| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| irvine |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 04:13:00
Please list your top 10 NHL goalies based on your perspective.
Irvine's Top 10 NHL Goalies (current):
1. Martin Brodeur
2. Ryan Miller
3. Roberto Luongo
4. Henrik Lundqvist
5. Cam Ward
6. Mikka Kipprusoff
7. Niklas Backstrom
8. Marc-Andre Fleury
9. Ilya Bryzgalov
10. Tomas Vokoun
---
11. Evgeni Nabakov
*** Notes:
* Evgeni Nabakov was included just outside of my top 10, due to being so close to being there. By playoffs, he may sneak in to the top 10, with some one else slipping out.
* My top 10 is always subject to change. Based on performances. However, I do not base only on hot play now -- nor based on the past 5+ years. I try to base on a mix of the two. Hence, some guys playing hot this year such as Tuuka Rask, Craig Anderson, etc.. did not crack the current top 10. (Doesn't mean they never will!)
* Of course, you can base on whatever criteria you wish. You do not have to base it on a mix of current hot streaks / overall career play. You can base it on whatever.
Irvine/prez. |
| 40 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Jumbo Joe Rocks |
Posted - 05/19/2010 : 16:10:13
1.Nabokov
2.Brodeur
3.Miller
4.Hiller
5.Rinne
6.Kiprusoff
7.Fleury
8.Ward
9.Gustavsson
10.Giguere
11.Luongo(I think he is overrated)
GO SHARKS GO |
| Guest0963 |
Posted - 05/15/2010 : 19:19:20
1. Rask
2. Rinne
3. Luongo
4. Miller
5. Hiller
6. Brodeur
7. Fleury
8. Bryzgalov
9. Howard
10. Kiprusoff |
| Iceman778 |
Posted - 04/04/2010 : 09:28:05
not in sequence |
| Guest2284 |
Posted - 04/03/2010 : 12:58:22
True i will agree Kipper had 1 good playoff run, but Calgary always seems to be a team...this is their year, but usually it ends up being not so. Too much dependence on Inglina i guess, with no 1st line center.
As for San Jose, always a disappointment come playoff time |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 04/03/2010 : 11:40:43
How far is another level.
Who the heck was the guy in net for Calgary when they went to game 7 of the Stanley Cup Final??? That fellow who has a 1.85 GAA and .928 save percentage in 26 games??
What was his name again???
Oh, and that same season, who played the Flames in the West finals?? It might have been San Jose but maybe I am wrong. Still trying to figure out who has been San Jose's goalie in the 5 playoff series they have won since 04??
I mean, let's get serious. Nabokov and Kipprusoff names are in that list of 15 goalies with more than 40 wins in a season Ever.
Luongo hasn't done squat in the playoffs. Neither has Lundqvist or Miller or Bryzgalov, or Vokoun, or Backstom.
If playoff success was the key indicator, there are only two good goalies in the NHL remaining. Fleury and Ward |
| Guest2284 |
Posted - 04/03/2010 : 11:24:04
Beans, i`ll say the the same thing to you now as i did in another topic...you are TOO much a stats guy..who cares ?? until Kipper and Nabakov take their team to another level in the playoffs, ( which is only what matters ) they are BOTH nothing but regular season good goalies...and thats it. |
| bounty2k3 |
Posted - 04/02/2010 : 20:32:30
Not soley based on stats, but there are stats to back up the goaltenders that I have chosen for my top 10. I mean I would much rather have a goalie on my team that's solid and isnt mainly flukes.
Alex116, no, I wasn't much of a fan of his lol I know he might have the numbers to back him up, but look at the teams that were in front of him, except maybe the buffalo days.
GO HAWKS GO!!! |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 04/02/2010 : 14:47:06
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
However, we have all watched goalies go from brillaint to average in a short period of time. Thomas and Theodore both come to mind.
How 'bout Jim Carey? Or Andrew Raycroft? Here's hoping Raycroft finds the magic tonight!!  |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 04/02/2010 : 12:48:55
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2760
As for 50 wins, I agree i am a bit off based but i definately think he can get 35 - 40 in the next couple of years, he has been that good.
How does the fact that Boston is the worst offensive team affect his record. Gee, I don't know , lets ask Jose Theodore.
