Hasek Vs. Roy

[19nazzy]

Don't pretend like Hasek was never any good in the playoffs.

So then you don't pretend Roy wasn't good in the regular season....

 

[revolverjgw]

Nobody's saying Hasek wasn't great in the playoffs. But he was never the playoff MVP, while Patrick Roy was the playoff MVP three times. Playoff MVP's are far more important than regular season MVPs, and harder to win. To wit, only Roy has more than two.

Giguere's run was a fluke and Vernon's post-season credentials don't compare to Roy's. Of course you don't take a guy with one Conn Smythe over Hasek... but a guy with triple that, and twice as many Cups...

 

[reckoning]

Nothing is harder than winning the Stanley Cup. Roy did it 4 times. I truly dont understand people saying Hasek was the better goalie, it just boggles the mind...

The goalie isn`t the only player on the team. While it has to be taken into consideration, the number of Cup wins isn`t the only factor.

Gump Worsely won 3 Cups as a starter, Glenn Hall won only 1.

Mike Vernon has won 2 Cups, Ed Belfour only 1.

I would love to meet the person who thinks Worsely and Vernon are better than Hall and Befour.

 

[God Bless Canada]

The 1993 Canadians had 102 points. Hasek's Sabres were never that good.

The 1992-93 Habs sputtered into the playoffs, having played subpar hockey for much of the season's final quarter. They were expected to be mincemeat for the Nords, and after dropping the first two games, that prediction appeared to be coming true. Montreal went on to win 16 of the next 18 games, 10 of them in OT and others by one goal. I don't think I've ever seen a player mean more to his team than Roy in 1993 with the Habs. They lose to Quebec in five or six games without him.

I'm not a Roy fan. In fact, I quite enjoyed his little hot dog gone awry in 2002 vs. Detroit, and then the Wings' seven-goal outburst the following game. I thought it was a fitting end for Roy's year, after he bailed on Canada for not being promised the No. 1 goalie job. Hasek won that series in 2002, but honestly, that Colorado team was nowhere near as good in 2002 as 2001 (witness seven-game clashes with LA and SJ), and Detroit should have polished them off much quicker than in seven games).

Hasek was terrific for the Czechs in the 1998 Olympics. He was the MVP. His team played terrific defence in front of him (Canada was stiffled the first 55 minutes in the semi-final, before coming on in the final minutes of regulation and overtime. Everyone remembers Hasek's brilliance in OT and the shootout, but often overlooked is how well they played as a team). But the Stanley Cup is still much harder to win. It's eight weeks of hard-nosed, intense hockey, which requires a team to play at their absoluate best every night. Hasek's Cup win came on a team that did not require him to win games. There were several players (Lidstrom, Yzerman, Fedorov, possibly even Chelios) who were more valuable to the Wings in 2002 than Hasek.

Hasek has a better regular season portfolio. But so much of my decision, when evaluating talent (especially for goalies) is who I would rather have in a Game 7 situation. In this case, it is Roy. The other reason to pick Roy is three Conn Smythe trophies, something nobody else has ever done. Best money goalie of the last 30 years.

 

[KOVALEV10*]

The 1992-93 Habs sputtered into the playoffs, having played subpar hockey for much of the season's final quarter. They were expected to be mincemeat for the Nords, and after dropping the first two games, that prediction appeared to be coming true. Montreal went on to win 16 of the next 18 games, 10 of them in OT and others by one goal. I don't think I've ever seen a player mean more to his team than Roy in 1993 with the Habs. They lose to Quebec in five or six games without him.

I'm not a Roy fan. In fact, I quite enjoyed his little hot dog gone awry in 2002 vs. Detroit, and then the Wings' seven-goal outburst the following game. I thought it was a fitting end for Roy's year, after he bailed on Canada for not being promised the No. 1 goalie job. Hasek won that series in 2002, but honestly, that Colorado team was nowhere near as good in 2002 as 2001 (witness seven-game clashes with LA and SJ), and Detroit should have polished them off much quicker than in seven games).

Hasek was terrific for the Czechs in the 1998 Olympics. He was the MVP. His team played terrific defence in front of him (Canada was stiffled the first 55 minutes in the semi-final, before coming on in the final minutes of regulation and overtime. Everyone remembers Hasek's brilliance in OT and the shootout, but often overlooked is how well they played as a team). But the Stanley Cup is still much harder to win. It's eight weeks of hard-nosed, intense hockey, which requires a team to play at their absoluate best every night. Hasek's Cup win came on a team that did not require him to win games. There were several players (Lidstrom, Yzerman, Fedorov, possibly even Chelios) who were more valuable to the Wings in 2002 than Hasek.

Hasek has a better regular season portfolio. But so much of my decision, when evaluating talent (especially for goalies) is who I would rather have in a Game 7 situation. In this case, it is Roy. The other reason to pick Roy is three Conn Smythe trophies, something nobody else has ever done. Best money goalie of the last 30 years.

