Martin Brodeur....Overrated?

[puckhead103*]

Everyone knows that he will break Sawchuk's shutout record.

I think hes good; I don't think he's the "best ever" though.

I'm wondering if he had the same success if this was the "defense be damned" 80s.

He wouldn't get all those shutouts i'll bet...

And another thing, I got Dupris Sawchuk book and in the back of the book show every game Sawchuk had a shutout.

I would like to do is to find the shots on goal for each game Sawchuk had a shutout.

I know the newspapers from the early 50s' did not carry that stat on shots on goal.

New York Times started to carry shots on goal stat probably late 50s? early 60s?

Click to read more...

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

he's a little overrated, but every all time great about to break or having recently broken an important record gets overrated at the time. in the end, brodeur isn't and likely won't become the greatest goalie of all time. his stats and the era he earned them in make him look a little better than he really was, but it's nothing to cry over. i mean, gretzky's numbers, amazing as they were, also make him a little overrated too (overrated in that many think he's uncontestably the best player of all time, when there's a good argument for him being second).

 

[seventieslord]

Overrated by most people? Yes. Overrated by the HOH section? No. We have a pretty good grip on how good he really is.

As for Stats like career shutouts and wins, they are quite meaningless. Obviously he would be less likely to post shutouts in the 80's and might only have 40 of them fifteen years into his career. However, during that same time, the next highest mark by any other goalie may be something like 30. He wouldn't post as many wins because of the shorter schedule, lack of shootouts and 4 on 4, and the fact that starting goalies in the 80's played just 45 games, but considering he is a great goalie he'd have probably won more games than his contemporaries.

See, over here we're not that obsessed with career totals like most people are. We're more concerned with how a player dominated his peers. And Brodeur dominated all his peers except Hasek and Roy.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

A pre-emptive note (and not directed at anyone who's posted thus far) that the standards of discourse are going to be higher in this thread than they are in the main board threads (as they usually are in the History subforum).

 

[Dark Shadows]

A pre-emptive note (and not directed at anyone who's posted thus far) that the standards of discourse are going to be higher in this thread than they are in the main board threads (as they usually are in the History subforum).

That's the reason this section is better than the rest of the boards

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

In January 2002, the hockey digest listed the 10 most unbreakable non-Gretzky records in hockey. This is what they said about Sawchuk's shutouts record:

MOST SHUTOUTS, CAREER: TERRY SAWCHUK, 103

Patrick Roy became the NHL's all-time winningest goalie when he surpassed Sawchuk's mark of 447 wins in October 2000. But Sawchuk's shutout record, amassed over 21 seasons playing for Detroit, Boston, Toronto, Los Angeles, and the Rangers is safer than the remote control in your dad's hand on Super Bowl Sunday. Sawchuk played in an era when teams employed a more conservative style, which meant fewer Scoring chances for the opposition and better stats for goalies. Entering the 2001-02 season, Ed Belfour led all active goalies with 57 shutouts.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCM/is_3_30/ai_80678769

I think people here DO underrate just how impressive the all-time shutouts record is.

 

[greatgazoo]

Sawchuk and Brodeur have one thing in common...they both played in low scoring eras.

How many more shutouts would Roy have if he hadn't played in the high scoring 80s and early 90's for much of his career?

 

[finchster]

Brodeur was the best goaltender after Hasek’s 6th Vezina in 2000-2001, but I think his competition was much weaker than Roy’s or Hasek’s even though he played in one of the lowest scoring eras. During the time of Roy, Belfour, and Hasek Brodeur was just an after thought

Some of the goaltenders that were voted on the NHL all star selections during Brodeur time on top are; Marty Turco, Roberto Luongo, Miikka Kiprusoff, and Evgeni Nabokov. None of those goaltenders have won anything or won any Stanley cups (yet). In my opinion this is a time of a bunch of good goaltenders but few great goaltenders and Marty was the best out of an ok group.

That's my opinion but I could be wrong

 

[seventieslord]

That's not wrong to say, necessarily. just because Brodeur is better than a bunch of OK goalies doesn't mean he's not great. It just means the goalies he was better than, weren't that great.

 

[VanIslander]

Hasek would've been too bored to, but most goalies would love to have played for the defensively-minded New Jersey Devils

Brodeur is fortunate to be in the right place at the right time: a solid NHL regular and occasional game star raised to superstar status because of the organization he's in.

The two Devils netminders who carried the load while Brodeur was injured this season looked like stars playing behind the team.

Brodeur is very good and consistent but he's nowhere near Roy and Hasek level of ability (more of a Mike Vernon level), but career stats will ensure that generations will think he is upper echelon in an all-time context.

 

[seventieslord]

I'm hard on Brodeur, but when I read things like this it really gets me wondering how good he is. I have him 7th all-time right now; am I too generous? Sometimes I think so.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Overrated by most people? Yes. Overrated by the HOH section? No. We have a pretty good grip on how good he really is.

