Yeah, when the sample size is too scarce, it can be misleading.
But "too much varience" sounds uh... weird because "too much variance" can be argued literally always as no team is like another and the same applies for the games.
I don't see that much varience there since Hasek was, uh, invariably beating Roy, however scarce the sample is.
Irrelevant -- just no. As I said, you can choose to ignore it and even justify ignoring it -- but it looks like putting one's head in the sand.
H2H matters in a sport like tennis, not hockey
H2H is such a small portion of their careers though, only a few % of their NHL games.
Roy 1276 career NHL games RS and PO, only 49 games vs Brodeur and Hasek.
Hasek 854 career NHL games RS and PO, only 50 games vs Brodeur and Roy.
Brodeur 1471 career NHL games RS and PO, only 51 games vs Hasek and Roy.
They each faced each other once in the playoffs, with all 3 series going 7 games. Brodeur beat Hasek, Roy beat Brodeur, and Hasek beat Roy.
But Ron Tugnutt was never considered Hasek's main rival / equal, right?
A late bloomer?
He was a teenage star in Europe and an accomplished international superstar with a crazy resume coming to the states.
He probably just knew that he was the best goalie in the world and that this part of the world simply needed a couple of years to catch up, that's all.
I really enjoyed watching Hasek and Roy take shots on one another. Head to head stats do not matter when there are 12 people on the ice.
That is, individual players matter in sports like tennis, not hockey.
But we're comparing individual players here.
But a game of hockey isn't one goalie against another
It's a team against another
I think his chief rival (the insecurities about continuing a season despite getting cleared by team doctors) has a better head-to-head record against Hasek than anyone does over Patrick Roy. Maybe Philadelphia, but it's probably close.
It's not like North America didn't see him in three best-on-best tournaments prior to him getting a starting job. I totally buy the argument that he could have been an NHL starter prior to 1992-93, but if he's the best goaltender in the world, you'd expect that with as many small-sample high-statistical-fluctuation tournaments he played in, he'd drop a Nagano or two or three on the world.
1984 Canada Cup
Myshkin: .940
Barrasso: .888
Peeters: .874
Hasek: .867
1986 WC
Belosheikin: .915
Hasek: .901
1987 WC
Belosheikin: .923
Hasek: .923
Burke: .895
1987 Canada Cup
Vanbiesbrouck: .922
Hasek: .894
Mylnikov: .894
Fuhr: .893
1988 Olympics
Myllys: .928
Moog: .900
Burke: .893
Richter: .842
Hasek: .835
1989 WC
Mylnikov: .922
Burke: .918
Hasek: .915
1990 WC
Irbe: .950
Casey: .914
Hasek: .904
1991 Canada Cup
Ranford: .939
Richter: .904
Hasek: .871
Good goaltender prior to 1994 - at times, very good - but not the best goaltender.
But a game of hockey isn't one goalie against another
It's a team against another
Yep. So why compare goalies, centers, wings, forwards and defensemen. It's always the team.
Ah, because I don't say Gretzky > Lemieux because Gretzky was more productive in the head to head matchups
I say that because Gretzky dominated his peers as a collective to a greater extent which is how I do my historical rankings.
So how and when did Hasek become the best goalie in the world? Which bench was it? Or did it happen in Indianapolis?
At what age? 30?
Okay. Barely a starter till 30, a sudden and miraculous five-time Vezina winner from there. Makes much more sense than having even some not-so-good tournaments during the 80s and then getting choked in the NHL because of his style.
(Yeah, irony, because I saw this before.)
Tim Thomas won the first of two Vezinas at 34. Martin Brodeur won the first of four at 30. Jacques Plante is slightly older than Terry Sawchuk, but it doesn't mean Terry Sawchuk can't reach his best earlier than Jacques Plante reaches his.
If you're legitimately the best goaltender in the world at a time when Patrick Roy and Kirk McLean are top-4 in Hart Voting and the only thing standing in your way is Jimmy Waite and an unsigned Ed Belfour, how do you end up in Indianapolis in the first place?
Are there people who argue that Hasek was legitimately the best in the world in 1991? Seems like an attempt to extend his peak retroactively into the past.
I think you could make the argument that Hasek wasn't given a fair chance in Chicago because of his strange style (he had an 0.897 sv% over 13 games, so it's not like he was poor or even mediocre when he got a chance to play). But claiming he was secretly the best in the world or something at that time seems bizarre
H2H comparisons are worse than worthless because usually they're only being made as the case for/against someone; essentially they're only brought up in the first place if the aim is to mislead.
Are there people who argue that Hasek was legitimately the best in the world in 1991? Seems like an attempt to extend his peak retroactively into the past.
I think you could make the argument that Hasek wasn't given a fair chance in Chicago because of his strange style (he had an 0.897 sv% over 13 games, so it's not like he was poor or even mediocre when he got a chance to play). But claiming he was secretly the best in the world or something at that time seems bizarre
Head-to-head goaltending matchups are more meaningless than simply meaningless.
The only way I could disagree with this more is if you said that hockey is measured by statistics or the moon is made of cheese. I can't begin to tell you, how much I disagree with you.
50 H2H games is A HUGE sample size. The fact that no Roy (I get it, he is a Canadian icon) fan acknowledges his losses to Hasek when they went face to face doesn't change the fact that he did lose to Hasek.
Sure, hockey is a team game. It's beyond me, why goaltenders have "WINS" by their name on any stats site.
Oh, and Roy didn't just "lose" to Hasek in 98 and 02. He lost in such ways that will be FOREVER remembered by ANYONE who was alive in those years.
Tim Thomas won the first of two Vezinas at 34. Martin Brodeur won the first of four at 30. Jacques Plante is slightly older than Terry Sawchuk, but it doesn't mean Terry Sawchuk can't reach his best earlier than Jacques Plante reaches his.
If you're legitimately the best goaltender in the world at a time when Patrick Roy and Kirk McLean are top-4 in Hart Voting and the only thing standing in your way is Jimmy Waite and an unsigned Ed Belfour, how do you end up in Indianapolis in the first place?
Hasek went from a back up to a best goaltender in the world, virtually overnight, at the age of thirty.
Trying to give another example of something like this, you naturally failed.
Does Martin Brodeur really remind you of Hasek's career arc as to bring him up as an argument in this context? Did he go from a back up to a sudden Vezina winner?
Thomas would probably be closer, but not quite there, either. And hey, he was unorthodox too. Not sure whether you realize Thomas actually sorta underlines the Hasek rule I'm trying to wrap your brain around.
As for the bolded part, that's not really an argument against Hasek, is it. That's more of a proof how totally wrong people were about him from the start. The big difference between the man responsible for Hasek's stint in the AHL and you is that he would probably admit having been wrong by now.
Btw, that man had to start learning Chinese to get a gig these days. I wonder if you'll learn, too.
Ignoring Hasek's Czech or International background and performance has a certain convenience. Internationally he was on a roller coaster, posted upthread. He was 26 when he came over to North America. So effectively four years to rise thru the ranks in NA including the IHL not the higher AHL..
In this context his performance is no different than George Hainsworth, Bill Durnan, Jacques Plante, Johnny Bower, Frank Brimsek, lesser degree Ed Giacomin, and a few others.
Martin Brodeur, initially thru midget and junior, then The AHL he was underplayed, sharing the workload with a slight majority of games. Jacques Lemaire saw that he had a workhorse, franchise cornerstone. Quite similar to Hasek in the Czech league where he was basically a one goalie system.