Greatest Goalie of All Time #6

[Bear of Bad News]

I mentioned this in my previous reply but Dryden isn't special in that backup goalies usually play against weaker teams than the starter. Not all backups end up with winning percentages better than the starter though.

Certainly true. But it's not unusual that Dryden's do.

Part of that is because Dryden's Canadiens had the opportunity to have a top quality backup goaltender on the team, whereas Brodeur's Devils did (and do) not. Bunny Larocque would have started for many of the 1970s rosters.

Again, I mentioned some of the greats like Broda, Smith, Fuhr, Brodeur all of whom had much better stats in the post season, unlike Dryden.

I guess it depends on how you define "stats".

Dryden did have (in 1977) the 20th most dominant postseason in modern history:
http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=6223972&postcount=36

And was also the 20th most dominant (career-wise) goaltender in modern postseason history:
http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=6223972&postcount=36

And had three consecutive seasons where he was the most dominant goaltender in the playoffs:
http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=6224066&postcount=41

All of those are based on save percentage, which is not perfect. But it's a stat, and it's the statistic which goaltenders have more control over than GAA or winning percentage.

 

[crashlanding]

Most goaltenders' statistics do. On average, postseason opponents are better than regular-season opponents.

So what was your point with these two statements?

Brodeur's numbers get significantly better in the postseason.
Regular Season - 2.2 GAA .912 Sv%
Postseason - 1.88 GAA .923 Sv%

 

[Talent Analyst]

Martin Brodeur

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Brodeur's numbers get significantly better in the postseason.
Regular Season - 2.2 GAA .912 Sv%
Postseason - 1.88 GAA .923 Sv%

"Most goaltenders" does not mean the same as "all goaltenders".

 

[God Bless Canada]

From how I interpret that quote, I think he implies that there isn't any aspect of greatness in which Brodeur trumps Dryden, indicating that is no comparison between the two. I disagree as Brodeur has played in many more games even at this point in his career and as such, has proven a greater durability than Dryden.



We speculate about how good Dryden would be if he had a career the size of Brodeur's, but as there is no evidence proving he can be as durable, I will favor the player who has proven the ability to be great over a long stretch of time.



You can't argue Dryden's success in the playoffs, however, guys like Broda, Roy, Smith, Fuhr, Brodeur all had their stats improve in the post season while Dryden's got worse; those are the fact, take what you will from them.



And exactly how is this different from most of the post expansion HOF calibur goaltenders? Do you think Brodeur misses games against the Flyers or Rangers, or Roy missed many games against Detroit and Dallas. When a team has an elite goaltender, the backup will mostly play against bad teams. Brodeur and Roy's backups had worse records, Dryden's had better records....again take what you will from that.

Based on how they ACTUALLY PLAYED THE GAME (a far more relevant reflection of greatness than stats), there is no way Brodeur is better than Dryden. But I don't think it's a wide gap. I think it's close. But still, Dryden is better.

You said that Brodeur has "played in many more games at this point." Care to expand on that? Because with one stupid remark, you just advocated having Felix Potvin ahead of Dryden. I'd expand on that if I were you, or you look like an outright fool.

Based on HOW HE PLAYED THE GAME we have plenty of evidence that Dryden would have thrived. His poise, his focus, his determination, his efficient style, his intelligence all indicate several more years of success. Would he have dominated until he was 40? Don't know. But with the way he played the game, Dryden would stand as good of a shot as any goalie in history of dominating well into his 30s.

Like I said before, I don't care about GAA and save percentage come playoff time. Yeah, they're nice and all, but come playoff time, only one thing matters for a goalie: winning. And last I checked, Dryden won the maximum number of games (12) every time he won the Cup. The second-most important thing in evaluating a goalie? Making the clutch saves. I don't care how many saves you make. What matters in the end is when, and the context, of those saves.

If you're arguing winning percentages among back-ups, you're really reaching for straws. That's a chooch-esque argument. With the exception of Chris Terreri, most of Brodeur's backups have been marginal NHL goaltenders.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

And last I checked, Dryden won the maximum number of games (12) every time he won the Cup.

Huh? A large number of starting goaltenders win the maximum number of games when their team wins the Cup.

You might as well say that, last time you checked, Dryden allowed zero goals (0) every time he had a shutout.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

The second-most important thing in evaluating a goalie? Making the clutch saves. I don't care how many saves you make. What matters in the end is when, and the context, of those saves.

The best thing about "making the clutch saves" is that people's memories are faulty. You basically remember what you want to remember.

