Top 5 guy every year. Theodore, Miller, Thomas, Brodeur, Quick, Rask, Price. They just come and go Hank has consistently been at that level. He's the only one since 2005 who has consistently been at the top.
The Legend of Lundqvist
- Thread starter Michel Beauchamp
- Start date
Top 5 guy every year. Theodore, Miller, Thomas, Brodeur, Quick, Rask, Price. They just come and go Hank has consistently been at that level. He's the only one since 2005 who has consistently been at the top.
Eric Sachs
Registered User
- Jan 31, 2007
- 18,643
- 1
Lundqvist is a great goalie, but his playoff performances are getting to be quite overrated.
re: Quick v Lundqvist
Regular season? Lundqvist. One of the most consistently good goalies there is over an 82 game season. With the exception of 2011-2012 Quick has been inconsistent in the regular season.
Playoffs? Quick. When it counts he's on a whole different level. In the playoffs theres nobody I'd rather have in net.
re: Quick v Lundqvist
Regular season? Lundqvist. One of the most consistently good goalies there is over an 82 game season. With the exception of 2011-2012 Quick has been inconsistent in the regular season.
Playoffs? Quick. When it counts he's on a whole different level. In the playoffs theres nobody I'd rather have in net.
Eric Sachs
Registered User
- Jan 31, 2007
- 18,643
- 1
Was pretty damn good until about 2011?
after which, I dunno.. he was 39? not really sure he did anything but go
calling easily the most consistent goalie in NHL history as 'coming and going' in any sense is kind of absurd.. guy was rock solid from day 1 until literally the tail end of his career
Quick
All Games|76|45|31|0.923|0.913|+0.30
Can Eliminate|18|10|8|0.923|0.913|+0.27
Can be Eliminated|12|9|3|0.937|0.913|+0.70
Mutual Elimination|4|4|0|0.940|0.912|+0.85
Lundqvist
All Games|92|43|48|0.926|0.909|+0.49
Can Eliminate|14|8|5|0.912|0.909|+0.08
Can be Eliminated|20|12|8|0.958|0.910|+1.44
Mutual Elimination|6|5|1|0.965|0.908|+1.71
Eric Sachs
Registered User
- Jan 31, 2007
- 18,643
- 1
I mean I would take Lundqvist over Quick in both scenarios..
but to me, the difference is that Quick's 'ceiling' is just higher than Lundqvists. Hank is all about consistency. He will always keep you in it.
Quick lacks that consistency but god damn when he is on his game, you just aren't winning. Lundqvist has that too.. but not as much as Quick IMO. That's what separates the two in the playoffs.. though I still take the more consistent goalie unless my team is built like the Kings/Hawks.
Eric Sachs
Registered User
- Jan 31, 2007
- 18,643
- 1
Elimination games are the stupidest stat ever.
You can only lose one elimination game in a year. This means that the stat largely favors teams who fall behind in series and have to battle their way back.. yet it doesn't actually take into account the falling behind in the series part.
Flip that around and look at the 'can eliminate' part. Quick has killer instinct Lundqvist (or at least the Rangers) lack.
Eric Sachs
Registered User
- Jan 31, 2007
- 18,643
- 1
Commonly putting up .920 sv% seasons are way more of a recent phenomenon.
Absolutely an argument to be made between Brodeur, Luongo and Lundqvist for best goalie of 2005-2011. Extend that to now.. and sure, Lundqvist.
Samuel Culper III
Mr. Woodhull...
Lundqvist has the better and more consistent stats in the playoffs and regular season. Quick had one absolutely stellar playoff year.
The quote said Quick was better "when it counts" look at the sv% and GAA. Ignore the W/L. Hank is on another level in those games.
Eric Sachs
Registered User
- Jan 31, 2007
- 18,643
- 1
and I'm saying stratifying games by elimination potential is a stupid way to look at things.
Lundqvist has more games 'when it counts' by that criteria because his teams fall behind in series in the first two rounds against weaker teams than those he would face in later rounds.
I think Lundqvist is the better and more consistent goalie (though as I said, I don't think his top game matches Quick's).. but your stats don't prove that to me. They're flawed.
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
Lundqvist = Luongo. For a period of time in their careers, they're considered to be the best or among the best goaltenders in the world, but they're also Cupless and were ultimately outperformed by their counterparts in the playoffs.
And to address the other discussion comparing Lundqvist to Hasek, no, he's no Hasek. Hasek did more with less and was the best player in the league for a couple of years.
Lundqvist is certainly one of the top 3-5 goalies in the league though, and that group is usually in a rotation between himself, Quick, Price, Rinne and Rask. Same applies with any other position too, there's no constant as to who is the best as it rotates between Ovechkin, Crosby, Malkin and Stamkos or with Karlsson, Keith, Subban, Doughty and Weber for dmen. So long as they're consistently performing in that upper echelon, they're among the best.
