posted at 4/8/2012 11:53 PM EDT
Every single person on TV calls Lunqvist the shoo-in for the Vezina.
Uh, Brian Elliott not only set a new Save % all time record with .940, Rotoworld just pointed out he set a modern NHL record for goals against average at 1.56.
I know he didnt play a slew of games, but that's pretty good.
posted at 4/8/2012 11:54 PM EDT
In Response to Vezina?
[QUOTE]Every single person on TV calls Lunqvist the shoo-in for the Vezina. Uh, Brian Elliott not only set a new Save % all time record with .940, Rotoworld just pointed out he set a modern NHL record for goals against average at 1.56. I know he didnt play a slew of games, but that's pretty good.
Posted by SoxFanInIL[/QUOTE]
Sure is, however his game splayed will be used against him, I think it's between Henrik and Quick, with Henrik getting it.
posted at 4/9/2012 9:36 AM EDT
You guys are forgetting Mike Smith in Phoenix lead them to there first division title and posted a 930 save percentage hes gotta get some love to great year by a guy no one ever discusses
posted at 4/9/2012 9:42 AM EDT
In Response to Re: Vezina?
[QUOTE]In Response to Vezina? : Sure is, however his game splayed will be used against him, I think it's between Henrik and Quick, with Henrik getting it.
Posted by kelvana33[/QUOTE]
Totally agree with this. I think it will be a really close race with a slight edge going to Lundquist.
posted at 4/9/2012 11:20 AM EDT
Elliot will be overshadowed by Phoenix's Smith. Heck with Thomas people wanted to use the 54 and 57 games played as a factor against him. Thus, unfortunetely Elliot will have the 38 held against him.
I thought Lundqvist had this locked up but Jonathan Quick has had one heck of a year and his stats are very close if not the same with him leading some major categories: Shutouts and the fact that his team blocks fewer shots and gives him less goal support.
I say give it to the kid! (Plus he's a Umass alum)
posted at 4/9/2012 12:09 PM EDT
Elliot had a fine year, no doubt about it. The problem for him is that he only started 38 games. In fact, Halak actually spent more time over the course of the year as a starter. No goalie has won the trophy with so few games played in the modern era. In fact, in 03/04 Mikka Kiprusoff faced the exact situation and the reason given why he did not win the Vezina that year was because he only played in 38 games.
Not saying Elliot is not worthy, but he is unlikely to win.
posted at 4/9/2012 2:08 PM EDT
Finalists should be Lundqvist, Quick & Smith.
It'll be close between Lundqvist & Quick, if they look at the true stats and facts. If they let the lobbying take over, Hank will win it.
IMO, it should be Quick's. A lot less goal support and blocked shots in front of him and the kid still ends up with the exact same numbers as Lundqvist.
posted at 4/9/2012 2:30 PM EDT
I'm hoping for Quick. Did my undergrad at UMass Amherst so I'm a bit biased.
posted at 4/9/2012 2:50 PM EDT
Can't believe no love for Rinne! I hope Quick gets it & even though Elliot had a great year his record for S.P doesn't get recorded because he started less than 40 games. Dumb excuse as I think 25 should qualify, but Neely's record sits at 50 in 49 even though he did it in 44 personal games. However the B's were on game 49 when he did it.
posted at 4/9/2012 3:28 PM EDT
Jonathan Quick should get it but probably wont because he doesnt play in a big hockey market, Lundquist will probably win and he has had a great year as well.
posted at 4/9/2012 3:29 PM EDT
In Response to Re: Vezina?
[QUOTE]Jonathan Quick should get it but probably wont because he doesnt play in a big hockey market, Lundquist will probably win and he has had a great year as well.
Posted by fourrings[/QUOTE]
Certainly more guys to consider this year than most. It's a tough call on this award.
posted at 4/9/2012 5:50 PM EDT
I think Quick deserves it. The Kings absolutely have no reason to be in the playoffs at all, let alone fighting for the division at season's end. Worst scoring team or close to it in the league and Quick led them to a playoff spot. Quick is my choice for Vezina.
posted at 4/9/2012 11:05 PM EDT
It depends on what the voters place their emphasis on -- I think it's also tough to ignore the two guys who got over 40 wins (Renne & Fleury), even though their GAA & Sv% wasn't as impressive as Lunqvist, Smith, Quick or Elliott.
I notice that when you go to the NHL web site and check goalie stats, they're ranked first by wins, and then you can re-sort by other categories. Does this mean that the league thinks W's are the most important stat for a goalie?
posted at 4/9/2012 11:17 PM EDT
Quick did so much with so little, my choice
Henrik wins it
You've gotta admit that when TT, Fleury, and even BobbyLu don't crack your top 5, that is a hell of a year for goaltenders.
Great season really. Playoffs will be even better.
posted at 4/9/2012 11:40 PM EDT
Yeah, I can't dispute the low games played angle on Ellott and I have to agree Henrik wins it, but I think I'd vote for Quick based on the team he plays on. Lots of goalies' numbers would improve behind NYR defense.
I love Rinne but I dont see him in the top 3 this year. I still think he could have been a legitimate winner last year. Smith was a shocker.
Schneider's numbers were scary, too!
posted at 4/10/2012 7:37 AM EDT
If you start fewer than 41 games, you're a backup. Doesn't matter what kind of stats a backup puts up, he's never going to win the Vezina.
There are cases like Kiprusoff where a trade moves a guy from the bench to the crease too late in the season to cross that 41 game threshold, and that's when you run into the arguments. Unless a guy is head and shoulders above the competition, wouldn't you give it to the guy who was as good - or very slightly less good - in more games? Or would you at least pick the best, say, 38 game stretch for the competition and see how that stacks up?
This isn't the case with Elliott, even though, by the end of the year, he was playing just as often as Halak and facing, generally, a tougher slate of opponents - Detroit, Nashville, Boston etc. And actually, when I look again, he had the tougher row to hoe in terms of strength of opponent all year. But he was never the out and out starter.
I think this is the right comparable - Tuukka Rask 2009-10. Led the league with a sub-2.00 GAA, had a .931 S% and led one of the worse scoring teams in the league into the second round of the playoffs. He played 45 games and was the undisputed starter by early 2010 given Thomas's injury. Rask not only got shut out for the Vezina (not a finalist) he didn't get a Calder nod either. Jimmy Howard did with a 2.26, .924 line and 37 wins in 63 games.