Roy or Hasek?

[CaptBrannigan]

This is a tough one, and I think I've finally settled on the Roy camp. Roy was just a hyper-competitor. If he could play, he would be out there giving it everything he had.

Hasek was a bit less so. Maybe it's because of his style or whatever, but he left teams out to dry in the playoffs before.

I find this part of the debate interesting, as Hasek is mentioned sometimes as leaving teams “out to dry”, but any instances of that are imo less egregious than quitting on a team mid-game (Habs), quitting on a team when not being named uncontested starter (Canada), and as a coach quitting on his team (Avs) late in the summer unexpectedly.

Operating under Space Jam, one game for the fate of the world type game I’d tap Hasek everytime.


Now to digress just a little, the main difference I see is Roy was a systematic, let the puck hit you player. Butterfly student of Allaire (perhaps the butterfly student) and spawned a huge following. That almost instantly led to oversized gear, a less athletic goalie, and for lack of a better term and general dumbing down of the position. Obviously some can do it better than others and understand the intricacies and add their own flair, but at its core the true butterfly goalies are not all that different. As a goaltender, it gives me a lot more appreciation for what and how Hasek did. When it comes down to choosing who I think is the best all time, that plays a huge role and makes a huge difference.

 

[The Macho King]

I find this part of the debate interesting, as Hasek is mentioned sometimes as leaving teams “out to dry”, but any instances of that are imo less egregious than quitting on a team mid-game (Habs), quitting on a team when not being named uncontested starter (Canada), and as a coach quitting on his team (Avs) late in the summer unexpectedly.

Operating under Space Jam, one game for the fate of the world type game I’d tap Hasek everytime.


Now to digress just a little, the main difference I see is Roy was a systematic, let the puck hit you player. Butterfly student of Allaire (perhaps the butterfly student) and spawned a huge following. That almost instantly led to oversized gear, a less athletic goalie, and for lack of a better term and general dumbing down of the position. Obviously some can do it better than others and understand the intricacies and add their own flair, but at its core the true butterfly goalies are not all that different. As a goaltender, it gives me a lot more appreciation for what and how Hasek did. When it comes down to choosing who I think is the best all time, that plays a huge role and makes a huge difference.

I mean the counter to that is - isn't it more impressive to spawn hundreds of imitators?

 

[CaptBrannigan]

I mean the counter to that is - isn't it more impressive to spawn hundreds of imitators?

That’s a credit to Allaire, not Roy though.

And to me, it’s not more impressive. Not when we’re talking about best of all time.

If I sample two cheesecakes, and they’re both the best thing I’ve ever eaten, and one chef says thanks I copied this old recipe exactly and the other says thanks I came up with this on my own, the latter is much more impressive.
Someone will come along who will be able to “copy the recipe” just as well again.

 

[buffalowing88]

Is Roy in the conversation as the best goalie ever? I don’t think so.
Hasek is arguably the best goalie ever.
This is not even close. Hasek 100/100 times over Roy.

What? Roy is in the conversation every single time it arises. I don't know who else is even in the conversation at this point. The consensus seems to now be Hasek vs. Roy. There's a strong second tier, but that's about it.

 

[JianYang]

I find this part of the debate interesting, as Hasek is mentioned sometimes as leaving teams “out to dry”, but any instances of that are imo less egregious than quitting on a team mid-game (Habs), quitting on a team when not being named uncontested starter (Canada), and as a coach quitting on his team (Avs) late in the summer unexpectedly.

Operating under Space Jam, one game for the fate of the world type game I’d tap Hasek everytime.


Now to digress just a little, the main difference I see is Roy was a systematic, let the puck hit you player. Butterfly student of Allaire (perhaps the butterfly student) and spawned a huge following. That almost instantly led to oversized gear, a less athletic goalie, and for lack of a better term and general dumbing down of the position. Obviously some can do it better than others and understand the intricacies and add their own flair, but at its core the true butterfly goalies are not all that different. As a goaltender, it gives me a lot more appreciation for what and how Hasek did. When it comes down to choosing who I think is the best all time, that plays a huge role and makes a huge difference.

Roy's career basically overlapped arguably some of the the most evolutionary times in nhl goaltending history. If you look at 80's Roy in appearance compared to 90s Roy, it was night and day.

Even in terms of playing style, they were quite different. 80's Roy was very aggressive. That Roy used to come out near the face off circles to cut angles, and that also required him to scramble a lot more to make athletic saves. Just look where Roy would position himself for a draw in his zone in the 80's. 90s Roy kept up with the equipment advancements, and leveraged that with a more economical butterfly style to a science.