At the same time, it's hard to simply disregard that Rask also plays on the team with the best defense.
35 seems to be a reasonable number as well. However, we have all watched goalies go from brillaint to average in a short period of time. Thomas and Theodore both come to mind. |
| Guest2760 |
Posted - 04/02/2010 : 12:35:59
As for 50 wins, I agree i am a bit off based but i definately think he can get 35 - 40 in the next couple of years, he has been that good.
How does the fact that Boston is the worst offensive team affect his record. Gee, I don't know , lets ask Jose Theodore.
|
| Beans15 |
Posted - 04/02/2010 : 12:09:45
quote:
Originally posted by Utemin
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9263
Why are so few people not giving Tuukka Rask any respect? I realize I can't make an argument for years gone by, but for this year I believe he is one of the top 5 goalies in the league.
He leads the league in G.A.A at 1.99
He leads the leaugue in SV% at .930
He has a winning record of 19-12-9
Perhaps the most amazing stat is that he does this all on the worst offensive team in the league. I believe that if Boston scored at last years rate and Rask had 60 or more starts he we would be talking 50+wins.
If you argue that he plays on a defence first team(which is true) it doesn't explain why Thomas (Vezina winner) is sub 500
I really doubt Boston is the worst offensive team in the league, and how does that hurt his record? The Defense on Boston is strong while offensively they have lucic and bergeron making there defense a whole lot stronger. Frankly I don't give a damn about goals against average comparing Huet has a good one and he sucks _____. Lets just say Rask is lucky like Tim Thomas was last year.
Actually, Boston has the worst offense in the league considering goals per game. They are dead last at 2.36/game. Next is Edmonton(2.46), FLA(2.49), CGY(2.51), and PHX(2.56). Compare that to the top 5 in the league of Pitt (2.97), SJS(3.14), CHi(3.14), Van(3.22), and Wash(3.80).
Defensively, Bos is the best in the game at 2.35 goal against per game. They also allow the 11th fewest shots.
I like Rask, I don't think he's lucky. But, there is a benefit to playing on the best defensive team in the league. He is a big part of that but not the only part.
Regardless, 50 wins is still making me laugh. |
| Utemin |
Posted - 04/02/2010 : 11:59:43
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9263
Why are so few people not giving Tuukka Rask any respect? I realize I can't make an argument for years gone by, but for this year I believe he is one of the top 5 goalies in the league.
He leads the league in G.A.A at 1.99
He leads the leaugue in SV% at .930
He has a winning record of 19-12-9
Perhaps the most amazing stat is that he does this all on the worst offensive team in the league. I believe that if Boston scored at last years rate and Rask had 60 or more starts he we would be talking 50+wins.
If you argue that he plays on a defence first team(which is true) it doesn't explain why Thomas (Vezina winner) is sub 500
I really doubt Boston is the worst offensive team in the league, and how does that hurt his record? The Defense on Boston is strong while offensively they have lucic and bergeron making there defense a whole lot stronger. Frankly I don't give a damn about goals against average comparing Huet has a good one and he sucks _____. Lets just say Rask is lucky like Tim Thomas was last year. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 04/02/2010 : 11:09:42
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9263
Why are so few people not giving Tuukka Rask any respect? I realize I can't make an argument for years gone by, but for this year I believe he is one of the top 5 goalies in the league.
He leads the league in G.A.A at 1.99
He leads the leaugue in SV% at .930
He has a winning record of 19-12-9
Perhaps the most amazing stat is that he does this all on the worst offensive team in the league. I believe that if Boston scored at last years rate and Rask had 60 or more starts he we would be talking 50+wins.
If you argue that he plays on a defence first team(which is true) it doesn't explain why Thomas (Vezina winner) is sub 500
Don't disagree that Rask has been very good and taken over at #1 in Beantown. However, a losing record is still a losing record. The dumb OTL number gives the perception that Rask if 7 games over .500, but his record is actually 19-21.
I also think it's ludicrous to say that Rask would have 50+ wins in 60 starts if Boston scored another goal a game. If you add a goal to every lost that Boston has his year, it would mean 12 more wins and 14 more game going to OT. Even winning 1/2 of those OT games, it would add 19 games to Rask's total, only if he played all those games.