As for Stats like career shutouts and wins, they are quite meaningless. Obviously he would be less likely to post shutouts in the 80's and might only have 40 of them fifteen years into his career. However, during that same time, the next highest mark by any other goalie may be something like 30. He wouldn't post as many wins because of the shorter schedule, lack of shootouts and 4 on 4, and the fact that starting goalies in the 80's played just 45 games, but considering he is a great goalie he'd have probably won more games than his contemporaries.

See, over here we're not that obsessed with career totals like most people are. We're more concerned with how a player dominated his peers. And Brodeur dominated all his peers except Hasek and Roy.

Interestingly enough, I think I remember something from when Roy and Brodeur faced off in the 2001 SCF, and going into game 1 (I think) they mentioned that Brodeur actually had a winning record against Roy (at the time). I think he may have ended that series with the winning record intact, but wow. Roy certainly put on a show that year. I will always set the difference between those two by that series; no matter what records Brodeur sets by playing for a billion years.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

In January 2002, the hockey digest listed the 10 most unbreakable non-Gretzky records in hockey. This is what they said about Sawchuk's shutouts record:





http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCM/is_3_30/ai_80678769

I think people here DO underrate just how impressive the all-time shutouts record is.

growing up watching hockey in the late 80s and early 90s, there were only two records i thought i'd never see fall in my lifetime. they were glenn hall's consecutive games streak and sawchuk's shutouts record. mario scored 199 and brett hull scored 86, so even gretzky's records seemed breakable. but the shutouts thing i could just never imagine; the game had changed too much from the days of sawchuk, plante, and hall. no goalie whose career started after '75 seemed to have a chance. i think it's a combination of the game unforeseeably changing in the late 90s and brodeur's greatness (plus him spending his entire career on teams that played to his strengths), but certainly it's hard to discount brodeur's greatness in the equation.

 

[Central Jersey Devil]

Hasek would've been too bored to, but most goalies would love to have played for the defensively-minded New Jersey Devils

Brodeur is fortunate to be in the right place at the right time: a solid NHL regular and occasional game star raised to superstar status because of the organization he's in.

The two Devils netminders who carried the load while Brodeur was injured this season looked like stars playing behind the team.

Brodeur is very good and consistent but he's nowhere near Roy and Hasek level of ability (more of a Mike Vernon level), but career stats will ensure that generations will think he is upper echelon in an all-time context.

I think Brodeur and Roy were about the same level and Hasek was a little better than both. However Roy always had the luxury of playing on cream of the crop teams, while Brodeur literally STOLE Stanley Cups that mediocre Devils teams had no business of winning (and this is coming from an obvious Devils fan).

But to say Brodeur was at a "Mike Vernon level"? Wow...just, wow!

 

[arrbez]

I think Brodeur and Roy were about the same level and Hasek was a little better than both. However Roy always had the luxury of playing on cream of the crop teams, while Brodeur literally STOLE Stanley Cups that mediocre Devils teams had no business of winning (and this is coming from an obvious Devils fan).

I think they both had their turns winning on stellar teams, as well as lesser ones. 1995 was a pretty iffy team, looking back on it. But in 2000 and 2003 those Devils teams were excellent from top to bottom. I think they were the highest scoring team in the league from 1999-2001, and we all know about their defense.

 

[Central Jersey Devil]

I think they both had their turns winning on stellar teams, as well as lesser ones. 1995 was a pretty iffy team, looking back on it. But in 2000 and 2003 those Devils teams were excellent from top to bottom.

You know, the 1995 team was my fav too, interesting. I honestly don't know where the Devs would be if not for Marty. There would be no Prudential Center that's for damn sure.

 

[NOTENOUGHJTCGOALS]

I think Brodeur and Roy were about the same level and Hasek was a little better than both. However Roy always had the luxury of playing on cream of the crop teams, while Brodeur literally STOLE Stanley Cups that mediocre Devils teams had no business of winning (and this is coming from an obvious Devils fan).

But to say Brodeur was at a "Mike Vernon level"? Wow...just, wow!

Brodeur literally stole the 2001 cup from his teammates and handed it to Roy. Is that what you mean?

I think Brodeur is easily overrated by people that just look purely at numbers and rarely if ever watch a game of hockey. But pretty much anyone that watched the three play and isnt a raging Devils homer will tell you Hasek and Roy were a clearly step above.

Brodeur is a clear cut hall of famer and a top 5 goalie of all time, he just happened to play in the shadow of two greater goalies. I see no shame in that. Just like there's no shame Gretzky's scoring overshadowed many other great players.

 

[JimEIV]

And Brodeur dominated all his peers except Hasek and Roy.

During the years Roy and Brodeur's career coinsided, Roy finished ahead of Brodeur in Vezina voting TWICE - And once was Brodeur's Rookie year.

 

[Strong Island]

I think Brodeur and Roy were about the same level and Hasek was a little better than both. However Roy always had the luxury of playing on cream of the crop teams, while Brodeur literally STOLE Stanley Cups that mediocre Devils teams had no business of winning (and this is coming from an obvious Devils fan).

But to say Brodeur was at a "Mike Vernon level"? Wow...just, wow!