Roy won 4 cups in 3 different decades, and each version of Roy was stylistically different. 86 Roy was one extreme, 93 was a bit more toned down, but I think the lasting perception of Roy's style was the one that won the 96, and 01 cups, but it wasn't always like that.

So I think his style actually did evolve alot over his career, and that's a credit to him, and his ability to adapt.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Now to digress just a little, the main difference I see is Roy was a systematic, let the puck hit you player. Butterfly student of Allaire (perhaps the butterfly student) and spawned a huge following. That almost instantly led to oversized gear, a less athletic goalie, and for lack of a better term and general dumbing down of the position.

It was more of a collaboration; Roy utilized a precursor to the butterfly in Granby.



I also reject the idea that butterfly goaltending is less athletic and a “dumbing down” of the position. Allaire specifically targeted taller players who were among the better skaters, as there needed to be continuous motion to not only stay square to the shooter prior to the execution of the long-existing save selection, but also to both advance and retreat to cut down on the available angle (rather than staying within the crease).

It also required enough leg strength to (with one foot) push the weight of the goaltender and his/her equipment from a downed position without surrendering coverage along the ice.

I don’t know what the opposite of “dumbing down” the goaltending position is, but the development and tweaking of the butterfly style (including catching glove elevation) was for 15 years or so exactly that. It’s taking a high-percentage save selection and infusing dynamic movement to mitigate the drawbacks of being on the ground.

 

[CaptBrannigan]

Roy's career basically overlapped arguably some of the the most evolutionary times in nhl goaltending history. If you look at 80's Roy in appearance compared to 90s Roy, it was night and day.

Even in terms of playing style, they were quite different. 80's Roy was very aggressive. That Roy used to come out near the face off circles to cut angles, and that also required him to scramble a lot more to make athletic saves. Just look where Roy would position himself for a draw in his zone in the 80's. 90s Roy kept up with the equipment advancements, and leveraged that with a more economical butterfly style to a science.

Roy won 4 cups in 3 different decades, and each version of Roy was stylistically different. 86 Roy was one extreme, 93 was a bit more toned down, but I think the lasting perception of Roy's style was the one that won the 96, and 01 cups, but it wasn't always like that.

So I think his style actually did evolve alot over his career, and that's a credit to him, and his ability to adapt.

It undoubtedly is. It's also what numerous others players with long careers have done. It also presents the question of which is better, being able to change to keep up or not having too since my tool/skillset/method works across the eras in question?

It's very interesting to debate, I absolutely love talking goaltending. I often wonder what we would need to see a goalie to in today's current age to even enter into the best of all-time debate.

 

[Fatass]

What? Roy is in the conversation every single time it arises. I don't know who else is even in the conversation at this point. The consensus seems to now be Hasek vs. Roy. There's a strong second tier, but that's about it.

For me Roy isn’t in my top five:
Hasek
Sawchuck
Brodeur
Broda
Bauer
Plant
Roy

 

[The Macho King]

It undoubtedly is. It's also what numerous others players with long careers have done. It also presents the question of which is better, being able to change to keep up or not having too since my tool/skillset/method works across the eras in question?

It's very interesting to debate, I absolutely love talking goaltending. I often wonder what we would need to see a goalie to in today's current age to even enter into the best of all-time debate.

With the exception of Hasek, most of the GOAT-eligible goaltenders had significant resumes at a young age (and we can argue about Hasek's Czech/international resume and how much weight that should have).

So of the current crop of goaltenders, Vasi has 3 top 3 Vezina finishes at 25 and one win. Helleybuck has his 2nd nom at 26 and is probably the best bet for the actual trophy. Are there any other young goaltenders with a resume to speak of?

 

[Hockey Outsider]

For me Roy isn’t in my top five:
Hasek
Sawchuck
Brodeur
Broda
Bauer
Plant
Roy

I can see the argument for Hasek and Plante over Roy, and maybe Sawchuk (even though I think he's fairly overrated). But what's the argument for ranking Brodeur, Broda or Bower over Roy?

 

[quoipourquoi]

What? Roy is in the conversation every single time it arises. I don't know who else is even in the conversation at this point. The consensus seems to now be Hasek vs. Roy. There's a strong second tier, but that's about it.

I think part of that is that because Roy and Hasek are pretty much contemporaries (even though they peaked at different ages), it makes for a natural (easier?) comparison, which perhaps wrongfully distances Plante and Sawchuk from the conversation. Not because of a flaw in Plante and Sawchuk’s resumes but rather because it’s just less obvious to talk about one of them when either Roy or Hasek comes up.

If one follows the media trail of best goaltender attributions, the same thing more or less happened to Durnan, where he was subtly pushed out of the conversation after the early-1970s. I had a sense that it was somewhat happening to Sawchuk on HOH, but if the recent top-100 project is any indicator, it is happening to Plante too.