My point here is that, unless you've done a systematic analysis of "when, and in the context" for Dryden's postseasons, this is going to get nowhere.

I remember Kirk McLean making a fantastic save in overtime of Game Seven in Vancouver's first-round series against Calgary in 1994. Does that make him the "most clutch goalie" ever?

 

[God Bless Canada]

The best thing about "making the clutch saves" is that people's memories are faulty. You basically remember what you want to remember.

My point here is that, unless you've done a systematic analysis of "when, and in the context" for Dryden's postseasons, this is going to get nowhere.

I remember Kirk McLean making a fantastic save in overtime of Game Seven in Vancouver's first-round series against Calgary in 1994. Does that make him the "most clutch goalie" ever?

Of course not. And I'm a big McLean fan. Consistency and frequency are factors, too. Dryden would face 20-25 shots a game, but when you needed that big save late in the third period, he was there. Or he could make three or four saves in rapid succession after several minutes of inactivity. (Brodeur's one of the few, ever, in Dryden's class in that regard).

That's what guys like Fuhr, Cheevers and Smith based their careers on. They didn't care about how many goals they gave up. They cared about the W. A 6-0 win and a 6-5 win were the same to them. (Cheevers once bailed out of the net during a lopsided game when facing Bobby Hull on a breakaway). But you knew that when you had those guys in the net in a close game in the final minute of the third period, that they would make the save.

As for your previous post, I did state the obvious. But my point is strictly that when it comes to evaluating goalies in the playoffs, winning is what counts. And that's what Dryden was about: winning. GAA and save percentage don't mean much in playoff time without winning. Just ask Curtis Joseph.

 

[canucksfan]

Let's take is easy with the Dryden is way better than Brodeur talk. Dryden has played a fraction of the games Brodeur has. Dryden's backups have a higher winning percentage than he does. Dryden's stats get worse in the playoffs. If you want to say Dryden is better, fine, but don't make it seems like there is no comparison between the two. Greatness includes being great for a long stretch of time and I would have loved to see what Dryden could have done over a longer career.

I never said Dryden was way better than Brodeur. Like previously mentioned Dryden's backups played easier teams. The most important stat for goalies in the playoffs is wins.

 

[meehan]

Based on how they ACTUALLY PLAYED THE GAME (a far more relevant reflection of greatness than stats), there is no way Brodeur is better than Dryden. But I don't think it's a wide gap. I think it's close. But still, Dryden is better.

OK, you call my remarks stupid but don't even explain how Dryden can't be worse than Brodeur in any way. I am sorry, but "how they actually played the game" is too vague to use as a defense of Dryden being better than Brodeur in every aspect of goaltending ability.

You said that Brodeur has "played in many more games at this point." Care to expand on that? Because with one stupid remark, you just advocated having Felix Potvin ahead of Dryden. I'd expand on that if I were you, or you look like an outright fool.

Right, because I said I prefer one HOF calibur goaltender over another HOF goalie because the player I prefer has proven durability, means that I think that all goalies who have played alot are great. Good job putting words in my mouth.

Based on HOW HE PLAYED THE GAME we have plenty of evidence that Dryden would have thrived. His poise, his focus, his determination, his efficient style, his intelligence all indicate several more years of success. Would he have dominated until he was 40? Don't know. But with the way he played the game, Dryden would stand as good of a shot as any goalie in history of dominating well into his 30s.

Ever think there is more to being great over a long stretch of time than just having talent in hockey sense? How do I know Dryden would stay injury free long enough to have the kind of career Brodeur has. Staying healthy is a big part of greatness. And again you bring up how he "played" the game; if we go that route, why can't we argue that if Brodeur were on those Canadians teams he wouldn't have better awards/statistics than Dryden. I mean Brodeur plays more than Dryden did, he also is great at making "big saves", great in tight games, and he plays the puck better than Dryden did. I mean if we get into speculation wars, we can go anywhere with all this.

Like I said before, I don't care about GAA and save percentage come playoff time. Yeah, they're nice and all, but come playoff time, only one thing matters for a goalie: winning. And last I checked, Dryden won the maximum number of games (12) every time he won the Cup. The second-most important thing in evaluating a goalie? Making the clutch saves. I don't care how many saves you make. What matters in the end is when, and the context, of those saves.

Gee, Dryden won the 12 games necessary everytime he won the cup.....so how many great goalies haven't won all the games their teams have on their cup runs? I mean, Brodeur won 16 games all the years his team won the cup; it's not special, it's what a #1 goalie should do.

