HOH Top-40 Goalies Voter Record - quoipourquoi

[seventieslord]

Round 1 List:
HOH Top-40 Goalies Voter Record - quoipourquoi - HFBoards

Players on the top-40 not ranked:

None

Players on the top-40 ranked below #50:

Henrik Lundqvist (59)

Players exclusive to this list and no more than two others:

None

Players ranked highest on this list:

None

Players ranked lowest on this list:

Henrik Lundqvist (59)
Normie Smith (60)

Lundqvist was left off 5 lists, Smith 12.

Round 2 voting record:

Participation Record:

Click to read more...

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I'm interested in hearing why you are so high on Giacomin, given your emphasis on save percentages and playoff performances for more recent goalies.

Not surprised to see Tim Thomas in first with no other "modern" goalies on the ballot for Vote 10. Other than Thomas and Luongo, you did seem to be lower than most of the panel on recent goalies in the last couple of rounds.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I'm interested in hearing why you are so high on Giacomin, given your emphasis on save percentages and playoff performances for more recent goalies.

I didn't get to spend as much time as I would have liked on Giacomin due to my schedule. In the end, despite his save percentages, he was a five-time consecutive All-Star in an era in which I do not feel comfortable asserting my personal view or a statistic not officially recorded over that of an electorate, and I'm not sure I missed out and placed any other five-time consecutive All-Stars on the list after Giacomin. Could non-HOFers Joseph, Thomas, or Barrasso been above him? Possibly. And while the playoffs in his prime were unsatisfactory, his post-prime playoffs were fine enough that #29 seemed okay.

Not surprised to see Tim Thomas in first with no other "modern" goalies on the ballot for Vote 10. Other than Thomas and Luongo, you did seem to be lower than most of the panel on recent goalies in the last couple of rounds.

I wouldn't say that. Was anyone particularly high on Miikka Kiprusoff? Or Mike Vernon? Or Mike Richter? I'm higher than most on Chris Osgood, but he wasn't exactly eligible in Vote 10.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I didn't get to spend as much time as I would have liked on Giacomin due to my schedule. In the end, despite his save percentages, he was a five-time consecutive All-Star in an era in which I do not feel comfortable asserting my personal view or a statistic not officially recorded over that of an electorate, and I'm not sure I missed out and placed any other five-time consecutive All-Stars on the list after Giacomin. Could non-HOFers Joseph, Thomas, or Barrasso been above him? Possibly. And while the playoffs in his prime were unsatisfactory, his post-prime playoffs were fine enough that #29 seemed okay.

Okay, so the big difference for you is that save percentages before 1983-84 were unofficial? I have wondered myself if there was any quality control for the reported shot counts before then that the unofficial save percentages have been reconstructed from. So you are more willing to throw out awards voting for guys who played after save percentage became an officially recorded stat? Correct me if I'm wrong.

I wouldn't say that. Was anyone particularly high on Miikka Kiprusoff? Or Mike Vernon? Or Mike Richter? I'm higher than most on Chris Osgood, but he wasn't exactly eligible in Vote 10.

Maybe I'm out to lunch, but over the last few votes you were pretty low on Beezer too.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Okay, so the big difference for you is that save percentages before 1983-84 were unofficial? I have wondered myself if there was any quality control for the reported shot counts before then that the unofficial save percentages have been reconstructed from. So you are more willing to throw out awards voting for guys who played after save percentage became an officially recorded stat? Correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm more willing to throw out awards voting for guys I've seen play. I just happen to be mostly familiar with goaltenders in the official save percentage era than the goaltenders prior to that era, because these are the goaltenders I've seen. And there is some skepticism on my part from any statistic not officially recorded. Had SPCT been a "thing" back then, maybe Giacomin doesn't get his five-consecutive selections. Maybe he still does though, so I wouldn't want to declare him guilty when I'm not finding myself in the position to think I know more about Giacomin than a voter. My voting record for pre-1980s goaltenders is much more influenced by awards and reputation than my voting record for the ones I've been privileged to watch at the time of their successes.

Maybe I'm out to lunch, but over the last few votes you were pretty low on Beezer too.

