Why is Martin Brodeur not considered a top 10 player of all time?

[MS]

I've mentioned this before -

Brodeur's shot totals weren't entirely a product of the defense in front of him. His rebound control, puck handling, and game management were better than any goalie in history - and mentally he was as strong as Roy (minus the twitches). Knowing how to get a puck out of the zone yourself; knowing when to freeze the puck; knowing where to put a rebound -

These things matter much more than most people would account - and they certainly don't show up in any statistics.

I think if Brodeur played in the league 20 years from now, when we could quantify the types of shots and chances faced - and have a Corsi-ish stat for goaltenders where Brodeur's shot-suppression could be measured - he'd get alot more credit.

This is pretty easy to debunk.

In 2008-09, Brodeur missed 60% of the season and was replaced as Devils starter by the immortal Scott Clemmensen.

Not only did Clemmenson duplicate Brodeur statistically, NJ's shots-against totals actually went down with Clemmensen in net. So unless you're arguing that Clemmenson is also some sort of mythical shot-suppressing God ... maybe this doesn't have as much of an effect as you think.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Depends on how goalies are treated in the list. My list would be pretty skater heavy so perhaps there would be no goalies in the top 10. So my immediate answer would be 'no'...

If Hasek or Roy make it into the top10, then so does Marty. I find it pretty hard to separate those 3, no matter how hard I try.

So is it fair to say you put Brodeur a level above Plante, Hall, Sawchuk, Tretiak and Dryden?

 

[Doctor No]

Not only did Clemmenson duplicate Brodeur statistically, NJ's shots-against totals actually went down with Clemmensen in net.

I have it going up slightly (29.0 to 28.8) under Clemmensen (admittedly it's a minor quibble):

http://hockeygoalies.org/bio/nhl/newjersey.html

One thing I find interesting about that season is that Clemmensen's save percentage was essentially identical to Brodeur (91.7% to 91.6%), and his GAA was too (2.39 to 2.42), but his mix of good/average/bad games (41%/38%/21%) was almost identical to Brodeur (43%/35%/23%) as well.

Edited to add relevant exhibit: http://hockeygoalies.org/bio/nhl/logs/NJD2008.html

 

[Michael Farkas]

I'm not trying to throw anyone off the scent here honestly...but is 2009 really the meat of the issue? When the game was different, no 4, no 27, not as much puck playing...I'd think we're in the 1995-2004 zone if you're looking to make trouble for Marty...Brodeur was already 36 and had played about 200 million consecutive games at that point...

That said, Scott Clemmensen did suck noodles...so, I guess if there was any daylight at all here, it could be there...but that's not "those Devils teams" really...

 

[BigKing]

The Clemmensen stuff is reminiscent of this past season in LA RE: Budaj/Quick.

I feel the Kings tightened up defensively (read: took less chances offensively) with Budaj in net v. Quick in a system that is already known for shot suppression due to high puck possession numbers. Budaj puts up similar SV% and GAA and you have HF chiming in about how Quick is a system product with the numbers put up by Jones/Scrivens in the past used as an example as well.

Quick is not going to play for as long as Brodeur or come close to his win totals but he will probably be looked at in a similar fashion--product of the system--by non-Kings fans as non-Devils fans look at Brodeur.

I say all of this with a huge dislike of Brodeur. Can't believe he is somehow getting endorsement deals still and I have to see his stupid mug on television in 2017.

 

[Doctor No]

Although, if the 2008-98 Devils tightened up offensively to protect Clemmensen more, it doesn't show in the numbers.

Clemmensen's GFA that year was 2.84 (compared to Brodeur's 2.75), and their schedule strengths were comparable (Clemmensen +0.02 SoS, Brodeur -0.06 SoS).

Related/unrelated: it clearly was a good move in retrospect, but looking at the Devils' game log chart above, I'm surprised that they abandoned Kevin Weekes so quickly. Really, just the one tough start against the Rangers on November 12, and they rode Clemmensen solidly after that.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Although, if the 2008-98 Devils tightened up offensively to protect Clemmensen more, it doesn't show in the numbers.

Clemmensen's GFA that year was 2.84 (compared to Brodeur's 2.75), and their schedule strengths were comparable (Clemmensen +0.02 SoS, Brodeur -0.06 SoS).

Related/unrelated: it clearly was a good move in retrospect, but looking at the Devils' game log chart above, I'm surprised that they abandoned Kevin Weekes so quickly. Really, just the one tough start against the Rangers on November 12, and they rode Clemmensen solidly after that.

