Okay, so tired of hearing the same arguments:

1. The merit of a goaltender has NOTHING to do with winning the Stanely Cup. If a goalie allows 1 goal every single playoff game and his offense can't score 2, he will never win the cup. Winning the Cup is a TEAM achievement, not an individual's. So stop bringing it up when we are talking about who is the better goalie.

2. The most important characteristic of who the best goalie is, is CONSISTENCY. There have been many many goalies that have posted great numbers 1 year, or even 3 or 4 years. The measure of true greatness in net is knowing what your getting over and over every single night without fluctuation.

3. Blocked shots. Sure we can easily say Hank had one of the best shot blocking teams in front of him but take that another step further. Look at the average shots against both goalies. Even with the Rangers blocking double digit shots night after night, they still surrender on average more shots on goal that LA does. What does that mean? LA is one of the worst shot blocking teams in the league but in order to still maintain a lower Shots against goal that the Rangers, one of the best, that means HIGH PUCK POSSESSION. This is a more important stat to consider than blocked shots because it means overall, the puck is in LA's zone MUCH MUCH less. The Rangers were a collapsing team that basically played the game in their own end and countered when they could. That puts EXTREME pressure on the goalie making him have to track the puck and exhaust him physically. This is one thing that no one is considering.

Lundqvist is the best goalie in the world right now. Thats not to say Quick can't be, but all things considered right now, Hank is. This new season will give us a nice look with the Rangers widely believed to play a more possession system under AV. Also, the new division make ups and realignment should bring at least a little more parity to each goalie's opposition teams during the season, although I still think the Metro division is tougher.
- xcheckmajor

let me get this straight...

the playoffs dont matter.

the kings are great & the rangers suck.

consistency matters but only for as long as you say.

blocked shots matter. possesion matters...even though hank saw like 2 more shots a game(im pretty sure thats why we have a sv % stat).


cool story bro and sweet criteria...too funny!

let me get this straight...

the playoffs dont matter.

the kings are great & the rangers suck.

consistency matters but only for as long as you say.

blocked shots matter. possesion matters...even though hank saw like 2 more shots a game(im pretty sure thats why we have a sv % stat).


cool story bro and sweet criteria...too funny!
- good2b_the_king

Hank is the best goalie in the league. Put him on at least 20 other teams and he would have a cup by now.

@sven22

"But going by the data we currently have, there is no solid case that I can see that would argue Quick above Lundqvist, at least any case supported by substantiated evidence as opposed to unprovable wishy-washy narratives."

so if goalies dont win cups and teams do, does that mean that the playoff #'s dont count either? lol. if winning a cup is the ultimate prize and the whole point...then wouldnt what you do in the playoffs as a goalie(aside from winning the cup) matter even more? you know like winning the conn smyth?

if the playoffs do enter the equation then heres some data that ill repost just for you.

reg season
Quick-286g-2.32gaa-.915sv-25shutouts
Hank-510g-2.25gaa-.920sv-45shutouts

playoffs
Quick-50g-2.03gas-.929sv-7shutouts
Hank-67g-2.28gaa-.920sv-8shutouts

hanks slightly better in the reg season(by 0.07gaa, .005sv)
quicks more than slightly better in the playoffs(by 0.25gaa, .009sv)


"Lundqvist has definitely been the better goalie over the last several years. Lundqvist is probably the better goalie right now. Lundqvist will probably be the better goalie over the next several years, but that's yet to be seen."

speaking of wishy-washy narratives...well done.

@sven22

"But going by the data we currently have, there is no solid case that I can see that would argue Quick above Lundqvist, at least any case supported by substantiated evidence as opposed to unprovable wishy-washy narratives."

so if goalies dont win cups and teams do, does that mean that the playoff #'s dont count either? lol. if winning a cup is the ultimate prize and the whole point...then wouldnt what you do in the playoffs as a goalie(aside from winning the cup) matter even more? you know like winning the conn smyth?

if the playoffs do enter the equation then heres some data that ill repost just for you.

reg season
Quick-286g-2.32gaa-.915sv-25shutouts
Hank-510g-2.25gaa-.920sv-45shutouts

playoffs
Quick-50g-2.03gas-.929sv-7shutouts
Hank-67g-2.28gaa-.920sv-8shutouts

hanks slightly better in the reg season(by 0.07gaa, .005sv)
quicks more than slightly better in the playoffs(by 0.25gaa, .009sv)


"Lundqvist has definitely been the better goalie over the last several years. Lundqvist is probably the better goalie right now. Lundqvist will probably be the better goalie over the next several years, but that's yet to be seen."

speaking of wishy-washy narratives...well done.
- good2b_the_king

Its really not all that close.

in the 2006 playoffs, in Lundqvist's rookie year, Lundqvist got blasted by the Devils in the playoffs. lost 3 games, gave up 13 goals on 79 shots, the series was a nightmare.