I actually moved Vanbiesbrouck up from what I recall (#44 on original list, #40 on current). I probably could have been higher, and I certainly would consider myself to be quite fond of Vanbiesbrouck, but I think there was too strong of a push to get modern goaltenders on the list prior to the #40 cutoff, so I think my votes might look low compared to others for that reason as well.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

I'm more willing to throw out awards voting for guys I've seen play. I just happen to be mostly familiar with goaltenders in the official save percentage era than the goaltenders prior to that era, because these are the goaltenders I've seen. And there is some skepticism on my part from any statistic not officially recorded. Had SPCT been a "thing" back then, maybe Giacomin doesn't get his five-consecutive selections. Maybe he still does though, so I wouldn't want to declare him guilty when I'm not finding myself in the position to think I know more about Giacomin than a voter.

I just find it amazing that you went on at length about how Lundqvist ranking 5-6-4-2-5 in games played was so vital to his Vezina voting record, yet you are still completely accepting of Giacomin's All-Star selections even though he led the league in games played four years in a row, finishing ahead of the #2 guy by at least 5 games played in each of them.

The voter bias towards games played is consistent across time, so there doesn't seem to be any reason to not make the same argument for Giacomin. I understand the hesitancy to make judgments about guys you haven't seen play, but all I can say is that approach looks pretty inconsistent from here.

As for pre-1983 save percentages, there is really no significant difference between "unofficial" save percentages and official ones other than the NHL collected and published the latter. In either case there was a guy sitting in a booth counting the shots on net. Sure he could be biased, but so are some of the official guys hired by the NHL today. I'd take any of the original six shot counters over the guys who have been recently working the job in Nashville, for example.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I just find it amazing that you went on at length about how Lundqvist ranking 5-6-4-2-5 in games played was so vital to his Vezina voting record, yet you are still completely accepting of Giacomin's All-Star selections even though he led the league in games played four years in a row, finishing ahead of the #2 guy by at least 5 games played in each of them.

Henrik Lundqvist wasn't a five-time All-Star now, was he? From 2007-2011, his GP scored him minority of votes that was bastardized into an argument about elite consistency just because some people thought he was top-three:

2007: (0-0-13) 143 ballots (7th)
2008: (1-6-51) 133 ballots (4th)
2009: (0-1-4) 131 ballots (9th)
2010: (0-1-1) 131 ballots (9th)
2011: (4-12-21) 125 ballots (5th)

Compare that to Giacomin's voting record that landed him in the top-two five times to Lundqvist's one and tell me what's so amazing about the difference in perception.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Seriously. 2008 and 2011 have the biggest (and the only meaningful) All-Star voting support between his legit elite seasons (2006 and 2012). Why? Shutouts. Finished 18th and 7th in save percentage, but boy, did he get some shutouts.

 

[seventieslord]

I agree that counting on those few votes is like sitting on a two legged stool, but the aggregate record still paints him as likely the best day to day goalie since the lockout.

 

[quoipourquoi]

As for pre-1983 save percentages, there is really no significant difference between "unofficial" save percentages and official ones other than the NHL collected and published the latter. In either case there was a guy sitting in a booth counting the shots on net. Sure he could be biased, but so are some of the official guys hired by the NHL today. I'd take any of the original six shot counters over the guys who have been recently working the job in Nashville, for example.

And just because I'm STILL sour about this, let me say this: I didn't show any special treatment to Ed Giacomin that I didn't already show to Brodeur. Puckhandling goaltenders lower SA which in turn affects save percentage. He's second in SPCT to Plante in 1971, .005 back from third in 1970, .005 back from first in 1967, and I don't have the 1968 and 1969 numbers in any of my resources (all that was posted was Giacomin vs. Vachon specifically).

Like I said, you want to put Joseph or Barrasso ahead of him so that my ranking of Giacomin perfectly matches the rest of the forum? I don't have a problem with that. But don't try to equate five All-Star selections to one just because we've been talking about Lundqvist for a week.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I agree that counting on those few votes is like sitting on a two legged stool, but the aggregate record still paints him as likely the best day to day goalie since the lockout.

And is it such a big deal that I find him to be the third-best goalie since the lockout to both Martin Brodeur and a player to whom I would have given two Hart nominations, two Vezinas, and a Conn Smythe (Thomas)?

