Jump to content

General Hockey Thread 2011-2012


Built Ford Tough
 Share

Recommended Posts

Radulov is back. This makes things very interesting in the west. Nashville is a team I would definitely not want to be seeing in the playoffs. It will be interesting to see Radulov now though, he was tearing up the K and was already really solid before he ditched the NHL. Adding a guy with point per game potential to that team is a huge boost. He will probably be their best offensive player from the get go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nashville is going to be losing suter at the end of the season, so they are just going absolutely all out for the cup this year. i'll probably cheer for them since i don't know what its like to see my favorite team make the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kovalchuk?

 

That was in my sig. If you would really consider him the best in the NHL, then I don't know what to tell you. I put that there around the time he was traded because the blinded Canadians here.

 

Canadians can never admit a Russian or other European players are better than a "good ole' Canadian boy".

 

 

Canadian fanboys actually think Roy>Hasek. :lol: .

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should check out the sports section on the misc with the newest NHL thread. They dedicated it to me this time. :lol: .

 

I'm not saying they did it because they like me.......... :glasses: .

 

The misc? Sorry, I'm missing something here, haha.

 

 

I do actually agree with you about the whole Canadian bias thing, although not to the extent you put it. I do believe a fully healthy Crosby is better than Malkin (not by much, though, and if Malkin can prove to be this consistent all the time I'd have no problem putting him above Crosby), but you are right with a lot of the "good ol' Canadian boy" crap that goes on. Those people really do annoy me. This isn't 20-30 years ago when Canada was clearly head and shoulders above the rest. Hell, look at the top 5 players by position (my opinion off the top of my head, no order)

 

Goalies: Lundqvist, Rinne, Thomas, Quick, Price

D-men: Chara, Weber, Lidstrom, Suter, Letang/Yandle

Forwards: Malkin, Crosby, Datsyuk, Stamkos, Giroux

 

Other than forwards, the other positions are dominated by non-Canadians. Canada has the depth that no other countries have, but they don't have a stranglehold on the elite players anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was in my sig. If you would really consider him the best in the NHL, then I don't know what to tell you. I put that there around the time he was traded because the blinded Canadians here.

 

Canadians can never admit a Russian or other European players are better than a "good ole' Canadian boy".

 

 

Canadian fanboys actually think Roy>Hasek. :lol: .

 

You honestly think Domenik Hasek was better than Patrick Roy? :lol: I don't think this is us being homers for Canadians, its you being against Canadian players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You honestly think Domenik Hasek was better than Patrick Roy? :lol: I don't think this is us being homers for Canadians, its you being against Canadian players.

 

I do.

 

Roy had 3 seasons in his career where he put up a .920 SV% or better, one of which was exactly .920.

 

In seasons where Hasek played 50+ games, he had 1 seasn where he didn't put up .920 SV% over better. The only time he didn't put up .920 or better was his final 2 seasons, his first 2 seasons and 1999-2000 where he only played in 35 games due to injury (and he was still at .919).

 

Hasek also had a better GAA for his career and more shutouts despite playing less seasons.

 

Roy had more cups, but Hasek never had the luxury on playing on stacked teams like Roy did.

 

Give me Hasek over Roy anyday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do.

 

Roy had 3 seasons in his career where he put up a .920 SV% or better, one of which was exactly .920.

 

In seasons where Hasek played 50+ games, he had 1 seasn where he didn't put up .920 SV% over better. The only time he didn't put up .920 or better was his final 2 seasons, his first 2 seasons and 1999-2000 where he only played in 35 games due to injury (and he was still at .919).

 

Hasek also had a better GAA for his career and more shutouts despite playing less seasons.

 

Roy had more cups, but Hasek never had the luxury on playing on stacked teams like Roy did.

 

Give me Hasek over Roy anyday.

 

Honestly, i just can't stand the way Hasek played. He was the equivalent to Blake Griffin of the NHL. Now obviously it worked for him to put up such good numbers, but i don't know. I honestly think Roy was way better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You honestly think Domenik Hasek was better than Patrick Roy? :lol: I don't think this is us being homers for Canadians, its you being against Canadian players.

 

 

Honestly, i just can't stand the way Hasek played. He was the equivalent to Blake Griffin of the NHL. Now obviously it worked for him to put up such good numbers, but i don't know. I honestly think Roy was way better.

 

The way I stated the question was just a jab at the Canadians here.

 

However, I think Hasek was certainly better than Roy. Yes, Roy has three Conn Smythe's, but Hasek was NEVER on a team as stacked as the Avalanche teams that Roy was on. And, the 1993 run was not as impressive as some like to think, but I can touch upon that later if need be.

 

Oh, and for people that talk about how Roy has the Conn Smythe's and Hasek doesn't, here's a little reminder for you. The best Canadian players in the world couldn't beat him. And, Canadians love to talk about international awards, for reasons I will never understand, but here you go because Hasek stonewalled a stacked Team Canada.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zb9-hbwmb0Y

 

 

 

And, what the hell does Hasek have to do with Blake Griffin? Flopping in basketball isn't a style of play besides playing like a [expletive]. Hasek played that style for a reason, and with great success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I stated the question was just a jab at the Canadians here.

 

However, I think Hasek was certainly better than Roy. Yes, Roy has three Conn Smythe's, but Hasek was NEVER on a team as stacked as the Avalanche teams that Roy was on. And, the 1993 run was not as impressive as some like to think, but I can touch upon that later if need be.

 

Oh, and for people that talk about how Roy has the Conn Smythe's and Hasek doesn't, here's a little reminder for you. The best Canadian players in the world couldn't beat him. And, Canadians love to talk about international awards, for reasons I will never understand, but here you go because Hasek stonewalled a stacked Team Canada.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zb9-hbwmb0Y

 

 

 

And, what the hell does Hasek have to do with Blake Griffin? Flopping in basketball isn't a style of play besides playing like a [expletive]. Hasek played that style for a reason, and with great success.

Hasek has to be one of the most overrated goalies stat wise in the NHL. Watching him play he always would let in the goals at the worst possible moments of a hockey game which is why his 119 playoff games does not stand near Roy almost 250. Being a goaltender is not about how you win, it's about when you win and Hasek was terrible at it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hasek has to be one of the most overrated goalies stat wise in the NHL. Watching him play he always would let in the goals at the worst possible moments of a hockey game which is why his 119 playoff games does not stand near Roy almost 250. Being a goaltender is not about how you win, it's about when you win and Hasek was terrible at it.

 

I don't really follow this. Why are playoff appearances relevant when comparing two individual players? This is kind of acceptable when comparing basketball superstars (although I still hate it in that case too), but definitely not for hockey. Hasek is clearly superior in all team independent stats. Bringing up the team dependent stuff doesn't really strengthen Roy's case.

Edited by Phightins
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really follow this. Why are playoff appearances relevant when comparing two individual players? This is kind of acceptable when comparing basketball superstars (although I still hate it in that case too), but definitely not for hockey. Hasek is clearly superior in all team independent stats. Bringing up the team dependent stuff doesn't really strengthen Roy's case.

I explained exactly why above. Try reading it again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...