If you're arguing winning percentages among back-ups, you're really reaching for straws. That's a chooch-esque argument. With the exception of Chris Terreri, most of Brodeur's backups have been marginal NHL goaltenders.

Actually, Dunham backed up Brodeur for a considerable chunk of time and he was a #1 goalie for a while and therefore a pretty good backup option. My point with that is that Dryden's teams were so great that their backup goaltenders were even big winners; something that is not true of Brodeur's teams or the teams of other great goaltenders.

 

[meehan]

I never said Dryden was way better than Brodeur. Like previously mentioned Dryden's backups played easier teams. The most important stat for goalies in the playoffs is wins.

Well, when you make remarks like "At this point in his career there is no way he is better than Dryden", how is one suppossed to know that you don't feel there is no aspect of goaltending (the "no way") in which Brodeur beats Dryden. Thus, I pointed out durability. And again, in general, all backups of HOF goalies play easier teams, that is not special to Dryden. And playoff wins are important.....Brodeur already has more than Dryden.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

As for your previous post, I did state the obvious. But my point is strictly that when it comes to evaluating goalies in the playoffs, winning is what counts. And that's what Dryden was about: winning. GAA and save percentage don't mean much in playoff time without winning. Just ask Curtis Joseph.

My conjecture is that Curtis Joseph very rarely had the horses necessary to win the Stanley Cup.

If you ask Curtis Joseph - would you trade your personal accolades for a Cup - of course he'd say yes. But that has nothing to do with his quality of goaltending.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

That's what guys like Fuhr, Cheevers and Smith based their careers on. They didn't care about how many goals they gave up. They cared about the W. A 6-0 win and a 6-5 win were the same to them. (Cheevers once bailed out of the net during a lopsided game when facing Bobby Hull on a breakaway). But you knew that when you had those guys in the net in a close game in the final minute of the third period, that they would make the save.

Until we see a 50-goal-scoring goaltender, this is ridiculous.

Grant Fuhr, Gerry Cheevers and Billy Smith knew that the more goals their team scored, the better chance they had of winning.

A goaltender cannot win games on his own.

 

[crashlanding]

"Most goaltenders" does not mean the same as "all goaltenders".

I don't understand.

You dismiss the argument that Dryden's numbers get worse in the postseason because "most goaltenders" experience the same phenomenon. Yet, when I post that Brodeur's numbers get much better in the postseason you dismiss that as well.

Sure, "most goaltenders'" numbers go down in the postseason, but this isn't a thread on most goaltenders, it is a thread on "Greatest Goalie of All Time" and I'd expect the greatest goalie of all time to play his best in important situations.

 

[canucksfan]

Well, when you make remarks like "At this point in his career there is no way he is better than Dryden", how is one suppossed to know that you don't feel there is no aspect of goaltending (the "no way") in which Brodeur beats Dryden. Thus, I pointed out durability. And again, in general, all backups of HOF goalies play easier teams, that is not special to Dryden. And playoff wins are important.....Brodeur already has more than Dryden.

Durability and puckhandling are the only things Brodeur has the edge on Dryden. Like stated earlier Larocque was a very good goalie. Furthermore, it's not a very good arguement to say Brodeur is better than Dryden because Dryden's backup's had better stats that Dryden. If Dryden's backups had better stats why would they let Dryden be the starter. Stats aren't everything when it comes to goalies.

Why do you think Brodeur has more playoff wins? He has played more games than Dryden. Dryden's winning% in the playoffs in 71%. Brodeur is only 56%.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

I don't understand.

You dismiss the argument that Dryden's numbers get worse in the postseason because "most goaltenders" experience the same phenomenon. Yet, when I post that Brodeur's numbers get much better in the postseason you dismiss that as well.

Sure, "most goaltenders'" numbers go down in the postseason, but this isn't a thread on most goaltenders, it is a thread on "Greatest Goalie of All Time" and I'd expect the greatest goalie of all time to play his best in important situations.

That's simple - in the initial post I was responding to, I couldn't tell if you were being pro-Brodeur or anti-Dryden. It seemed as though you were being anti-Dryden.

 

[meehan]

Durability and puckhandling are the only things Brodeur has the edge on Dryden. Like stated earlier Larocque was a very good goalie. Furthermore, it's not a very good arguement to say Brodeur is better than Dryden because Dryden's backup's had better stats that Dryden. If Dryden's backups had better stats why would they let Dryden be the starter. Stats aren't everything when it comes to goalies.

Why do you think Brodeur has more playoff wins? He has played more games than Dryden. Dryden's winning% in the playoffs in 71%. Brodeur is only 56%.