I didn't put Henrik Lundqvist on my list because I was afraid it would get rejected; he's on my list because he's a Top-60 goaltender. I'm not slagging him. I make a habit not to insult the New York Rangers. The difference between each goalie gets smaller and smaller as you go down my list. If he replicates what he did last year, I'll say he's a Top-40. But one great season and one rookie year with an inflated home save percentage aren't doing a whole lot for me in comparison to goaltenders with the same amount of elite seasons and Conn Smythe level playoffs.

 

[LiveeviL]

Nice to see Pekka Lindmark in the list, as he have nothing to do with the NHL.

But no mention of Lindbergh? He have a Vezina after all.

 

[quoipourquoi]

But no mention of Lindbergh? He have a Vezina after all.

For the record, only 4 of 27 lists had Lindbergh, so I don't believe I'm too far off the mark. I'm a pretty big fan of his 1985 playoff though. A .926 SPCT until the Oilers won four-straight on the Flyers to close the Finals in 5.

 

[LiveeviL]

For the record, only 4 of 27 lists had Lindbergh, so I don't believe I'm too far off the mark. I'm a pretty big fan of his 1985 playoff though. A .926 SPCT until the Oilers won four-straight on the Flyers to close the Finals in 5.

Ok, I was just curious. My remark could have gone into any of the lists but I posted in yours just by whim. I have no knowledge about the metrics for the lists.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

Henrik Lundqvist wasn't a five-time All-Star now, was he? From 2007-2011, his GP scored him minority of votes that was bastardized into an argument about elite consistency just because some people thought he was top-three:

2007: (0-0-13) 143 ballots (7th)
2008: (1-6-51) 133 ballots (4th)
2009: (0-1-4) 131 ballots (9th)
2010: (0-1-1) 131 ballots (9th)
2011: (4-12-21) 125 ballots (5th)

Compare that to Giacomin's voting record that landed him in the top-two five times to Lundqvist's one and tell me what's so amazing about the difference in perception.

Because Lundqvist finished 4th in games played and 4th in AST voting in 2007-08, and he finished 5th in games played and 5th in AST voting in 2010-11, and you're claiming both of those positions are largely impacted by his GP.

Don't you think that sort of suggests it might be altogether possible for a guy who finished 1st by a mile in games played to ride that to a high finish in All-Star voting?

1966-67: 1. Giacomin 68 GP, 2. Crozier 58 GP
1967-68: 1. Giacomin 66 GP, 2. Hodge 58 GP
1968-69: 1. Giacomin 70 GP, 2. Maniago 64 GP
1969-70: 1. Giacomin 70 GP, 2. Smith 65 GP

I do actually agree with you that Lundqvist's awards record doesn't necessarily make the strongest case for him. But I don't even see how the awards voting is needed, because Lundqvist's statistical record is impressive enough.

Lundqvist (career): 468 GP, 341.7 GAR, 0.73 GAR/GP, .564 SNW%
Giacomin (5 AST yrs only): 319 GP, 212.2 GAR, 0.67 GAR/GP, .546 SNW%

Seriously. 2008 and 2011 have the biggest (and the only meaningful) All-Star voting support between his legit elite seasons (2006 and 2012). Why? Shutouts. Finished 18th and 7th in save percentage, but boy, did he get some shutouts.

You know who else got some shutouts? Ed Giacomin. Led the league three times in his five All-Star seasons, and was second in both of the other two. So, again, you appear to be using an argument to knock Lundqvist without applying it to Giacomin, even though again the likely boost to Giacomin was greater than it was to Lundqvist.

And to be clear, I think a lot of your points about awards voting are correct (e.g. high GP and SO can lead to goalies being overrated). I just don't see why you seem to be making those arguments unevenly.

And just because I'm STILL sour about this, let me say this: I didn't show any special treatment to Ed Giacomin that I didn't already show to Brodeur. Puckhandling goaltenders lower SA which in turn affects save percentage. He's second in SPCT to Plante in 1971, .005 back from third in 1970, .005 back from first in 1967, and I don't have the 1968 and 1969 numbers in any of my resources (all that was posted was Giacomin vs. Vachon specifically).

