tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148461224473220694.post1051060120678584649..comments2024-03-27T06:03:35.695-04:00Comments on Brodeur is a Fraud: The 1993 Canadiens in OTThe Contrarian Goaltenderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03433370306939690205noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148461224473220694.post-58202323665865645562010-10-08T13:38:16.585-04:002010-10-08T13:38:16.585-04:00CG good article with some good information to thin...CG good article with some good information to think about. Far be it from me to every praise Patrick Roy but I remember this playoff run and being really impressed at Roy's and the Canadians performance.<br /><br />I agree totally that the Canadians were not a terrible team that Roy saved. One thing that is worth noting is Roy had a terrible regular season by his standards. His 0.894 SV% was the 3rd lowest of his career. This came sandwiched between seasons of 0.914 and 0.918.<br /><br />If Roy had a 0.916 SV% (the total SV% of the years before/after 92-93) over the same 62 games he played he would have allowed 40 less goals. This would have made the Habs a +86 team. Close to tops in the league.<br /><br />It would appear as though he "saved it for the playoffs".<br /><br />That considered I think we are selling the Habs opponents a bit short.<br /><br />Here are their opponents<br /><br />Team PTS GF GA Diff<br />MONT 102 326 280 46<br />QUE 104 351 300 51<br />BUF 86 335 297 38<br />NYI 87 335 297 38<br />LAK 88 338 340 -2<br /><br />In addition to these numbers the Kings were without Gretzky for 30 games and likely would have been a much better offensive team had he played the entire time.<br /><br />Basically the Habs/Nords outperformed their regular season numbers while the Sabres/Isles underperformed and the Kings fought injuries.<br /><br />Basically the series should have been much closer than they were but were not thanks in a large part to Roy's greatly improved performance between reg season and playoffs.<br /><br />In addition the Habs had a reg season GF of 3.88 and GA of 3.33. In 111 minutes of playing time we would expect GF 7.2 GA 6.2. Instead they got GF 10 GA 1.<br /><br />This would contribute about 61% to goaltending/defense and 39% to shooters. Some of the 61% goes to the defense and team play of course but the goalie should get some credit.<br /><br />I guess the end result is I agree with you to an extent. It wasn't just Roy but it isn't too much of a stretch to say his contribution was the greatest. The Habs were not a bad team, in fact they were quite good, but the teams they played against were also good teams who were capable of putting up very good games.<br /><br />Montreal should have and did win the cup. Once they beat the Nords they should have won every round but the rounds should of been quite a bit closer than the over 12-2. That over performing is more measurable with Roy than any other individual team member.Agent Orangehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11969608025201544178noreply@blogger.com