It's a complete abberation to his entire career in the post season, and when you are getting nitpicky about save percentage and GAA in the post season, just take that into consideration

So now we're discounting regular season and international play and only counting a 1 1/2 month stretch? In that case, J.S. Giguere is a sure-fire HOFer.
- jmatchett383

Okay, so give me a solid reason reason why Lundquist is better. All great sports figures have championships, along with their regular season play. I don't see how he's any better, but if you say he is, then he must be.

Hank is the best goalie in the league. Put him on at least 20 other teams and he would have a cup by now.
- mighty13duck

Pure speculation. Again, he's more popular based on being on a MAJOR market hockey team, the media, and video games(that's you, kids).

Quick was awesome before anyone new he was.

Just watch NHL on the Fly. You rarely get any Kings highlight real footage as oppposed to the large markets. Of course people will choose the more popular option, even if the other guy is a bit better. Ie Quick.

Every non-LA fan will be biased towards Lundquist for the very reasons I've just described.

Pure speculation. Again, he's more popular based on being on a MAJOR market hockey team, the media, and video games(that's you, kids).

Quick was awesome before anyone new he was.

Just watch NHL on the Fly. You rarely get any Kings highlight real footage as oppposed to the large markets. Of course people will choose the more popular option, even if the other guy is a bit better. Ie Quick.

Every non-LA fan will be biased towards Lundquist for the very reasons I've just described.
- Ersberg

I hate the Rangers and don't mind the Kings. Me thinking the Hank is better has nothing to do with being bias

let me get this straight...

the playoffs dont matter.

the kings are great & the rangers suck.

consistency matters but only for as long as you say.

blocked shots matter. possesion matters...even though hank saw like 2 more shots a game(im pretty sure thats why we have a sv % stat).

cool story bro and sweet criteria...too funny!
- good2b_the_king

1. Playoffs do matter, but when your talking goalie stats, Quick had 1 amazing playoff where the team in front of him dominated every team they played sweeping teams basically the entire run, which pads his entire stats. Playoffs is a small sample size and a specialty sample for that.

2. Consistency doesn't only matter for as along as I say, consistency matters period. Having really good half seasons or really spectacular dominating runs that get offset by having subpar other parts means inconsistency. Quick is fairly consistent, but he has swings a hell of a lot more than Hank. In terms of consistency, there is no goalie in the league that has been more consistent over the past 7 years than Lundqvist.

3. You apparently missed my entire point of the shots against comment. LA ranked 25-30 in blocked shots. Rangers were always in the top 5. Thats a HUGE difference. The 2 more shots may seem insignificant but not when you add that huge difference in blocked shots. If everything was consistent, then you would assume that the Rangers blocking TONS more shots than LA would equate to a huge difference in shots against, but contrary, the Rangers still let up 2 more shots against on average. That does have a bigger implication.

Pure speculation. Again, he's more popular based on being on a MAJOR market hockey team, the media, and video games(that's you, kids).

Quick was awesome before anyone new he was.

Just watch NHL on the Fly. You rarely get any Kings highlight real footage as oppposed to the large markets. Of course people will choose the more popular option, even if the other guy is a bit better. Ie Quick.

Every non-LA fan will be biased towards Lundquist for the very reasons I've just described.
- Ersberg

Jonathan Quick has had two awesome seasons. One of them was one of the best seasons any goalie has ever had the in the league when you include the Cup run.

But, he's had TWO awesome seasons.

Pure speculation. Again, he's more popular based on being on a MAJOR market hockey team, the media, and video games(that's you, kids).

Quick was awesome before anyone new he was.

Just watch NHL on the Fly. You rarely get any Kings highlight real footage as oppposed to the large markets. Of course people will choose the more popular option, even if the other guy is a bit better. Ie Quick.