After reading all your posts about being apart of the HHOF I have a lot of respect for you. But I have to disagree. IMO I would feel safer with a 97-98-99 Dominik Hasek in a game 7 then a sometimes great sometimes soo bad patrick roy. Having watched the majority of Roy's career with Montreal I would have to say he was good during those 2 cup runs but other then that he was average at best in the remaining playoffs.

 

[Claypool_*]

Playoff MVP's are far more important than regular season MVPs, and harder to win.

It's easier to fluke a Conn Smyth than it is to fluke a Hart Trophy.

 

[habs_24x]

After reading all your posts about being apart of the HHOF I have a lot of respect for you. But I have to disagree. IMO I would feel safer with a 97-98-99 Dominik Hasek in a game 7 then a sometimes great sometimes soo bad patrick roy. Having watched the majority of Roy's career with Montreal I would have to say he was good during those 2 cup runs but other then that he was average at best in the remaining playoffs.

Roy was more than just "good" in those 2 cup runs with Montreal, he was amazing and was chosen best player of the playoffs for both.
All i know is Hasek needed to play with a stacked Detroit team to win his only cup and will maybe win another one next year with another stacked team. Roy did it with very ordinary Montreal teams that were not expected to win a round much less the cup. Detroit and Ottawa were and are favored to win the cup.

 

[Claypool_*]

Detroit and Ottawa were and are favored to win the cup.

Because Hasek was/is their goalie.

 

[matthew94]

It's very close

Out of 100 shots Dom saves 92 or 93 whereas Roy saves 91.

 

[19nazzy]

Because Hasek was/is their goalie.

Yeah because the rest of the team sucks

 

[Ogopogo*]

But Roy won two Cups on Montreal teams that frankly, were no better than what Hasek played on. You can say Montreal didn't have to go through the best team from the regular season that year (the 1986 Oilers and the 1993 Penguins) but Roy was playing so well in both playoffs that neither team would have beat the Habs in the playoffs. And let's keep in mind that even though Roy didn't win the Conn Smythe in 1996, he was the missing piece in Colorado's puzzle. They were eliminated in the playoffs in the first round the year before, despite having the best record in the Eastern Conference. (That was their last year in Quebec). Roy not only gave them that elite No. 1 goalie, he gave them that elite No. 1 goalie with two Conn Smythe Trophies - a track record for winning and playing his best when it mattered most - and instant credibility.

Hasek was good for the Wings in 2002, but how many games did he steal? He was not the Hasek who stood on his head for the Sabres in the late 1990s. (I'd say he was better in the 1998 and 1999 playoffs, but the bottom line is he didn't win the Cup, and like I said, Roy won his Cups on teams no better than the Sabres in 1998 and 1999). Yes, he had seven shutouts, but those weren't the Hasek-style shutouts that featured 40-plus saves, many of them spectacular. Hasek's 2002 shutouts were mostly a reflection of the team in front of him, and Hasek would only have a few challenging saves each night.

Winning the Olympics is great, you'll never hear me question the validity of the Olympics. But nothing in hockey compares to the Stanley Cup playoffs. Outside of a rugby tournament (think of a sport as physical as football, but without the pads, and with several games a weekend instead of one game a week), the Stanley Cup playoffs is the most gruelling, intense competition in sports.

I suggest you take a closer look at those Montreal teams. They were significantly better than what Hasek had to work with in Buffalo.

Roy played on better teams his whole career and Hasek still won more Vezinas and Harts. Roy's accomplishments, although impressive, are fuelled by better teams. You cannot win a Smythe on a crappy team. That is a fact. Hasek propped up plenty of crappy teams.

Hasek is definitely the better goalie. Many just choose not to distill the records, stats and facts to find out what they really mean.

 

[19nazzy]

You cannot win a Smythe on a crappy team. That is a fact.

J.S. Giguere disagrees

 

[Claypool_*]

Yeah because the rest of the team sucks

Ottawa was not a contender with Lalime.

Detroit got eliminated in the first round the year before they got Hasek.

The fact that it took Buffalo upwards of 3 seasons to recover from losing Hasek while Colorado still won shows how importanted Hasek was to his team.

 

[19nazzy]

Ottawa was not a contender with Lalime.

Detroit got eliminated in the first round the year before they got Hasek.

Both teams added players

 

[Claypool_*]

Both teams added players

ok

 

[19nazzy]

ok

Well I mean, Detroit basically bought the 2002 cup (IMO) and Hasek was indeed a big part of it. But they added so many guys it was ridiculous.
And most people did consider Ottawa a contender. Lalime has amazing post season stats. But now they have a really developed Spezza and Heatly (although at the expense of Hossa). But Hasek isn't the reason this team is so good.