 

[Fatass]

I can see the argument for Hasek and Plante over Roy, and maybe Sawchuk (even though I think he's fairly overrated). But what's the argument for ranking Brodeur, Broda or Bower over Roy?

Personal bias. Never liked Roy. I’d put another Hab (Ken
Dryden) ahead of Roy in Dryden.

 

[CaptBrannigan]

It was more of a collaboration; Roy utilized a precursor to the butterfly in Granby.



I also reject the idea that butterfly goaltending is less athletic and a “dumbing down” of the position. Allaire specifically targeted taller players who were among the better skaters, as there needed to be continuous motion to not only stay square to the shooter prior to the execution of the long-existing save selection, but also to both advance and retreat to cut down on the available angle (rather than staying within the crease).

It also required enough leg strength to (with one foot) push the weight of the goaltender and his/her equipment from a downed position without surrendering coverage along the ice.

I don’t know what the opposite of “dumbing down” the goaltending position is, but the development and tweaking of the butterfly style (including catching glove elevation) was for 15 years or so exactly that. It’s taking a high-percentage save selection and infusing dynamic movement to mitigate the drawbacks of being on the ground.

Interesting. As I have no way to prove the following (except for a few pictures which would give away my identity on the internet and don't really care for that), so hopefully you'll trust that I have no reason to lie.

My rationale for "dumbing down" (yes maybe better phrasing can be used, maybe "standardizing"?) is based on my own experience. I am fortunate to have over the years been part of numerous NHL practices, normally during the late summer when the players that don't live here have returned but not two goalies yet. I also participate in the invite skate that the retired guys in the area who stayed host. Make no mistake, this is 90% because of knowing them and being reliable to show up, not because I'm a stupendous stopper.
Anyway, this experience has granted me the perspective that it is much much much much easier to make a save on an NHL shot when you use the KISS method. Everything you mentioned in your post, angles, big, square, movement without opening up, etc. is all paramount to being successful. This can all be taught. It is (imo) the most efficient way to do the job of not allowing the puck to enter the net behind you.
That's what makes Hasek so impressive to me, he is at the very top of the game and did not utilize the easiest methods to get there. Making him play a more traditional style would be taking away from what he already brings and this sets him apart when discussing the best of all-time. Because really it's close but when I factor in this it can't help but tip the scales for me. So that's a little more detail on why I think the way I do about it.

 

[quoipourquoi]

It undoubtedly is. It's also what numerous others players with long careers have done. It also presents the question of which is better, being able to change to keep up or not having too since my tool/skillset/method works across the eras in question?

Is there a goaltender this would necessarily apply to? Johnny Bower?

 

[CaptBrannigan]

With the exception of Hasek, most of the GOAT-eligible goaltenders had significant resumes at a young age (and we can argue about Hasek's Czech/international resume and how much weight that should have).

So of the current crop of goaltenders, Vasi has 3 top 3 Vezina finishes at 25 and one win. Helleybuck has his 2nd nom at 26 and is probably the best bet for the actual trophy. Are there any other young goaltenders with a resume to speak of?

I mean more in terms of how they play and their style or method. My post previous to this may clear it up a little more.

For looking at numbers and resumes and trophies it's so hard to compare to almost any time before now as the league has so much parity and individual teams can be so up and down year to year.

I watch a lot of Vasilevskiy because I live in Tampa, but I can't imagine the things those hips do being something that's super long term sustainable. Guy is a physical freak, even when compared to NHL goalie peers, but that can't last forever.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I can see the argument for Hasek and Plante over Roy, and maybe Sawchuk (even though I think he's fairly overrated). But what's the argument for ranking Brodeur, Broda or Bower over Roy?

There's an argument for Brodeur over Roy. Centers around longevity as a top player. I don't buy it, you don't buy it, most of HOH doesn't buy it, but at least it's there.

Broda and especially Bower though... really have nothing.

 

[CaptBrannigan]

Is there a goaltender this would necessarily apply to? Johnny Bower?

I would say it applies pretty well to Hasek. I don't think differences in his game are as notable as a lot of others, particularly when it's considered that the styles of play he was up against in coming from Europe to NA were more varied than Roy.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

There's an argument for Brodeur over Roy. Centers around longevity as a top player. I don't buy it, you don't buy it, most of HOH doesn't buy it, but at least it's there.

Broda and especially Bower though... really have nothing.

Fair point. Thinking about it again, I'd put Brodeur in the same category as Sawchuk - he has an argument over Roy, but it's not a very strong one (but it's not completely unsupportable either, like Broda or Bower).

