http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Debt1929-50.jpg
It is true, however, that he raised taxes on the rich. Sound like anyone we know?
But Hoover was trying to balance the budget. He saw it as a goal, an end to itself that would reassure credit markets and do a bunch of good. FDR saw stimulating demand as more important in the short term. That's the difference between them. Hoover was raising taxes to try and balance the budget, and only increased government spending very slightly considering he had 25% unemployment. FDR threw it all to the wind for a few years and massively increased deficits as a deliberate policy.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/publications/erp/page/3796/1208...
As one of FDR's brain trust stated, "practically the whole New Deal was extrapolated from programs that Hoover started."
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/goldengate/sfeature/sf_30s.html
But I thought the difference was more clear-cut than that as far as their actions.
Still, I find it hard to justify the statement that "they had the same view in regards to counter-cyclical spending and balanced budgets" -- FDR championed crazy deficits to stimulate the economy for a decade, Hoover seems to have been trying to move towards a balanced budget after a brief round of stimulus.
--Totally biased source, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122576077569495545.html