Every non-LA fan will be biased towards Lundquist for the very reasons I've just described.
- Ersberg

Based purely off of season to season statistics.. 5 of Lundqvists 8 seasons he has had a save percentage over .920

His lowest save%? .912

Quick on the other hand..
In his 5 seasons, he has one year with a save % above .920, and 2 below Lundqvist's career low.

ALLLLL the while, Quick is playing on a defensively dominant team in the lowest scoring division in the league.

@sven22

"But going by the data we currently have, there is no solid case that I can see that would argue Quick above Lundqvist, at least any case supported by substantiated evidence as opposed to unprovable wishy-washy narratives."

so if goalies dont win cups and teams do, does that mean that the playoff #'s dont count either? lol. if winning a cup is the ultimate prize and the whole point...then wouldnt what you do in the playoffs as a goalie(aside from winning the cup) matter even more? you know like winning the conn smyth?

if the playoffs do enter the equation then heres some data that ill repost just for you.

reg season
Quick-286g-2.32gaa-.915sv-25shutouts
Hank-510g-2.25gaa-.920sv-45shutouts

playoffs
Quick-50g-2.03gas-.929sv-7shutouts
Hank-67g-2.28gaa-.920sv-8shutouts

hanks slightly better in the reg season(by 0.07gaa, .005sv)
quicks more than slightly better in the playoffs(by 0.25gaa, .009sv)


"Lundqvist has definitely been the better goalie over the last several years. Lundqvist is probably the better goalie right now. Lundqvist will probably be the better goalie over the next several years, but that's yet to be seen."

speaking of wishy-washy narratives...well done.
- good2b_the_king

Quick's Playoff Stats is completely padded by ONE playoff year. The one where the team in front him completely dominated the other teams by owning the puck and destroying them. Quick was great, but he wasn't the only reason they swept basically the entire run. Without that 1 playoff year, what would be Quick's playoff average? Significantly lower. Lundqvist again, is the most consistent goalie, playoff after playoff, he gives you the same performance. Its the team in front of both goalies that make the big playoff difference. The sample size of the playoffs is so small that 1 year can completely throw the overall stats off.

Okay, so give me a solid reason reason why Lundquist is better. All great sports figures have championships, along with their regular season play. I don't see how he's any better, but if you say he is, then he must be.
- Ersberg

I can name you probably 30 amazing hockey players goalies and skaters that have never won a cup. There's even HOF players that never won a cup.

Just by example of the shiatpile of Stanley Cups he's won...
- MisterC

So I guess when Gretzky left Edmonton he was no longer the best player in the world either because he didn't ever win the cup again??? What a stupid comment. Hockeys a team game.

I can name you probably 30 amazing hockey players goalies and skaters that have never won a cup. There's even HOF players that never won a cup.
- xcheckmajor

Pavel Bure never won a Cup.

That means he sucked.

Pavel Bure never won a Cup.

That means he sucked.
- jimbro83

Just as a comparison.



Quick:
286 games, .915 sv%, 2.32 gaa, 1 Stanley Cup ring.

Antti Niemi:
213 NHL games, .917%, 2.34 gaa, 1 Stanley Cup ring.

Uh-oh... who's better?12?!@?^@$&*F

Pavel Bure never won a Cup.

That means he sucked.
- jimbro83

Mats Sundin, Eric Lindros, Pat Lafontaine, Peter Stastny, Marcel Dionne, Brad Park, Jean Ratelle, Adam Oates, Pavel Bure, Borje Salming, Ron Greschner, Peter Bondra, Trevor Linden, Joe Thorton, Jarome Iginla, Bernie Nicholls, Jeremy Roenick, Pierre Turgeon, Paul Kariya, Curtis Joseph, Dale Hunter, Keith Tkachuk, Phil Housely, Daniel Alfredsson, Dino Ciccarelli, Ed Giacomin, Dale Hawerchuk, Rod Gilbert, Mike Gartner, Emile Francis, Cam Neely.

I mean, RAY F-NING Bourque almost NEVER won a cup. Thats the perfect example. Throw him on a different team and presto! Stanley Cup!

Again, no one is saying Quick sucks. But stop using "oh he won a cup Hank didn't so he's better" as your reason. Come up with some real evaluation to prove he's better. Everything else points to Hank being better except that playoff false reasoning.