Puckhandling is a fair point, but even better puckhandlers like Brodeur or Belfour probably only prevented about a shot per game compared to an average goalie, and that includes all soft goalie skills like rebound control and not freezing the puck and so on. Comparing Giacomin to his backups on a minutes-weighted SA/60 basis, he faced 0.3 fewer shots per game. Maybe that bumps up to 0.5 or a bit more when considering quality of opposition. That's certainly something, but at the same time I think all of it disappears and then some when you take into account the effect of playing behind the Rangers' team defence in an expansion era.

Like I said, you want to put Joseph or Barrasso ahead of him so that my ranking of Giacomin perfectly matches the rest of the forum? I don't have a problem with that. But don't try to equate five All-Star selections to one just because we've been talking about Lundqvist for a week.

I actually don't care that much about Lundqvist, he's just the modern guy who happens to be a point of comparison. I still think Ed Giacomin is one of the most overrated goalies of all-time, and a big reason for that is that historical goalies seem to get treated differently than more recent ones do, and that isn't going to change any if people remain unwilling to challenge past perceptions at all.

This is not only directed to you, by the way, my ranking of Giacomin is still much lower than nearly all of the group here, and there were other guys that seemed to be making the same "He has 5 AST, what can you do?" argument.

If Lundqvist has better career stats than Giacomin did during his prime, and Lundqvist outplayed his backups by more, and Giacomin played behind a better defence, and Lundqvist played against a deeper talent pool, and Lundqvist was better in the playoffs, where is the argument for Giacomin ranking ahead of him unless we're treating 1970s sportswriters as infallible?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Clarification Request

Puckhandling is a fair point, but even better puckhandlers like Brodeur or Belfour probably only prevented about a shot per game compared to an average goalie, and that includes all soft goalie skills like rebound control and not freezing the puck and so on.

Please clarify the scope of what you are claiming. Specifically are you simply referring to shots as in the context of SOG or are you referring to shots in the broad sense of SA (shots attempted) which includes SOG/SV + Blocked shots + Shots that miss the net.

You are claiming about a shot per game impact. Any supporting data for this claim?

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

Please clarify the scope of what you are claiming. Specifically are you simply referring to shots as in the context of SOG or are you referring to shots in the broad sense of SA (shots attempted) which includes SOG/SV + Blocked shots + Shots that miss the net.

You are claiming about a shot per game impact. Any supporting data for this claim?

SOG only, since we're discussing the impact on save percentage. And I'm claiming about a shot per game impact relative to league average as a rule of thumb for a top goalie of the Brodeur/Belfour mold, although it might be much as 1.2-1.5 per season for an all-time great all-around goalie at his peak. A goalie with below-average all-around skills could be creating shots and therefore have a larger differential with a top goalie. The estimate is based on the numbers for guys like Brodeur and Belfour relative to backups, plus the fact that I've never seen a long-time goalie tandem exhibit a persistent shot differential of more than about 2.5 shots per game between them (Kari Lehtonen and Johan Hedberg in Atlanta is the biggest I'm aware of at a difference of 2.6 SA/60 from 2006-07 to 2008-09).

Here's Overpass looking at Brodeur vs. backups in terms of SA, adjusted for quality of competition:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=18311923&postcount=219

Here's my work on Belfour compared to teammates:

To do my comparative shots analysis, I usually look for goalies that had both substantial playing time with the study goalie as well as lots of minutes played on other teams. There are three goalies that fit these criteria that we can use to evaluate Belfour: Jeff Hackett, Roman Turek, and Marty Turco.

In this type of analysis, I prefer to take the average of yearly averages rather than simply calculate an average from the totals, because otherwise it skews the data when there are seasons with much higher or lower minutes played totals. Belfour played with Hackett from 1993-94 to 1996-97, and averaged 27.3 SA/60 per season, compared to 29.2 SA/60 for Hackett. That is a gap of about 2 shots per game. Over the rest of his career, Hackett tended to face more shots than his teammates, averaging about one extra shot per game against. That gives us an estimate for Belfour of about one shot per game saved.

Belfour played two seasons with Roman Turek in Dallas, and faced 0.5 fewer shots per game. Turek was pretty consistently about a half shot below his goalie teammates throughout the rest of his career, which again supports the one shot per game number.

