .616 23 .918 2.30 4 3
Marty .582 21 .921 1.89 3 0
The only category Roy blows Marty away in is Conn Smythes and Marty EASILY could have won it any three times he won the cup especially when he was robbed of it by Giguere. Here are his stats in those playoffs:
Year SO GAA SV%
94-95 3 1.67 .927
99-00 2 1.61 .927
02-03 7* 1.65 .934
*record for shutouts, including 3 in finals
Those are phenomenal numbers and the "good team" excuse is only so valid because look at his save percentages. For example, he lost in the first round in 01-02 with a 1.42 GAA and a .938 sv%, so his team in front of him couldnt have been that good at all. I could see some people picking Roy for one game as more of a "money goalie," but Brodeurs postseason numbers are pretty close to Roy's and he was slightly better in the regular season. Keep in mind ROy never even started 70 games. Marty's durability and puckhandling should definitely be taken into account.
As the numbers show, its pretty close so I can see people taking ROy over Marty. But heres the real headscratcher. People then rank Hasek in between Roy and Marty. Hasek in his prime was the most dominant goalie ever, easily better than both of them. But his prime was very short and that causes you to choose longevity vs. prime when discussing these goalies. How can someone choose longevity (or clutchness) when comparing Roy and Hasek, but choose prime when comparing Hasek and Brodeur. Keep in mind Brodeur and Roy BOTH played behind great teams, while Hasek didn;t for the most part. Also, once again Hasek only started 70 games once while Marty does it ever year. Brodeur had Hasek like numbers through January last year, leading the league in every major goaltending category, but those numbers fell because he started many more games than the dominator typically would in his career.
Sorry for the rant, but do I make valid points? Does Brodeur get downplayed by some? Can someone without bias explain the Roy then Hasek then Broduer logic? THanks.