 

[quoipourquoi]

Interesting. As I have no way to prove the following (except for a few pictures which would give away my identity on the internet and don't really care for that), so hopefully you'll trust that I have no reason to lie.

My rationale for "dumbing down" (yes maybe better phrasing can be used, maybe "standardizing"?) is based on my own experience. I am fortunate to have over the years been part of numerous NHL practices, normally during the late summer when the players that don't live here have returned but not two goalies yet. I also participate in the invite skate that the retired guys in the area who stayed host. Make no mistake, this is 90% because of knowing them and being reliable to show up, not because I'm a stupendous stopper.
Anyway, this experience has granted me the perspective that it is much much much much easier to make a save on an NHL shot when you use the KISS method. Everything you mentioned in your post, angles, big, square, movement without opening up, etc. is all paramount to being successful. This can all be taught. It is (imo) the most efficient way to do the job of not allowing the puck to enter the net behind you.
That's what makes Hasek so impressive to me, he is at the very top of the game and did not utilize the easiest methods to get there. Making him play a more traditional style would be taking away from what he already brings and this sets him apart when discussing the best of all-time. Because really it's close but when I factor in this it can't help but tip the scales for me. So that's a little more detail on why I think the way I do about it.

I’d say standardization is a fair word - though I would also say one cannot teach being tall, so there are still some physical elements in there beyond the mould used to factory-produce butterfly goaltenders.

The biggest element that separates Roy from subsequent butterfly goaltenders is, of course, mentally; Patrick Roy has photographic memory. So even if one were to take a 6’1” goaltender and train him/her on the most updated version of butterfly goaltending, without a photographic memory, the style itself doesn’t generate the additional readings on attack patterns - particularly in a playoff environment.

So in a way, attackers adjust to a standardized butterfly technique over the course of a 7-game series, whereas Patrick Roy’s anticipation would get better as he adjusted to what he saw from the opponent.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I would say it applies pretty well to Hasek. I don't think differences in his game are as notable as a lot of others, particularly when it's considered that the styles of play he was up against in coming from Europe to NA were more varied than Roy.

By Hasek’s own admission, he made adjustments during his injury in the 1992-93 season. This was probably most noticeable in his catcher and his preemptive movement. What benefitted him (just as it benefitted Roy) was having a coach who accentuated his game rather than try to modify it completely. They certainly broke the mould after Hasek though - unless someone knows how to create double-joints?

If one were to look at the HOF 1965 goaltenders, all three were fortunate to eventually land exactly where they needed to be.

I mention Bower because (forgive me if I’m wrong), he was visually more consistent from start to finish without necessarily looking too far out-of-date to modern eyes. More than that, Roy and Hasek were beneficiaries (though not wholly or even majorly dependent) of lighter equipment during the course of their careers, which allowed for greater energy-efficiency.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

I mean the counter to that is - isn't it more impressive to spawn hundreds of imitators?

No, it's more impressive to be so naturally talented that no other player can replicate your style and results

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

The biggest element that separates Roy from subsequent butterfly goaltenders is, of course, mentally; Patrick Roy has photographic memory. So even if one were to take a 6’1” goaltender and train him/her on the most updated version of butterfly goaltending, without a photographic memory, the style itself doesn’t generate the additional readings on attack patterns - particularly in a playoff environment.

does roy literally have a photographic memory or is this just a figure of speech?

 

[Perennial]

I mean the counter to that is - isn't it more impressive to spawn hundreds of imitators?

And the counter argument is - isn't more impressive to dominate with a style that nobody can imitate?

 

[buffalowing88]

For me Roy isn’t in my top five:
Hasek
Sawchuck
Brodeur
Broda
Bauer
Plant
Roy

Bauer?

 

[buffalowing88]

I think part of that is that because Roy and Hasek are pretty much contemporaries (even though they peaked at different ages), it makes for a natural (easier?) comparison, which perhaps wrongfully distances Plante and Sawchuk from the conversation. Not because of a flaw in Plante and Sawchuk’s resumes but rather because it’s just less obvious to talk about one of them when either Roy or Hasek comes up.

If one follows the media trail of best goaltender attributions, the same thing more or less happened to Durnan, where he was subtly pushed out of the conversation after the early-1970s. I had a sense that it was somewhat happening to Sawchuk on HOH, but if the recent top-100 project is any indicator, it is happening to Plante too.

Love the feedback. Love that you offered up an idea of the bigger thing happening with goalies getting transitioned out. I spent tonight, over a beer or two and some wings, reading up on Sawchuk and Plante just to remember where they stood. I would love to hear an argument for Sawchuk at # 3. He's currently behind Plante in my book, but I probably let those Boston years detract from him a bit too much.