In his two seasons playing with Marty Turco, Belfour was about a shot per game better than Turco, which is impressive since Turco has been half a shot per game better than his backups over the last few years (and Dallas has tended to bring in goalies who play a similar style, so Turco's effect might even greater when you consider he is being compared to guys like Johan Hedberg or Mike Smith). It could be that Turco had not yet developed his skills to the same extent early in his career, or that he learned a thing or two from Belfour that he was able to apply later on, or maybe there were some other variables that were influencing the shot numbers.

The results from all three goalies suggest that Belfour has a shots against effect of at least one shot per game. I did another piece of work where I compared how the backup goalies did while playing with a specific goalie and how they did on other teams. Ed Belfour faced 26.7 shots per game, compared to 27.9 for his backups. His backups had a weighted average of 28.4 on other teams, which suggests that although his defences were better than average at preventing shots, Belfour contributed to his team's shot prevention.

For the sake of comparison, Brodeur faced 25.4 shots per game compared to 26.1 for his backups, who had a weighted average of 28.5 shots per game on other teams. This shows that New Jersey had a significant defensive effect. Subtracting the differences between the two of them, and you get a 1.2 shot differential for Belfour and a 0.7 difference for Brodeur.

Adjusting for quality of competition and home/road starts would bump up Brodeur's number there (see Overpass above), but that's where the estimate is coming from at least.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Making Progress

SOG only, since we're discussing the impact on save percentage. And I'm claiming about a shot per game impact relative to league average as a rule of thumb for a top goalie of the Brodeur/Belfour mold, although it might be much as 1.2-1.5 per season for an all-time great all-around goalie at his peak. A goalie with below-average all-around skills could be creating shots and therefore have a larger differential with a top goalie. The estimate is based on the numbers for guys like Brodeur and Belfour relative to backups, plus the fact that I've never seen a long-time goalie tandem exhibit a persistent shot differential of more than about 2.5 shots per game between them (Kari Lehtonen and Johan Hedberg in Atlanta is the biggest I'm aware of at a difference of 2.6 SA/60 from 2006-07 to 2008-09).

Here's Overpass looking at Brodeur vs. backups in terms of SA, adjusted for quality of competition:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=18311923&postcount=219

Here's my work on Belfour compared to teammates:



Adjusting for quality of competition and home/road starts would bump up Brodeur's number there (see Overpass above), but that's where the estimate is coming from at least.

Making progress but suggest cross comparing. Lehtonen / Hedberg
against Brodeur / Hedberg. Also the other types of shots should be considered before making the claims you do. Teams recognize this in their internal stats, explaining why GMs and coaches may rate goalies differently from HF.

Finally consider an alternative metric, Shots / Defensive zone faceoffs. You could replace Shots with SOG but you would be getting colder instead of warmer.

 

[quoipourquoi]

And to be clear, I think a lot of your points about awards voting are correct (e.g. high GP and SO can lead to goalies being overrated). I just don't see why you seem to be making those arguments unevenly.

Because there is a difference between Giacomin's number of votes each season and Lundqvist's number of votes each season. Giacomin is a FIVE TIME ALL-STAR. Lundqvist is a ONE TIME ALL-STAR. That's why my opinions of Giacomin and Lundqvist are not even. We're talking about the difference between Giacomin being named on a majority of ballots for five-straight years compared to Lundqvist being named on less than 10% of ballots in several years from 2007-2011 with big spikes when he led the league shutouts.

Lundqvist was not in the All-Star race - let alone leading it like Giacomin was; he was getting a microscopically small portion of votes for having a healthy statline with high GP. This is not even close to being a similar situation.

And I've already shown that Giacomin was barely out of the SPCT race in 1967, 1970, and 1971 - so given the fact that he was arguably the strongest puckhandler of his generation (something Lundqvist is admittedly bad at), these aren't exactly the pity 5-10% vote seasons like Lundqvist received in 2007, 2009, and 2010.

As for the other two seasons (1968, 1969), who was finishing ahead of Giacomin in save percentage? In 1968, it was just Bower, Parent, Worsley, and their tandem partners. In 1969, it was just Plante, Hall, Parent, Worsley, and by the slim margin of .003, Roy Edwards. Go ahead and make an argument that Lundqvist would have placed higher in these save percentage races against some of our Top-20 goaltenders when he hasn't broken the top-three against lesser goalies once in his life.