 

[Goldark]

It's very close

Out of 100 shots Dom saves 92 or 93 whereas Roy saves 91.

1 or 2 goals can be the difference

 

[Claypool_*]

Well I mean, Detroit basically bought the 2002 cup

They bought two players who nobody wanted (and most of the team gave up salary to bring in these players)

They don't win without Hasek. They don't even get past Vancouver.

 

[19nazzy]

They bought two players who nobody wanted (and most of the team gave up salary to bring in these players)

They don't win without Hasek. They don't even get past Vancouver.

Vancouver collapsed.

 

[arrbez]

And most people did consider Ottawa a contender. Lalime has amazing post season stats. But now they have a really developed Spezza and Heatly (although at the expense of Hossa). But Hasek isn't the reason this team is so good.

Lalime choked HUGE when the pressure was on last season. That Ottawa-Toronto series underlines exactly how important having dependable goaltending is in the playoffs. Ottawa were probably the better team, but Belfour rose to the challenge, and Lalime did not.

They would still be a good team if they kept Lalime (or with any goalie), but I'd be hard pressed to call them a true contender.

With that said, Hasek is not what he was 5 or 10 years ago, but as long as he's healthy, he's the solid goaltending that Ottawa needs to contend.

If this were a late-90's Dominik Hasek, they would just be ridiculous.

 

[19nazzy]

Lalime choked HUGE when the pressure was on last season. That Ottawa-Toronto series underlines exactly how important having dependable goaltending is in the playoffs. Ottawa were probably the better team, but Belfour rose to the challenge, and Lalime did not.

They would still be a good team if they kept Lalime (or with any goalie), but I'd be hard pressed to call them a true contender.

With that said, Hasek is not what he was 5 or 10 years ago, but as long as he's healthy, he's the solid goaltending that Ottawa needs to contend.

If this were a late-90's Dominik Hasek, they would just be ridiculous.

Don't get me wrong, Hasek obviously is an upgrade over Lalime, but Lalime was a pretty good goalie with the Sens.

 

[arrbez]

Don't get me wrong, Hasek obviously is an upgrade over Lalime, but Lalime was a pretty good goalie with the Sens.

I think Lalime was an average goalie behind a good defensive team. I really believe that an elite goaltender (and not necessarily Hasek-good or Roy-good) would have got them at least to the finals

 

[canucksfan]

It's very close but I'd take Roy.

 

[God Bless Canada]

Ottawa was not a contender with Lalime.

Detroit got eliminated in the first round the year before they got Hasek.

The fact that it took Buffalo upwards of 3 seasons to recover from losing Hasek while Colorado still won shows how importanted Hasek was to his team.

There were a lot of reasons Detroit lost to LA in 2001. Detroit won Game 1, lost Yzerman, won Game 2, lost Shanahan. Fedorov was generally ineffective the final four games. Also, Potvin played fantastic in that series (and in the following series against Colorado, nearly backstopped the Kings to a monumental upset, in what was likely the best hockey he played since the 1994 playoffs).

Hasek was, of course, a big addition. Anyone who denies Hasek's contributions is a fool. (I never denied them, just said others were more important). But there was more to Detroit's success than Hasek. Chris Chelios stepped up and played his best hockey since 1996. (Chelios finished second for the Norris, losing a close race to Lidstrom. Both were first-team all-stars). Hull gave them another weapon, and another Cup champion in the locker room. Yzerman, when he did play, was the on and off ice leader, and the team's MVP from the first two rounds of the playoffs.

(As for Luc Robitaille, another off-season addition, the less said about him in the 2002 playoffs, excluding Game 7 vs. Colorado, when everyone seemingly had multiple points, the better).

 

[God Bless Canada]

Lalime choked HUGE when the pressure was on last season. That Ottawa-Toronto series underlines exactly how important having dependable goaltending is in the playoffs. Ottawa were probably the better team, but Belfour rose to the challenge, and Lalime did not.

They would still be a good team if they kept Lalime (or with any goalie), but I'd be hard pressed to call them a true contender.

With that said, Hasek is not what he was 5 or 10 years ago, but as long as he's healthy, he's the solid goaltending that Ottawa needs to contend.

If this were a late-90's Dominik Hasek, they would just be ridiculous.

Ottawa wouldn't get a late-90s Hasek. No way Buffalo trades him within the conference.

Lalime built his own legacy in Ottawa. His performance in the 2004 playoffs, especially in Game 7, left a lot to be desired. He also had some rather dubious moments in 2001 and 2002. Lalime actually was excellent for the Sens in the 2003 playoffs, and is far from the biggest reason that the Sens lost to N.J. in 7 games that year.

Lalime is one of the best examples that good-very good (even excellent) regular seasons can be forgotten thanks to bad playoffs.