That's not even a 40 win season.
Do you know how many goalies have had 50 win seasons??
Zero.
Heck, there have only been 29 seasons and 15 goalies in the history if the NHL had seasons of more than 40 wins.
50 wins??? Insert smart mouth comment here about how rediculous this assumption is. |
| Odin |
Posted - 04/02/2010 : 09:24:21
One goalie I thought may get honourable mention was Halak. I know its early in his career, but he has been standing on his head for the Habs while getting shelled. |
| Guest9263 |
Posted - 04/02/2010 : 09:05:29
Why are so few people not giving Tuukka Rask any respect? I realize I can't make an argument for years gone by, but for this year I believe he is one of the top 5 goalies in the league.
He leads the league in G.A.A at 1.99
He leads the leaugue in SV% at .930
He has a winning record of 19-12-9
Perhaps the most amazing stat is that he does this all on the worst offensive team in the league. I believe that if Boston scored at last years rate and Rask had 60 or more starts he we would be talking 50+wins.
If you argue that he plays on a defence first team(which is true) it doesn't explain why Thomas (Vezina winner) is sub 500 |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 04/02/2010 : 01:07:47
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
quote:
This list is not solely basd on stats
Thats about the only thing that made sense in your post.
Good point nuxfan, his list appears to be more of the "top 10 most conventional goalies". I mean, he's actually even said it's goalies he feels "look solid in net" so i guess you can't really complain. Apparently he wasn't a fan of the Dominator?  |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 04/02/2010 : 00:27:40
quote:
This list is not solely basd on stats
Thats about the only thing that made sense in your post. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 04/02/2010 : 00:18:45
quote:
Originally posted by bounty2k3
And Luongo? I just can't stand the floppyness. He's lucky he made the list lol
GO HAWKS GO!!!
What? What are you saying? You must be absolutely out of your mind! Luuuuuuuuuuongo held a very powerful LA team to a mere 8 goals tonight!!! C'mon, show some respect!!! |
| bounty2k3 |
Posted - 04/01/2010 : 20:40:52
My top ten is def gonna look different than others. Granted I dont see much of the westrn conference, but when I do, I love the goaltending. In the East I hear too much talk about the forwards, and the goaltending for the most most part sucks ass. (Being a Chicago fan I think I can talk about bad goaltending lol cough huet cough). This list is not solely basd on stats, but on players that I can relate to their style of play more than anything. Who looks solid in net as opposed to flopping around ala Thomas or Hasek. Based on this year only.
1. Nabakov
2. Brodeur
3. Bryzgalov
4. Kipprusoff
5. Miller
6. Lundqvist
7. Vokoun
8. Anderson
9. Niemi
10. Luongo
I know Niemi has not played as many games as the others. From what I've seen of the guy, he's definitly a step up from Huet. And Luongo? I just can't stand the floppyness. He's lucky he made the list lol
GO HAWKS GO!!! |
| hanley6 |
Posted - 03/31/2010 : 13:42:11
lol hey Beans.. I see you miss me haha
but yeah its good to see Toronto is pplaying better without Toskala forsure
...And the LEAFS Win the CUP |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 10:04:56
quote:
Not directing it towards anyone in particular here, but just wanted to point out that a lot of times, people only use stats when they back up their own point of view and discredit stats when they don't.
Good point. I've heard that happens in 93% of all polls. |
| Guest4339 |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 09:52:47
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
quote:
Originally posted by irvine
@ Beans:
When I look at who I believe (my perspective), are the top 10 goal tenders in the National Hockey League... I did not consider only stats.
In fact, I did not dissect any stats what-so-ever. I could have looked over each stat, weighted them accordingly, and decided from there.. but I don't feel stats tell the whole story of any player, including goaltenders.
Save percentage, Goals Against Average, indeed have relevance. But, they do not solely determine who one feels is a better goaltender all around, in all of their skills.
I also do not punish any players based on team performance. Otherwise, we'd be seeing a guy like Halak / Anderson on my list. Even Rask.
None of those three are. I based on who I believe, are the elite of the elite today. Anyone can argue ANY single one of my picks to be placed any where. They are all that close. It's a tight race in the goaltender top 10, hence the topic. I wanted to see how diverse these lists are, and more so where each person ranks each goaltender... as they are basically so very even and a matter of 'perspective', not stats. All these guys have pretty good stats, they are the elite of the elite in the world.