I actually don't care that much about Lundqvist, he's just the modern guy who happens to be a point of comparison. I still think Ed Giacomin is one of the most overrated goalies of all-time, and a big reason for that is that historical goalies seem to get treated differently than more recent ones do, and that isn't going to change any if people remain unwilling to challenge past perceptions at all.

This is not only directed to you, by the way, my ranking of Giacomin is still much lower than nearly all of the group here, and there were other guys that seemed to be making the same "He has 5 AST, what can you do?" argument.

Then you should have spoken up in Vote 8 instead of turning it into a Lundqvist debate with someone who rated Giacomin the same as everyone else did. Lundqvist wasn't getting Giacomin-esque voting support, so I don't see why people are looking for similarities just because some of you (not necessarily TCG) couldn't help yourselves from discussing Lundqvist since before he even became available.

And I'm not "unwilling" to disagree with voters of the past; I'm just more willing to disagree with 5-10% of the voters who clapped their hands like seals when Lundqvist added to his Win totals and declared him a top-three goalie when I saw the same seasons that they saw and noticed someone else stopping the pucks much better. And Hell, I thought Lundqvist was better in 2006 than those same voters did, so I'm not being "uneven" at all. He'll be a top goalie in my opinion if he maintains his consistency or even peaks a little higher (a season with a top-two save percentage would do wonders, something Giacomin has from when he finished second to Jacques Plante). But no, I'm not putting him ahead of a HOFer yet. Sue me.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Because there is a difference between Giacomin's number of votes each season and Lundqvist's number of votes each season. Giacomin is a FIVE TIME ALL-STAR. Lundqvist is a ONE TIME ALL-STAR.

It looks a lot different when you put it that way than when you compare a 5-time all-star to a 4-time Vezina finalist.

Anyway, it's probably pointless to argue about this now.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Anyway, it's probably pointless to argue about this now.

OMG, yes. I would love someone to roast me about Hasek or Smith again, so I don't have to talk about Lundqvist any more. Seriously, someone yell at me about Rayner or Gardiner, because God knows I understood that less than this Lundqvist thing.

 

[Hobnobs]

I surprised that Pekka Lindmark is on the list but Honken is not (I guess this is the case with most lists) as Honken is considered Swedens best of all time.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I surprised that Pekka Lindmark is on the list but Honken is not (I guess this is the case with most lists) as Honken is considered Swedens best of all time.

I think it has a lot to do with the eras they played in. I had Lindmark and not Honken on my list too. Lindmark was competing against the likes of Tretiak and young Hasek in tournaments, while Honken was usually being outplayed by Seth Martin.

 

[Hobnobs]

I think it has a lot to do with the eras they played in. I had Lindmark and not Honken on my list too. Lindmark was competing against the likes of Tretiak and young Hasek in tournaments, while Honken was usually being outplayed by Seth Martin.

Pekka played against Tretiak so I bet that the wc best goalie in 81 is what puts Pekka on top. Though I have to say that many thought Honken should have been the best goalie in 70 which had weird a choice as Ylönen wasnt more stand out.

Holmqvist was also up against Holecek so Im quite divided between them (Pekka and Honken).

Edit: When was he outplayed by Seth Martin btw?

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

Pekka played against Tretiak so I bet that the wc best goalie in 81 is what puts Pekka on top. Though I have to say that many thought Honken should have been the best goalie in 70 which had weird a choice as Ylönen wasnt more stand out.

Holmqvist was also up against Holecek so Im quite divided between them (Pekka and Honken).

Edit: When was he outplayed by Seth Martin btw?

How are the two of them rated in terms of their domestic careers in Sweden? I had Honken over Lindmark (by a lot) on my top 60 because I was not at all impressed by Lindmark's domestic save percentage record, even during the years when he was winning the Swedish best goalie awards. I guess Lindmark had a couple of pretty good tournaments, but I'm still not a huge fan of putting massive emphasis on individual world championship awards voting.

Also, was there a reason why guys like Holmqvist, Lindbergh, Hogosta, and Astrom all played pro hockey in North America while Lindmark did not?