From year to year you can make a case for who the best is in their respective positions, but can anyone definitively say there's been a single player who has been the clear cut best at his position year after year? Nope.
And to address the other discussion comparing Lundqvist to Hasek, no, he's no Hasek. Hasek did more with less and was the best player in the league for a couple of years.
Lundqvist is certainly one of the top 3-5 goalies in the league though, and that group is usually in a rotation between himself, Quick, Price, Rinne and Rask. Same applies with any other position too, there's no constant as to who is the best as it rotates between Ovechkin, Crosby, Malkin and Stamkos or with Karlsson, Keith, Subban, Doughty and Weber for dmen. So long as they're consistently performing in that upper echelon, they're among the best.
From year to year you can make a case for who the best is in their respective positions, but can anyone definitively say there's been a single player who has been the clear cut best at his position year after year? Nope.
To your first point thats fair, I really don't think there is a wrong answer to that question (in the playoffs that is).
Very well said. Quick's playoff ceiling, as you put it, is probably higher than any other current goalie. Thats why I'd take him. While yes he isn't as consistent as Lundqvist, in the playoffs he doesn't have those truly awful moments he can have in the regular season. Even if he's not quite on his game he won't single-handedly lose a series. What wins it for me is when he just plays lights out, because when he is on top he can certainly win a series, and its usually... pardon the pun.. quick. Just ask Blues fans about that.
and if we're talking consistency amongst regular season goalies, Cory Schneider has got to be up there. He's put up great numbers since entering the league, and hasn't faltered after earning a starter's workload this past season. For me the top 3 regular season goalies are Lundqvist, Price, Schneider. The rest are a level below them. Unfortunately Schneider is pretty much untested in the playoffs, so that discussion cannot be had.
Eric Sachs
Registered User
- Jan 31, 2007
- 18,643
- 1
who_me?
Registered User
- Oct 7, 2003
- 3,415
- 1,256
The only thing 'The King' has been consistent is in how he fails each playoffs.
His 'stellar' numbers are a result of him playing in an inferior conference where the bottom half of the draw wouldn't even make the playoffs in the western conference. The same way Ovechkin scored a ton of goals in the Southleast Division against inferior teams.
damacles1156
Registered User
- Feb 5, 2010
- 21,665
- 1,303
No one should argue that Hank hasn't had good teams, These last few years.
The Rangers have been to Three Conference finals in the last four years, and a Cup final.
That's a good team surrounding Hank.
The Rangers have been to Three Conference finals in the last four years, and a Cup final.
That's a good team surrounding Hank.
On top of that, same coach as when Luongo was on a President Trophy team. Not that it might mean much but there where some more similarities now that you mention it.
Machinehead
GoAwayTrouba
I agree but he's still had to do a lot of work. The defense would let a guy with no limbs walk in and shoot.
If the offense gets shut off like Tampa Bay managed to do enough times, Hank is ****ed. The Rangers are incapable defensively of shutting a team off the way Tampa did to us.
Our Lady Peace
Registered User
Have you ever watched any Ranger playoff games? This guy who plays goalie for NY and wears #30 sits in his net and plays his absolute heart out- night in, night out.
He's playing behind an inferior defense if anything. It's quite visually evident when NY blows coverage in front of Hank because he's right there acting out his anger towards them, having bailed his team out again.
It took them until this series to realize they were going to have to consistently score more than 2 goals if they wanted to win. They didn't do it tonight and Henrik isn't to blame.
Lundqvist is absolutely the LAST person you point fingers at in regards to failure.
damacles1156
Registered User
- Feb 5, 2010
- 21,665
- 1,303
The Shocker for me, was how the Rangers didn't make Tampa pay for all the cheating all over the ice they do.
I am Kings fan, so I get to see players on the right side of the puck ALL friggin day till my eyes bleed.
Tampa players leave the zone without the puck constantly, and on the wrong side of the puck numerous times a game.
They would all be benched in LA.
How the Rangers didn't make Tampa pay for that is just, amazing.
Captain Creampuff
Registered User
- Sep 10, 2012
- 10,969
- 1,816
Can someone explain how Lundqvist dropped to the 7th round? I just don't understand with his pre-draft stats.
lmao jonathan quick is so overrated he has mediocre reg season stats and his playoffs last season werent that good he isnt even top 5 this year let alone this decade
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
GAME 7 - North Bay Battalion @ Oshawa Generals - Series tied 3-3Wagers: 4Staked: $875.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
Series Winner Florida Panthers vs Boston BruinsWagers: 14Staked: $110,895.00Event closes- Updated:
-