Irvine/prez.
I absolutely agree that stats do not tell the entire story. There are literally countless factors involved when people are ranking or judging players. Some times it's completely irrational and it come right down to who one like better.
However, I find it difficult to accept judgements for one player while using the exact same judgement to dispell another player.
For example,the inclusion of Bryzgalov on many lists is valid and I am not arguing. However, it is nearly impossible to accept a judgment on Bryzgalov at the same time Nabokov is being dispelled with literally the same statistical success.
That's just not right.
I admit that I am a numbers guy. They don't tell the entire story but they do say something. Not directed towards anyone specifically, but rather than trying to deny the statistics, look at them for what they are. Rather than saying, 'Nabokov gets better stats because he plays on a better team,' trying thinking, "Well I never realized his numbers matched Luongo's so well. Maybe I should be watching both (hey they play tonight) and then make a better judgment based on what I see."
Too often stats are over used or under used rather than what I believe they are for in pointing people in a specific direction to focus on.
That being said, when you are talking about the top 10 goalies in the NHL, they are the elite of the league and in many cases it is splitting hairs between them.
Not directing it towards anyone in particular here, but just wanted to point out that a lot of times, people only use stats when they back up their own point of view and discredit stats when they don't. |
| Guest2000 |
Posted - 03/29/2010 : 13:19:47
Top 10 over the last 3 years cuz if we did this list 9 months ago then i'm sure i'd see Steve Mason & Tim Thomas would be plastered all over this board and neither are deserving IMO.
1) Brodeur
2) Fleury ( Simply for playoff consistency an you can say look at the team in front of him but i rebutal that with Nabakov who blows in the playoffs and has an equally stacked team.)
3) Henrik Lundqvist
4) Mikka Kiprusoff
5) Cam Ward ( dude plays on a team with limited talent and twice carried them to the conference finals & a cup as a rookie)
6)Ryan Miller
7) Ilya Bryzgalov
8) Nik Backstom
9) Roberto Luongo ( Ultimate choker, Sorry canucks fans you'll never win with him in net gives up to many soft goals)
10) Thomas Vokoun
I cant give any love to Nabokov dude chokes anytime it matters (Russia, Playoffs the Red wings are gonna tear him a new asswhole. He plays on a team with a revolving door of talent so he should have great numbers. People hate on Brodeur & Dryden because of the system they played in or the team in front of them. Well they made the saves when it counted and Nabokov gets spread like a playboy calender when it matters. If you take Nabokov off the sharks they are still a top tier team in the West. You take Miller, Lundqvist, Ward, Vokoun & Backstrom and their teams are battling for Taylor Hall & Seguin. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 03/27/2010 : 15:21:58
quote:
Originally posted by irvine
@ Beans:
When I look at who I believe (my perspective), are the top 10 goal tenders in the National Hockey League... I did not consider only stats.
In fact, I did not dissect any stats what-so-ever. I could have looked over each stat, weighted them accordingly, and decided from there.. but I don't feel stats tell the whole story of any player, including goaltenders.
Save percentage, Goals Against Average, indeed have relevance. But, they do not solely determine who one feels is a better goaltender all around, in all of their skills.
I also do not punish any players based on team performance. Otherwise, we'd be seeing a guy like Halak / Anderson on my list. Even Rask.
None of those three are. I based on who I believe, are the elite of the elite today. Anyone can argue ANY single one of my picks to be placed any where. They are all that close. It's a tight race in the goaltender top 10, hence the topic. I wanted to see how diverse these lists are, and more so where each person ranks each goaltender... as they are basically so very even and a matter of 'perspective', not stats. All these guys have pretty good stats, they are the elite of the elite in the world.
Irvine/prez.
I absolutely agree that stats do not tell the entire story. There are literally countless factors involved when people are ranking or judging players. Some times it's completely irrational and it come right down to who one like better.
However, I find it difficult to accept judgements for one player while using the exact same judgement to dispell another player.
For example,the inclusion of Bryzgalov on many lists is valid and I am not arguing. However, it is nearly impossible to accept a judgment on Bryzgalov at the same time Nabokov is being dispelled with literally the same statistical success.