Mediocre Devils teams? That's just silly.

I am of the opinion that Brodeur is simultaneously overrated and underrated by two different groups of people.

-He is overrated by the group that looks solely at big numbers and career accomplishments. These are the same types of people who look at Hank Aaron's stats and proclaim him better than lets say Mickey Mantle.

-I feel that he is actually underrated by the community here in the HOH forum. I have deep respect for the work that many of you do here (you all understand the history of hockey far more than I do). With that being said, some of the historical viewpoints I have seen here are a bit unfair to Brodeur. I feel as though Brodeur has been unfairly penalized for having a "hall of fame defense" and playing behind a "spectacular defensive system" for most of his career. Yet I recognize that these two facts are undisputably true. However, I feel as though this should not lessen the greatness of Brodeur the goalie. Why? I think that instead of viewing Brodeur as being helped along by the system and his defensemen, we should view Brodeur as part of that system and part of that defense corps. Furthermore, the undeniable effectiveness of the Devils past "system" and the hall of fame defensemen who played for the Devils made it much more difficult for Brodeur to have as great an impact on the game as he COULD have during what should have been some his "prime" years. I'm talking about 1998-1999 to 2001-2002. During those seasons, the Devils were so dominant, they did not allow Brodeur to shine to the point that he could have. His sv% through those years were constantly mediocre, yet watching the man play for all those years, he played quite well and the team won... a lot. He had many nights when he was playing a garbage team, faced 15-20 shots, but gave up 2-3 goals in a rout... as the Devils just dominated the other team. He didn't need to stand on his head like many other goalies did... not only that, but he COULD NOT have impacted his team much more positively if he DID stand on his head during those years. If Brodeur had posted .920 sv%'s during those years would his teams have gone from 105 pt teams to 120 pt teams? I don't think so. Anyway, to wrap this thing up, I feel as though after the lockout, Brodeur has proven that he can put in an elite performance without elite defensemen in front of him. This shows me that he is the same goalie that he was when he was putting up .906 sv%'s with an elite defense, but now he is "allowed" to impact the game more.

 

[Ace36758]

I think they both had their turns winning on stellar teams, as well as lesser ones. 1995 was a pretty iffy team, looking back on it. But in 2000 and 2003 those Devils teams were excellent from top to bottom. I think they were the highest scoring team in the league from 1999-2001, and we all know about their defense.

An iffy regular season team maybe.. but in the playoffs, absolutely not. That 1995 devils team just poured it on in the playoffs. I think they outshot the other team in almost every game, and went something like 10-2 on the road. It was a total team effort, so I wouldn't go so far as to say Brodeur "stole" them that cup. He contributed, sure, but stealing is an overstatement.

 

[Whiplash27]

Beyond the fact that I despise him, I'd say to the people who say that he's the best ever, he's definitely overrated. Brodeur is probably one of the top 5 ever, but to say he's the best is ludicrous. He played in one of the most defensive eras in the history of the game. He also played behind a team that never left him out to dry on a regular basis. I'm not saying he's not great and yes, I do respect everything he's done, but to say he's the best ever is nuts to me.

Devils fans always point to how offensive their teams were for their 2nd & 3rd cups, yes, they were offensive. They were a trap and transition team and were damn good at both. You pounce on turnovers in the neutral zone, go the other way and score. That's the whole point of the trap. That's why they scored so many goals while having such a tight defensive team. Not to put down their accomplishments, but it is what it is.

Had he not played behind that system, would the Devils have won 3 cups? IDK, maybe, maybe not. I doubt they would have won their first. Would Brodeur have been as great, who knows? Would he have still been one of the top 10 ever? Probably.

However, after what I pointed out, that's why I can't see him as #1 or #2. Devils hatred aside.

 

[seventieslord]

During the years Roy and Brodeur's career coinsided, Roy finished ahead of Brodeur in Vezina voting TWICE - And once was Brodeur's Rookie year.

..................and?

 

[JimEIV]

..................and?

I think that is pretty significant that GM's felt Roy was better only 2 times in the 11 years they played together.

Brodeur finishes ahead of Roy 9 of 11 seasons in Vezina voting and it that does mean anything to you? And the first time it happened Brodeur was a Rookie, so the only real time was 2001

 

[Laterade]

I would say that he's the best right now, but not all time.
how many wins left until he passes Roy?

 

[seventieslord]

I think that is pretty significant that GM's felt Roy was better only 2 times in the 11 years they played together.

Brodeur finishes ahead of Roy 9 of 11 seasons in Vezina voting and it that does mean anything to you? And the first time it happened Brodeur was a Rookie

I'm not really concerned with what happened when Roy was in his 30's and when Brodeur was in his 20's, especially Vezina voting. I'm more concerned with what the sv% numbers from the regular season and playoffs tell me, what my eyes told me throughout their careers, and the impact I watched them both have on their teams' Stanley Cup victories.

If you're attempting to argue that Brodeur is better than Roy, that's a non-starter right there. This has been gone over time and again, and there is no real argument in Brodeur's favour. But knock yourself out.