Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
Yeah, that's why I'm not formalizing anything until I'm ready to go...I'll go crazy...one list, a minute before the deadline, that's it and that's all...
We'd have to take it in stride...
Before the deadline yes. Part way thru phase two may shift discussions.
That's what I would think as well. I can't imagine something that would drastically affect our process. I mean even to date what have they released recently that has had the biggest affect? I'm sure a lot more of the specific data will be used in more detail during the actual voting rounds rather than the prelim discussion anyways.It might. But unless there's a schedule from the NHL, I think we'll just have to play the ball as it lies. I think it would have to be one hell of a bombshell to knock us off course though, no? Like what kind of magnitude would elicit something that would change the landscape that dramatically do you think...? Just spitballing, because I can't even come up with anything reasonable...
I wouldn’t exactly lump Sergei Fedorov and Brett Hull in with Forsberg and Malkin. The latter two were consistently held as top 3-5 players (with minority support as #1) for a decade-straight.
Fedorov and Hull were healthier but with a fraction of the window as top players. I think this is the difference between #30-40 range and #70-85 range.
It might. But unless there's a schedule from the NHL, I think we'll just have to play the ball as it lies. I think it would have to be one hell of a bombshell to knock us off course though, no? Like what kind of magnitude would elicit something that would change the landscape that dramatically do you think...? Just spitballing, because I can't even come up with anything reasonable...
Hard to imagine five years would bump his career number in their range, but Terry Sawchuk’s numbers for 1951-1955 could theoretically bump him into the .926-934 adjusted peak ranges of Dryden, Hasek, Roy, Esposito, and Parent.
We’ve seen stronger pushes for Dryden on casual hockey blogs and from the main boards after his numbers were released. At the very least it seemed to shatter the narrative that any goaltender has created an Orr-like gap within the position.
If we can see a pattern of these peak-level numbers occurring in the 50s, 70s, and 90s, I think it would go a long way in helping some groups trust that there have been great players at the position prior to the YouTube-1980s-slapshot-from-the-wing GAs they may be mentally comparing to what would be considered a bad goal in 2018.
We have to lure the young folk in with save percentage because they grew up with it and can understand it... then we spring the trap and tell them all of the reasons why it’s not always reliable.
Malkin has been a walking bandaid for the better part of a decade now, though he does get some credit for playing almost every available playoff game at least.
Gosh for some reason I thought it was mid-September. Okay I'll take another crack at a draft then.We have til mid-October, right?
Well, he did miss an entire playoff run. 2011?
I guess I see it as not enough to drop that much from their healthier contemporaries with similar decade-long reputations (#30-40 vs. the #10-20 Jagr, Crosby, Ovechkin).
Orr and Hasek seem to take the lesser hits than players like Malkin and Forsberg and Lindros for their injury problems - almost certainly because there will always be more excellent forwards while truly great defensemen and goaltenders may be more rare.
Hasek 12, Roy 10.
I have the two so close overall, I bounce between the two. I have a hard time committing to one over the other for very long. This time around I think I gave the edge based on longevity and playoffsHasek is my top rated goalie.
Unless you completely disregard the most important aspect of the game : goalscoring.I'd say Forsberg is ahead. They're similar in offensive prowess and both have very good playoff runs, but in other aspects Forsberg brought more to the table while Malkin took things off.
Hasek is my top rated goalie.
No goaltenders in the top-10 then? Not saying there’s a mandate or anything, but two names to take a look at strongly in comparison to some of the #5-10 skaters would be Jacques Plante and Patrick Roy. Both careers had structure more resembling that of a skater, so it may make for easier comparison to the usual suspects like a Maurice Richard or a Jean Beliveau - without all of the same caveats necessary when comparing Dominik Hasek and Terry Sawchuk.
I’m trying to remember who first drew the parallel between Patrick Roy’s career and golf scorecard (Michael Farber of Sports Illustrated?), but if you think of the 18 seasons as 18 holes, he probably just has the one double-eagle in 1989 where everything went right from October to May/June, but he also birdies just about everything else because even if he struggles getting to the green (1986 and 2001), he’ll chip it in because of his playoffs. And just the one bogey in a par-3 lockout season.
Not a whole lot in terms of water hazards or sand traps (injuries), and you’d have to take more than just his appendix in a playoff round to keep him from finishing a hole. And he helped modernize the swing and the club.
I’d keep going but I’m terrible at golf so I’m running out of metaph- OH! I bet he wishes he could mulligan his eagle putt in 2002. Okay, now I’m done.
Scoreboard to scorecard, he might have shot the same as Maurice Richard, so hopefully they’re eligible at the same time.
Well, there's five skaters to every goalie, so it shouldn't really be too surprising. Plus it's too early to have a drink (referring to the thread guidelines in the very first post), but it's hard enough to rank goaltenders among skaters anyways.No goaltenders in the top-10 then? Not saying there’s a mandate or anything,