That's just not right.
I admit that I am a numbers guy. They don't tell the entire story but they do say something. Not directed towards anyone specifically, but rather than trying to deny the statistics, look at them for what they are. Rather than saying, 'Nabokov gets better stats because he plays on a better team,' trying thinking, "Well I never realized his numbers matched Luongo's so well. Maybe I should be watching both (hey they play tonight) and then make a better judgment based on what I see."
Too often stats are over used or under used rather than what I believe they are for in pointing people in a specific direction to focus on.
That being said, when you are talking about the top 10 goalies in the NHL, they are the elite of the league and in many cases it is splitting hairs between them. |
| irvine |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 21:00:37
@ Beans:
When I look at who I believe (my perspective), are the top 10 goal tenders in the National Hockey League... I did not consider only stats.
In fact, I did not dissect any stats what-so-ever. I could have looked over each stat, weighted them accordingly, and decided from there.. but I don't feel stats tell the whole story of any player, including goaltenders.
Save percentage, Goals Against Average, indeed have relevance. But, they do not solely determine who one feels is a better goaltender all around, in all of their skills.
I also do not punish any players based on team performance. Otherwise, we'd be seeing a guy like Halak / Anderson on my list. Even Rask.
None of those three are. I based on who I believe, are the elite of the elite today. Anyone can argue ANY single one of my picks to be placed any where. They are all that close. It's a tight race in the goaltender top 10, hence the topic. I wanted to see how diverse these lists are, and more so where each person ranks each goaltender... as they are basically so very even and a matter of 'perspective', not stats. All these guys have pretty good stats, they are the elite of the elite in the world.
Irvine/prez. |
| Leafs81 |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 17:55:19
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
Beans:
quote:
Nabokov is historically(considering the past 5 seasons) in the top 5 in Wins, but also in shots against, save %, GAA, and games played. We are not talking about a flash in the pan here. We are talking about a goalie with significant positive performances over an extended period of time.This season included. It's hard to say that his performance is over rated playing in SJ when only Anderson and Vokoun have faced more shots.
Consider this, Nabokov has played in 3 more games than Roberto Luongo this season, faced more than 200 more shots, has 2 more wins, has a better GAA and a better save %. Vancouver has the same number of wins as SJ and thier overall goals against and goals for are nearly identical.
How does Luongo not get punished for being on a good team??
Everything being equal, I think people are making these judgements with their hearts and not their heads.
Well, there are SOG, and then there are SOG that might go in. I can't claim to have seen a lot of SJ this year, but at least when they face the canucks their defense has done a good job at keeping players to the outside for the most part. A shot from the point that can be clearly seen is a lot easier to save than a shot from close in or a tip or a mad scramble in front. From what I have seen Nabokov does not face the same shot pressure that other goalies do. SJ is a very good team and a very big team, and there are just not that many teams that can dominate them down low.
He may see a lot of shots, but from what I see in SJ/Canucks games, there are more easy shots than hard shots. Those types of shots can bloat SOG and SV% stats. This viewpoint is also very subjective.
As for Luongo, I did punish him a bit - he is #5 on my current year list. As another guest mentioned, this is the first offensive breakout year for the Canucks since the early 2000's when we scored in bunches. Luongo for the most part has spent the last 3 seasons before this one being the difference maker in a lot of 2-1 and 3-2 games. For that he gets kudos.
As well, I have to agree that its not as unbiased as one might like. People get emotional about their teams, and polls like this will always be coloured to some extent. Also, some teams we see more than others and therefore have more insight. What can you do.
Great reply, I couldn't have said it better. Especially the last paragraphe. |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 17:43:04
Beans:
quote:
Nabokov is historically(considering the past 5 seasons) in the top 5 in Wins, but also in shots against, save %, GAA, and games played. We are not talking about a flash in the pan here. We are talking about a goalie with significant positive performances over an extended period of time.This season included. It's hard to say that his performance is over rated playing in SJ when only Anderson and Vokoun have faced more shots.
Consider this, Nabokov has played in 3 more games than Roberto Luongo this season, faced more than 200 more shots, has 2 more wins, has a better GAA and a better save %. Vancouver has the same number of wins as SJ and thier overall goals against and goals for are nearly identical.