Well if Brodeur has an edge on Dryden in some way then don't say there is "no way" he is better. And did I ever say Dryden's backups were better than he was? All I said were that his teams were so good that Dryden's backups won at higher clips than most of the goalies in the hall of fame.

So tell me, what's better, a goalie who has played in few playoff games, has won a vast majority of them while being on not only the best team of that era but what many feel is one of the best teams ever; or a goalie who has played in many playoff games, has won the majority of them and has gone very deep into the playoffs more than a few times, all the while being on mostly one of the top teams in the league, none of whom will ever be thought of as any where near the all time great teams? What is better, having a short period of extremely great play, or a long period of great play? My point from the beginning has been that there IS a debate here and it ISN'T a slam dunk selection either way.

 

[Wisent]

Tretiak, add Jiri Holecek.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Tretiak, add Jiri Holecek.

Great tandem in the 76 Canada Cup - Holocek and Dzurilla!

 

[Wisent]

Great tandem in the 76 Canada Cup - Holocek and Dzurilla!

Truly one of the best tandems IMO.

 

[Pavel Bure]

Vladislav Tretiak

Add Vezina

 

[Nifty=HHOF]

Marty Brodeur
add Tony Esposito

 

[canucksfan]

Well if Brodeur has an edge on Dryden in some way then don't say there is "no way" he is better. And did I ever say Dryden's backups were better than he was? All I said were that his teams were so good that Dryden's backups won at higher clips than most of the goalies in the hall of fame.

So tell me, what's better, a goalie who has played in few playoff games, has won a vast majority of them while being on not only the best team of that era but what many feel is one of the best teams ever; or a goalie who has played in many playoff games, has won the majority of them and has gone very deep into the playoffs more than a few times, all the while being on mostly one of the top teams in the league, none of whom will ever be thought of as any where near the all time great teams? What is better, having a short period of extremely great play, or a long period of great play? My point from the beginning has been that there IS a debate here and it ISN'T a slam dunk selection either way.

Bossy clearly is the better goal scoring between him and Gretzky but there is no way Bossy is better than Gretzky.

As great as those Montreal teams were they don't win as many Cups without Dryden. 1971 is a prime example. Dryden played excellent in the first series against Boston. He was the reason why Montreal won that series. Boston had the best team.

I would rather have Dryden and here's why. He was the league's best goalie five times. Brodeur has only been the league's best goalie twice. Brodeur has only played 4 more seasons than Dryden. He has a Conn Smythe where Brodeur doesn't. He was the most important part of the Habs dynasty.

 

[meehan]

Bossy clearly is the better goal scoring between him and Gretzky but there is no way Bossy is better than Gretzky.

That's not a fair comparison as the difference between Gretzky and Bossy is much larger than the difference between Brodeur and Dryden so as to disqualify such a justification of your original choice of words. No goaltender who ever played the game is at the level of legends like Gretzky.

As great as those Montreal teams were they don't win as many Cups without Dryden. 1971 is a prime example. Dryden played excellent in the first series against Boston. He was the reason why Montreal won that series. Boston had the best team.

I won't deny that, but you can also say Brodeur's devils don't win as much if at all without him too.

I would rather have Dryden and here's why. He was the league's best goalie five times. Brodeur has only been the league's best goalie twice. Brodeur has only played 4 more seasons than Dryden. He has a Conn Smythe where Brodeur doesn't. He was the most important part of the Habs dynasty.

To counter, though Dryden was the league's best goalie more times, Brodeur played much of his career alongside Patrick Roy and Dominik Hasek, both top 5 goalies all time according to this poll and both considerably better than Dryden's competition in net most years. Though Brodeur has only played five more seasons than Dryden, Brodeur's seasons are so much longer than Dryden's that the difference in games amounts to Brodeur playing 90% more total games. Brodeur doesn't have a conn smythe but Brodeur has had MVP calibur playoffs where he could have justifiably won the Conn Smythe. For instance the last time the Devils won the cup the award was given to a player on the losing team; doesn't mean that Brodeur didn't put up an MVP calibur performance. And again, Brodeur gets harder to score on in the playoffs, more so than Dryden. Dryden being the most important part of the Habs dynasty is debatable, just like how you can debate Brodeur being the most important player in the Devil's winning years.

 

[No-Twitch Tabitha]

Hall won with 28 votes and Johnny Bower will be added next. I am voting for Dryden and add Gardiner.

#3.Plante(38.16%)

WOO-HOO! Yes! If only for the invention of the goalie mask. Helps keep goalies alive out there!