Weekes played a stay-in-net style that the team struggled to adjust to. Clemmensen played more of a puck handling style like Marty.

 

[billingtons ghost]

This is pretty easy to debunk.

In 2008-09, Brodeur missed 60% of the season and was replaced as Devils starter by the immortal Scott Clemmensen.

Not only did Clemmenson duplicate Brodeur statistically, NJ's shots-against totals actually went down with Clemmensen in net. So unless you're arguing that Clemmenson is also some sort of mythical shot-suppressing God ... maybe this doesn't have as much of an effect as you think.

Nice sample set. 20 years against 50+% of one season - where a backup goalie played out of his mind (by all accounts) and the team rallied around the fact that their best player had gotten hurt -

I guess you are saying then that there is never a case of backup goalies exceeding expectations - or a team playing harder in front of them because they have to..

Oh, except like *EVERY* year in the NHL there are Grubauers statistically better than Holtbys and Talbots better than Lundqvists.

Maybe it is just that goalie stats suck in general - and don't really accurately depict how well a goalie plays... but go on cherry picking.

 

[feffan]

Nice sample set. 20 years against 50+% of one season - where a backup goalie played out of his mind (by all accounts) and the team rallied around the fact that their best player had gotten hurt -

I guess you are saying then that there is never a case of backup goalies exceeding expectations - or a team playing harder in front of them because they have to..

Oh, except like *EVERY* year in the NHL there are Grubauers statistically better than Holtbys and Talbots better than Lundqvists.

I would say that you are comparing situations that ain´t comparable. The Talbots and Grubauers are, as most back ups, often more sheltered by what teams they get the start against. The Broduer/Clemmensen year wasn´t that story. That was a case of a team having 2 periods with different no.1:s because of their no1 being out with injuries. Much easier to make a fair comparision as I see it.

 

[Doctor No]

Weekes played a stay-in-net style that the team struggled to adjust to. Clemmensen played more of a puck handling style like Marty.

Good call - I hadn't thought of that, but you're absolutely right.

 

[Lindys Lazy Eye]

Salty hockey fans and analysts who love to claim he was a "product of the system"

 

[SatanwasaSlovak]

I will go with what team-mates, coaches and gm's think. There's a reason Brodeur was the nr. 1 goalie for more than a decade. There's a reason he never got traded out of New Jersey and there's a reason why he won the cup several times with them.

He was a phenomenal goalie, no matter what some fans believe. But as always, opinions are the lowest point of information. It's just, the people that has knowledge and actual real life experience of the sport, might have a more sounded base in the reality of the game than the random user here on HF boards and hence why they rated Brodeur, their franchise-goalie as one of the best.

And just as a hockey fan, watching Brodeur, he was goddam fantastic. There's no way New Jersey wins those cups without him. They would've been on the level of Toronto without him i believe.

 

[GuineaPig]

To be honest I've been fairly critical of Brodeur in the past (in the sense I don't think he's up there with Hasek/Roy), but I wouldn't read too much into 40 games of Clemmensen. 40 games is a tiny sample size, it's entirely reasonable for him just to have played well for that stretch. He also performed at a similar level the seasons after in Florida. The similarity in shots against is more telling, imo.

 

[Doctor No]

Salty hockey fans and analysts who love to claim he was a "product of the system"

Let's see your Top Ten Players of All Time, then, including where Brodeur slots in.

There are very reasonable answers to the question asked *other* than salt.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Nah, Doc...don't be mad because you didn't think of it first...it was just regular old salt...N...A...uhh...H2...O...and et cetera...

 

[Doctor No]

Dammit, I knew it was salt, I just didn't want to say anything. I apologize to everyone.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

how can that guy say he didn't suppress shots and chances with puck handling?

suppressing puck retrievals --> suppressing offensive zone time --> suppressing shots --> suppressing chances.

not sure why you'd discount him for that either. i guess it depends on his defense regularly forcing the other teams to dump the pucks via their structure.

 

[billingtons ghost]

I would say that you are comparing situations that ain´t comparable. The Talbots and Grubauers are, as most back ups, often more sheltered by what teams they get the start against. The Broduer/Clemmensen year wasn´t that story. That was a case of a team having 2 periods with different no.1:s because of their no1 being out with injuries. Much easier to make a fair comparision as I see it.

