Revisiting an old argument: Marty v. Hank — the first 10 years

Earlier this year, we took a look at the first 10 years in the careers of Martin Brodeur and Henrik Lundqvist (not 10 seasons ... years). We broke down the stats before Hank had completed the 10-year period and in fairness, we re-present the statistics with the 10-year period now complete for the Rangers’ netminder.

Hank’s numbers changed in two categories (those numbers are in red). Finals appearances jumped from 0 to 1 — and series won jumped from 5 to 8.

As I’ve said — there is no comparison to these two yet. There may never be an instance where they can and/or should be compared. And yes, I know there are plenty who will disagree with me on this one. That’s why we have comments enabled — and why you don’t even need an account or to register to post your comments.

So please, comment away!

Click on the image to see a larger version of it.

Not ready to crown Hank a king just yet — but close

NEW YORK —

A buddy of mine emailed me last night and said: “And come on...after tonight? Even YOU gotta call him The King.”

My response was: “No I don’t actually, but he did play the best game of his career last night.”

And I really believe he did. Remarkably, Lundqvist stopped the final 26 shots of the game. You would have thought it was the Kings were the ones desperate to get back into the series, not the Rangers, they way they turned it on in the third period.

But Lundqvist was ready for the task.

And that final minute was nothing short of remarkable. Some amazing saves. And some incredibly good luck. Now I understand why goalies look to make slushies on the ice. A little less of it in the crease, and perhaps there is yet another OT.

Yet still, a tremendous game.

That is how close the Kings were to sending Game 4 to OT.

A massive effort.

One worthy of the history books even.

But not yet on the level of a King.

Remember: That day comes when in the final game of the season, Lundqvist is jumping in the air and not sitting on the bench or on his buttocks. And when the stat sheet says he’s the game-winning goalie.

Until then, perhaps prince is more appropriate.

Lundqvist deserves much better than his teammates have given him

Perhaps unfairly at times, I’ve been rather critical of New York Rangers goalie Henrik Lundqvist. Since he entered the NHL in the 2005-06 season, he’s had some great regular-season numbers — but when it comes to the post-season, he’s accomplished nothing.

He’s only got a handful of series victories — and only once, last year, did he ever win two series in one season.

And up to a few weeks ago, I wrote, in this same space, that it was somewhat embarrassing that the so-dubbed “King” was far from being a king, given his incredible lack of playoff success.

And then yesterday happened.

And then it hit me — as it did many other hockey fans.

This guy is the reason — the only reason — the Rangers were in Game 2 against the Caps yesterday afternoon at the Verizon Center. This guy is the only reason that game wasn’t 8-0. This guy would already have multiple championships if he played elsewhere, somewhere where his teammates backed up his incredible play with — oh, you know — scoring an occasional goal.

In two games, the Rangers have a grand total of one goal. While I understand the Caps don’t exactly have a ton more — they’ve only scored four — this team’s offense has just disappeared. 

Lundqvist has single-handedly carried this team in two games in Washington. He’s done it so many times before. And quite frankly. he deserves so much better.

Perhaps it’s because I am getting older — but I just feel badly for the guy. Here’s a man who, day in and day out, shows up. Even in last year’s Eastern Conference Finals, which our team won in six games, the guy was barely at fault for the four games his team lost. When Adam Henrique scored on OT in Game 6 to win it for the Devils, Lundqvist was practically left out to dry by his teammates, many of whom were flat on their asses when the puck crossed the goal line.

Steven Schaffer is a buddy of mine I met over a year ago on Facebook. He’s as big and loyal a Rangers fan as I’ve ever known. And he’s likely the most intelligent Rangers fan I’ve ever known, too. After yesterday’s game, here’s what he said about Hank.

Henrik Lundqvist deserves so much
better than his teammates have
given him over the years.  

Perhaps it was sarcastic. Perhaps it wasn’t. But it was striking, nonetheless.

“I hope Hank leaves as a free agent and goes to a team and wins a cup,” Schaffer wrote. “They don’t deserve him.”

Regardless of the intent of this statement, it’s true. The guy has played well enough over 8 or so years to win a Cup. Multiple Cups, practically. And yet every post-season, his teammates let him down.

One thing’s for sure. 

Our team has an aging goaltender. He’s likely a year or perhaps, at most, two, away from retiring.

And if Henrik Lundqvist really wants to win a cup, I am sure Lou Lamoriello would be more than happy to offer him a nice incentive to cross the river.

Hey — a man can dream, can’t he?

There can be no argument — it's not even close yet — in the 'debate' over who's better: Marty or Henrik

ABOVE: Henrik Lundqvist 

The Canessa Commentary
By Kevin Canessa Jr.

No surprise, it's happening again.

Not sure how or why, either, quite frankly, given how poorly both teams have played all season long.

Still, there are fans of the New York Rangers who, rightfully so, will defend their goaltender to the death. I can understand that. Completely.

But when they make comparisons of Henrik Lundqvist to Martin Brodeur — even to this very day — I cannot help but laugh.

The so-called "King" hasn't even approached the same goaltending stratosphere as Brodeur. Not especially when you compare their first seven-and-three-quarter seasons.

The sheer numbers alone — the post-season numbers are the only ones that matter — are where it's most striking.

Let's take a look at Lundqvist's post-season numbers.

In his career, he's won a grand total of four series — one against Atlanta, another against our Devils — and Ottawa and Washington last year.

Four series — in seven years.

In Martin Brodeur's first season, he won three — against Buffalo, Boston and Philly.

And in the season next, four — Boston, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia and Detroit.

Seven series victories in his first two seasons. Three more than Hank's had in eight (six, really, considering one year, he didn't make the playoffs — and this year still a question).

In total, Brodeur won 15 series and two Cups (three Finals appearances) in his first eight NHL seasons, whilst missing the playoffs once in that span (1995-96).

That alone is enough to stop the silly comparisons.

The statistics speak for themselves and tell a great story —
there is no rightful comparison between Martin Brodeur
and Henrik Lunqvist. Hank isn't even close to Marty
territory yet. But that could always change
 in the future, can't it?

But let's take the years Lundqvist has been in the league — starting with the 2005-06 season, and compare the two.

His first playoff appearances were hideous. The Devils swept the Rangers that year — and he was so bad, Kevin Weekes got a start in that series (a loss).

In the same time frame — despite an age difference of 10 years and three months, Brodeur has won five series to Lundqvist's four — and head-to-head, Brodeur leads 2 series to 1.

So even in the modern era — this so-called King — the man so many in New York have anointed the second-coming of Christ, he still doesn't have the numbers or statistics to back it up.

There is no question Lundqvist has was it takes to be considered an elite goaltender. But he hasn't even been to the Finals yet — let alone he hasn't yet won a Cup.

It's fun to compare players. It happens to Brodeur all the time — especially when the name Patrick Roy is mentioned. But sorry — comparing Henrik Lundqvist to Martin Brodeur is like comparing the Mets to the Yankees. One is a lifetime winner. The other gets a break here and there, but wins nothing big ultimately.

Perhaps in 20 years, we'll look back and say: "Boy that Lundqvist was the best there ever was." For Rangers fans, I hope you all get that opportunity.

But for now, it's an apples-to-oranges comparison.

It's not even close.

The two names shouldn't be even considered equals at this point because they're not.

One wins constantly. The other has accomplished nothing.

I'll accept the argument, perhaps, after he's got two rings.

For now, carry on.

This argument shouldn't have happened in the first place.