How does Luongo not get punished for being on a good team??
Everything being equal, I think people are making these judgements with their hearts and not their heads.
Well, there are SOG, and then there are SOG that might go in. I can't claim to have seen a lot of SJ this year, but at least when they face the canucks their defense has done a good job at keeping players to the outside for the most part. A shot from the point that can be clearly seen is a lot easier to save than a shot from close in or a tip or a mad scramble in front. From what I have seen Nabokov does not face the same shot pressure that other goalies do. SJ is a very good team and a very big team, and there are just not that many teams that can dominate them down low.
He may see a lot of shots, but from what I see in SJ/Canucks games, there are more easy shots than hard shots. Those types of shots can bloat SOG and SV% stats. This viewpoint is also very subjective.
As for Luongo, I did punish him a bit - he is #5 on my current year list. As another guest mentioned, this is the first offensive breakout year for the Canucks since the early 2000's when we scored in bunches. Luongo for the most part has spent the last 3 seasons before this one being the difference maker in a lot of 2-1 and 3-2 games. For that he gets kudos.
As well, I have to agree that its not as unbiased as one might like. People get emotional about their teams, and polls like this will always be coloured to some extent. Also, some teams we see more than others and therefore have more insight. What can you do. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 17:28:51
Well, sometimes you are right and sometime you are wrong.
I took the stats of every goalie who played more than 70 games in the past 2 season plus the current season. From that, I took specific statistics which I feel are the most important in goaltending and weighted the rankings as follows:
Games Played - 3
Win % - 3
Shots Against - 5
GAA - 5
Save % - 5
SO - 2
TOI - 3
Basically meaning shut outs being least important, amount played and winning being next important, but Save %, number of shots against, and GAA being most important. Lowest score being the best.
Player Total Score
Evgeni Nabokov 8.0
Roberto Luongo 10.7
Henrik Lundqvist 12.4
Ryan Miller 13.3
Tomas Vokoun 17.8
Niklas Backstrom 17.9
Ilya Bryzgalov 18.3
Miikka Kiprusoff 19.0
Martin Brodeur 21.9
Tim Thomas 22.2
Cristobal Huet 27.9
Cam Ward 28.9
Chris Mason 30.4
Pekka Rinne 30.5
Marty Turco 31.0
Jose Theodore 31.9
Jonathan Quick 36.0
Martin Biron 36.8
Jonas Hiller 38.2
Steve Mason 38.6
Marc-Andre Fleury 38.7
Jean-Sebastien Giguere 40.5
Carey Price 42.1
Dwayne Roloson 43.2
Nikolai Khabibulin 43.3
Chris Osgood 44.0
Vesa Toskala 48.4
Kari Lehtonen 48.8
Mike Smith 58.2
It appears I have given Kipprusoff too much credit, but nailed Nabokov.
In that period of time, Nabokov ranks in the top 3 in the NHL in games played, win%, GAA, SO, and time on ice, 6th in shot against, and 11th in save %.
|
| Beans15 |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 16:58:31
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2114
ahhh but Beans, its not a one year question. You've referenced Nabakov stats back 5 years in time. In the last 5 years, Luongo hasn't always played on a great team. In that time, sure, this year the Canucks are great. But in the 4 years proceeding they twice missed the playoffs. Bad comparison.
Not as bad as one might think.
Since the lock out(not counting this year as it's virtually identical) SJ has averaged 5 more wins a season. So again, it would argue the wins that Nabokov has.
Regardless if you think it's a bad comparison or not, 5 wins a year is not that huge of a difference, and the bottom line is when 2 goalies are comparable in many ways and one is a concensus top 3 goalie in the league and the other is not in the top 10, something is wrong. |
| Utemin |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 16:49:39
I remembered like 5 reply's read on they were already answered!
Nabby has a strong Offense in front of him but i wouldn't particularly point out the D, they are probably 15th best D in the league. Nabakov's record over the years would look so much better then most goalies if it weren't for the season where his sv% was .888; He is an outstanding goalie and has always done well when i have seen him. As for Nabakov not winning big games this a team thing not just him; only Marleu has ever pulled through in the playoffs for them. In the Olympics Russia was not passing, they were puck hogs, and the D was pinching 50% of the time allowing Canada with their equal maybe a bit lower amount of speed to rocket right though to get a breakaway I don't even believe for one second that Bryzgalov would of done better.