While what you say is completely fair - it isn't a good comparison on my part -

I'll say that there are probably more than one examples of guys going down for the majority of a season and having the backup goalie suddenly vaulted into the #1 spot in which the team ends up tightening up defensively, and the former second-rate goalie has the best season of his career.

I think the Weekes/Clemmenson puck-handling discussion above is very pertinent and as someone who remembered that year fondly - Clemmenson was absolutely out of his head good. He knew he was playing with house money and there was no pressure on him to succeed. We all expected to lose each game 6-3. The team kept shots to the outside and let him see the puck. It was really fun to watch.

There's no way the Devils win any cups without Marty. I'd go as far to say that they likely wouldn't have won any cups even if you put any other goalie not named Roy or Hasek in the crease for them for those years.
(maybe Cujo gets them a cup)

I think folks like to forget that Roy was playing behind very good defensive teams - the source of Lemaire's defensive philosophy was present up there, and they had some excellent defensive forwards.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

While what you say is completely fair - it isn't a good comparison on my part -

I'll say that there are probably more than one examples of guys going down for the majority of a season and having the backup goalie suddenly vaulted into the #1 spot in which the team ends up tightening up defensively, and the former second-rate goalie has the best season of his career.

I think the Weekes/Clemmenson puck-handling discussion above is very pertinent and as someone who remembered that year fondly - Clemmenson was absolutely out of his head good. He knew he was playing with house money and there was no pressure on him to succeed. We all expected to lose each game 6-3. The team kept shots to the outside and let him see the puck. It was really fun to watch.

There's no way the Devils win any cups without Marty. I'd go as far to say that they likely wouldn't have won any cups even if you put any other goalie not named Roy or Hasek in the crease for them for those years.
(maybe Cujo gets them a cup)

I think folks like to forget that Roy was playing behind very good defensive teams - the source of Lemaire's defensive philosophy was present up there, and they had some excellent defensive forwards.

You know when you see a goalie flopping around, out of position, but he keeps getting lucky? Sometimes it goes on for a string of games, but everyone watching knows his luck is eventually going to run out. That's how Clemmensen looked his last few weeks as a starter, before Brodeur came back. For his first couple of months, I thought Clemmensen played legitimately well. But that's the difference between a HHOFer and a journeyman goaltender - one can play that way for a career, one can play that way for a few months (an extended hot streak, as I'd call it).

 

[Michael Farkas]

You know when you see a goalie flopping around, out of position, but he keeps getting lucky? Sometimes it goes on for a string of games, but everyone watching knows his luck is eventually going to run out.

Yes, yes I do.

 

[Doctor No]

Yes, yes I do.

Was that you in the stands this morning? You should have said hello (and I earned that two-pad stack save fair and square).

 

[Michael Farkas]

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

To be honest I've been fairly critical of Brodeur in the past (in the sense I don't think he's up there with Hasek/Roy), but I wouldn't read too much into 40 games of Clemmensen. 40 games is a tiny sample size, it's entirely reasonable for him just to have played well for that stretch. He also performed at a similar level the seasons after in Florida. The similarity in shots against is more telling, imo.

Pretty sure that was the point of the original post.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

While what you say is completely fair - it isn't a good comparison on my part -

I'll say that there are probably more than one examples of guys going down for the majority of a season and having the backup goalie suddenly vaulted into the #1 spot in which the team ends up tightening up defensively, and the former second-rate goalie has the best season of his career.

I think the Weekes/Clemmenson puck-handling discussion above is very pertinent and as someone who remembered that year fondly - Clemmenson was absolutely out of his head good. He knew he was playing with house money and there was no pressure on him to succeed. We all expected to lose each game 6-3. The team kept shots to the outside and let him see the puck. It was really fun to watch.

There's no way the Devils win any cups without Marty. I'd go as far to say that they likely wouldn't have won any cups even if you put any other goalie not named Roy or Hasek in the crease for them for those years.
(maybe Cujo gets them a cup)

I think folks like to forget that Roy was playing behind very good defensive teams - the source of Lemaire's defensive philosophy was present up there, and they had some excellent defensive forwards.

Hard to make an argument against that.

But I don't think it is out of the realm of possibility that those Devils teams win without Brodeur. The first 2 Cup years Brodeur wasn't one of the top goalies during the regular season, so there were other goalies playing well. And from what I recall the Devils were usually the team in control during all 3 runs, so it wasn't like they needed to have many games stolen.

 

[go comets]

Could be the 2009 game 7 loss to Carolina when he gave up two goals in the last 80 seconds of the game....The 2nd of which was very weak......