Quick's Playoff Stats is completely padded by ONE playoff year. The one where the team in front him completely dominated the other teams by owning the puck and destroying them. Quick was great, but he wasn't the only reason they swept basically the entire run. Without that 1 playoff year, what would be Quick's playoff average? Significantly lower. Lundqvist again, is the most consistent goalie, playoff after playoff, he gives you the same performance. Its the team in front of both goalies that make the big playoff difference. The sample size of the playoffs is so small that 1 year can completely throw the overall stats off.
- xcheckmajor

do you guys even check the stats before you post?

quick
2012-2013 playoffs - 18g-1.86gaa-.934-3so

everything you just said is proved rubbish by one copy and paste of last years stats that every kings fan already knew...smh.

"I think the cups > no cups line of reasoning, as a stop-gap argument, is insufficient. That being said, the fact that Quick has won a cup cannot be completely discounted."

See how that works guys? Cup wins can be a criteria for which goalie is better without being the be-all and end-all.

do you guys even check the stats before you post?

quick
2012-2013 playoffs - 18g-1.86gaa-.934-3so

everything you just said is proved rubbish by one copy and paste of last years stats that every kings fan already knew...smh.
- good2b_the_king

Playoffs --GP W L GA GAA SA SV SV% SO
'09-'10 LA 6 2 4 21 3.50 181 160 .884 0
'10-'11 LA 6 2 4 20 3.16 229 209 .913 1

OKAY, so he's had 2 good playoff years after having 2 awful playoff years. Again, comeback when he posts these playoff stats 5 years in a row. Seriously, your really good potential goalie has 2 good years in a row and you want to crown him the best goalie in the league compared to the other guy who has been stellar for basically 7 years in a row?

do you guys even check the stats before you post?

quick
2012-2013 playoffs - 18g-1.86gaa-.934-3so

everything you just said is proved rubbish by one copy and paste of last years stats that every kings fan already knew...smh.
- good2b_the_king

You guys had the best player in the history of the game on your team and couldn't win a cup. Hockey is a team sport. LA plays a TEAM defensive game. Effective yes and easier on a goalie. They let up less shots on goal and less scoring chances, and the ones that do make it through are not the same quality.

Just as a comparison.



Quick:
286 games, .915 sv%, 2.32 gaa, 1 Stanley Cup ring.

Antti Niemi:
213 NHL games, .917%, 2.34 gaa, 1 Stanley Cup ring.

Uh-oh... who's better?12?!@?^@$&*F
- jak521

niemi's career playoff stats
56g-2.65gaa-.909sv-2so

do i need to post quicks playoffs stats again or say anymore?

its hilarious that you suckers want to completely not count the cup...but to completely not count the conn smyth and the playoffs is crazy.

Why the need for this blog? The prior blog you posted the ranks of the 30 starters, there was enough of a debate between the two fan bases. Both have an avenue to claim to be the best right now. Lundqvist's multiple Vezina nominations and one Vezina win. Quick obviously with the cup. Just seems like your looking for hits.

Why the need for this blog? The prior blog you posted the ranks of the 30 starters, there was enough of a debate between the two fan bases. Both have an avenue to claim to be the best right now. Lundqvist's multiple Vezina nominations and one Vezina win. Quick obviously with the cup. Just seems like your looking for hits.
- tomburton99

I simply wanted this to have its own platform, as well as the poll, outside of the list that was posted previously. I also wanted to provide those statistics for people that were relevant to some of the arguments being brought up in the comments section of last blog (Like the divisional stats, the average shots against). I'm a big stat guy.

Playoffs --GP W L GA GAA SA SV SV% SO
'09-'10 LA 6 2 4 21 3.50 181 160 .884 0
'10-'11 LA 6 2 4 20 3.16 229 209 .913 1

OKAY, so he's had 2 good playoff years after having 2 awful playoff years. Again, comeback when he posts these playoff stats 5 years in a row. Seriously, your really good potential goalie has 2 good years in a row and you want to crown him the best goalie in the league compared to the other guy who has been stellar for basically 7 years in a row?
- xcheckmajor

you said it was one year. i showed you two.
now you say to comeback in 5 years? lol!

in what world do i need to comeback to you to prove anything regarding the playoffs when ive already posted these CAREER playoff stats?

Quick-50g-2.03gas-.929sv-7shutouts
Hank-67g-2.28gaa-.920sv-8shutouts

amazing. give your head a shake...