Fleury never been impressed with the guy, just because he did better then most in the playoffs does not make him a top 5 not even a top 10. |
| Guest2114 |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 16:33:16
ahhh but Beans, its not a one year question. You've referenced Nabakov stats back 5 years in time. In the last 5 years, Luongo hasn't always played on a great team. In that time, sure, this year the Canucks are great. But in the 4 years proceeding they twice missed the playoffs. Bad comparison. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 16:08:00
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
No, in this poll I don't think he gets any credit for what he did in 2003 - if he does, then my list of top-10 goalies changes again. This year Nabokov has been above average this year (I put him at #10 in my list for this year), and over the last 3 years has been consistent enough to have him at #5 on my other list. But he benefits greatly from playing in SJ
I agree that the number of wins he gets is a benefit of playing on SJ. But save % specifically, and to a certain degree GAA is a direct stat of a goalies performance. Specifically when you are looking at a goalie that faces a ton of shots.
Nabokov is historically(considering the past 5 seasons) in the top 5 in Wins, but also in shots against, save %, GAA, and games played. We are not talking about a flash in the pan here. We are talking about a goalie with significant positive performances over an extended period of time.This season included. It's hard to say that his performance is over rated playing in SJ when only Anderson and Vokoun have faced more shots.
Consider this, Nabokov has played in 3 more games than Roberto Luongo this season, faced more than 200 more shots, has 2 more wins, has a better GAA and a better save %. Vancouver has the same number of wins as SJ and thier overall goals against and goals for are nearly identical.
How does Luongo not get punished for being on a good team??
Everything being equal, I think people are making these judgements with their hearts and not their heads. |
| Leafs81 |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 15:42:58
quote:
Originally posted by HawkinOilCountry
On the outside looking in is Anderson, but only just barely. I'd sub him in for 8, 9, 10 in a heartbeat. Wouldn't take much convincing.
Come on... Come on!!!! |
| Leafs81 |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 15:41:15
I will make a list for this year
1. Ryan Miller (Vezina winner)
2. Ilya Bryzgalov (Brought the Coyotes to the playoffs - runnerup)
3. Roberto Luongo (Gold Medal, strong season)
4. Miikka Kiprusoff (strong season but not enough for playoffs)
5. Tomas Vokoun (Great goalie for a weak team)
6. Martin Brodeur (Getting older and consistency seems an issue but still great)
7. Marc-André Fleury (A winner, shines when it matters)
8. Henrik Lundqvist (Solid goalie and very consistent)
9. Cam Ward (Carolina are not the same without him)
10. Pekka Rinne (Great sophomore season)
|
| nuxfan |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 15:19:49
Alex116:
quote:
Utemin, i'm still not sold on Cory Schneider. Wondering if they're gonna bring him up next year and play him as Luongo's back up like a lot of speculation out there says? I think he needs to come up and play if he's ever going to have a chance to show what he can or can't do? That of course is, unless he's dealt at the draft?
I suspect Schneider will be a starting goalie in the NHL one day, but I don't think he'll ever play in Vancouver. Using him as Luongo's backup is detrimental to his career (too few starts), and also not cost effective (his NHL salary is 1M or so) - which is why he is still with the Moose. I suspect with Luongo wrapped up in Vancouver for the next decade, Schneider will be dealt in the offseason as a blue-chip prospect.
Beans:
quote:
Again, we are punishing a guy for the team he plays on.
Would anyone consider a goalie who played 65 playoff games with a .915 save % and a GAA of 2.23 as the reason his team did not succeed in the playoffs??
That is exactly what Nabokov has done for his career. Last year's playoffs is the only post season his save % was less than .900. He get's no credit for the season in 03 when he went 10-7 with a save % of .935 and a GAA of 1.71.
SJ falls in the playoffs have little to nothing to do with Nabokov. Or are we using his last big game (Canada vs Russia at the Olympics) as the measuring stick?
No, in this poll I don't think he gets any credit for what he did in 2003 - if he does, then my list of top-10 goalies changes again. This year Nabokov has been above average this year (I put him at #10 in my list for this year), and over the last 3 years has been consistent enough to have him at #5 on my other list. But he benefits greatly from playing in SJ |
| Guest0951 |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 15:13:25
Nabakov - I agree Beans, it's not entirely his fault. He still made my top ten; I just don't consider him 'the best' by any means. He has good numbers, but has he ever stolen a series for the team? Or raised his game to that next championship level? I realize those are intangible aspects, more based on opinion than anything else, but they still matter. He's good, but until he advances further in the post season, it will be a blemish on his career.
Bryzgalov - Again, you're right, Pho plays a system that allows him to excell. Just like Backstrom in Minny (prior to this year - and Backstrom still made most lists).
However, two points to counter that, in his time with the Ducks, Bryz looked good there too. Even though he lost the starting job, he was still a top quality guy, see Burke promising to find him somewhere to start, then waiving him so Pho could pick him up.
Second, have you watched many of their games this year in the desert? True, they don't allow a lot of shots, but wow, he has stood on his head. Some of those shots he faces are VERY high quality and were it not for his stellar performance...well, you get my point. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 14:52:00
Again, we are punishing a guy for the team he plays on.
Would anyone consider a goalie who played 65 playoff games with a .915 save % and a GAA of 2.23 as the reason his team did not succeed in the playoffs??
That is exactly what Nabokov has done for his career. Last year's playoffs is the only post season his save % was less than .900. He get's no credit for the season in 03 when he went 10-7 with a save % of .935 and a GAA of 1.71.
SJ falls in the playoffs have little to nothing to do with Nabokov. Or are we using his last big game (Canada vs Russia at the Olympics) as the measuring stick?
One other things. Bryzgalov is a fine goalie, so don't take this as me knocking him down, but that group fo defensement in Phoenix as well as the overall team defense is grossly under rated. Phoenix is the top 1/2 of the league in shots against per game and is top 10 in PK.
It's not like he is a one man army, such as Vokoun in Florida or Anderson in Colorado.
|
| Guest0951 |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 14:36:58
Personally, I fault Nabakov for his failure to show up in big games. Not saying he's a bad goalie, but he hasn't really done it in the playoffs (or yes, more recently, in the Olympics). I realize not every goalie has stepped up in the playoffs, and not every goalie has gotten a chance to yet, but SJ makes the show every year, and every year they crumble. At some point in time, that has to reflect back on their players. (for the same reason, Thorton drops out of my top ten players, regardless of his point totals.) You're welcome to disagree with my reasoning, but it's my opinion.
This year only:
1a Miller
1b Bryzgalov
3 Kipper (I hate to say it, but he has earned it this year)
4a-f Lu, Lundqvist, Vokoun, Nabakov, Brodeur, Halak
Sorry for the condensed rankings, but I really think most of the top 10 are so close to call it's a moot point.
I think Backstrom has suffered with the change to an offensive system in Minny and Ward has been too injured to really stand out this season, that's why they didn't make my list.
|
| Beans15 |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 14:13:45
Broduer leads the league in wins and is near the top of the league in every other statistical measure of a goalie and he is in the top 10 based on the shutout record??
San Jose's masks Nabokov?? Is that why Nabokov has faced the 3rd most shots in the league (More than anyone other than Anderson and Vokoun) and still has a save % of .922?? How is that his team masking his play on the stats sheet?? That is his team hanging him out to dry??
So I understand, we are faulting goalies for having the most wins, faulting goalies for playing on teams that don't score, and also faulting goalies who play on teams that score too much??
Basically, if a goalie is on a team that was not highly touted at the start of the year (a la Buffalo, Colorado, and Phoenix) that gives their goalies a leg up??
|
| HawkinOilCountry |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 14:01:15
Calgary's lack of a playoff spot might be skewing my opinion of him true, but I've still got him as a top 10 goal tender for a reason. I personally don't think there's that much of a difference from #4 to #10
Brodeur getting the shutout record this year is one of the only reasons he's in my top 3 even.
I can't speak for everyone else, but I didn't base my picks on stats, purely on games I've seen these guys play.
I have no idea why Nabakov is on so few lists, but he didn't make mine because I don't think he's that good. His team masks his faults pretty well on teh stat sheet.
The arena wall in chicago should be credited with a goal. |
|
|
