Is Sawchuk Losing His Status as the Greatest Goalie Of All Time?

19nazzy

Registered User
Jul 14, 2003
17,217
31
And Roy won't be after Brodeur finishes.
Unless Brodeur wins a cup without Stevens/Niedermayer I don't see how you could put him above Roy.

Roy won 2 cups each on 2 different teams. With the Montreal Cup teams being very different from each other. And then with the Colorado teams with Sakic/Forsberg/Foote.
 

EagleBelfour

Registered User
Jun 7, 2005
7,467
62
ehsl.proboards32.com
If you're going to play that game, you have to analyze the players in front of Hall to figure out why his teams didn't win more in the playoffs. Or, are you just going to assume it was always Hall's fault?

Besides, all goaltending stats are skewed by the team in front of the goaltender. There is no stat (except for shootout save %) that gives you a measure of really how good a goaltender is.

Based on eyewitnesses, Hall was #1. (7 1st Team selections and 4 2nd team selections and a Conn Smythe Trophy)


I don't need to analyze everything to conclude somethnig everyone has except a few of you: it's impossible to clearly figure out who's the best goaltender of all-time. It's all opinion, knowledgable opinions, but to say that Hall was clearly the best goaltender of all-time just lowered the importance I can put on your opinions.
 

kurt

the last emperor
Sep 11, 2004
8,709
52
Victoria
You forgot, by far, the biggest reason today's goaltenders appear to be better:

HUGE equipment.

Without the HUGE equipment, there is no new technique. Glenn Hall made the butterfly popular. HUGE equipment made it mandatory.

Point taken. Bigger equipment is also of benefit, and also a result of the additional resources being invested into the development of modern sport.

I still think that any of the old timers, in their prime, decked out in new gear, would have a tough time taking the starting job from a Brodeur, Roy or Hasek in training camp.
 

Snap Wilson

Registered User
Sep 14, 2003
5,838
0
I don't see the name Corrado Micalef anywhere in here. Numbers are no good without context. Martin Brodeur has 494 career wins and Micalef has 26, which may SEEM like a large gap, but you have to consider the context under which they attained these numbers.

Opponents scored 4.24 goals per game against Micalef, while only scoring a paltry 2.20 per game against Brodeur. This naturally inflates Brodeur's stats. If opponents had scored as few goals against Micalef than they did Brodeur, he undoubtedly would have won more games. Would Martin Brodeur have won three Stanley Cups, garnered Vezina trophys, and be flirting with the career wins mark if opponents had scored over four goals per game against him? Not a chance. See? That's what context is about.

Micalef didn't have Scott Niedermayer and Scott Stevens in front of him. I mean, hell. Scott Stevens? He would have taken Inger Stevens on that blueline.
 

kurt

the last emperor
Sep 11, 2004
8,709
52
Victoria
I think you have to look at them in relative terms though. The ability to "think abstractly, comprehend, problem solve, make new connections, etc." would be on par with athleticism, reflexes, reaction time, etc. and as such, are both cultivated differently in time. If you were to drop Einstein into today, he wouldn't be able to understand how to use a computer nor would Sawchuk be able to play using modern technique because they weren't available to them at the time.

I disagree. First off, computer use has little (actually nothing) to do with the power of the mind. He could still research and contemplate modern physics, and further push our understanding of the universe through his ability to conduct purely conceptual experiments, etc. This is something so intangible and not understood that it cannot be effectively taught. It differs greatly from goaltending.

Sure, some of the aspects you mentioned are attributed to natural gifts, but they can also be incredibly polished through training. There's a much greater understanding to improving physical abilities than there are to unlocking the powers of the mind.

Maybe it would be easier if you picked another example, other than Einstein and intelligence.
 

Reilly*

Guest
Unless Brodeur wins a cup without Stevens/Niedermayer I don't see how you could put him above Roy.

Roy won 2 cups each on 2 different teams. With the Montreal Cup teams being very different from each other. And then with the Colorado teams with Sakic/Forsberg/Foote.

I can't think of a team Roy played on that didn't have hall-of-fame defensemen in front of him.
 

God Bless Canada

Registered User
Jul 11, 2004
11,793
17
Bentley reunion
I can't think of a team Roy played on that didn't have hall-of-fame defensemen in front of him.
Who was the HHOF goalie on Colorado in 1995-96? Ozolinsch? Not even close. Foote? I've always liked Adam, but he's not getting in the HHOF, unless the selection committee suddenly starts caring about international accomplishments.

And the 1992-93 Montreal Canadiens? Schneider and DesJardins had wonderful careers, but they aren't getting in the HHOF.
 

God Bless Canada

Registered User
Jul 11, 2004
11,793
17
Bentley reunion
I don't view Sawchuk as the best ever. I think Plante is the best ever. Yet I don't blame those who herald Sawchuk as the best ever, he was the top-rated goalie in the THN top 100 list, although the voting for that list was conducted in 1996. I also don't blame those who hold Roy as the best ever. Hasek and Hall would be my picks for the best regular season goalies ever, and while you can't give them all the blame for their respective teams' playoff failures, both goalies have had playoff issues.

Simply looking at career numbers to evaluate a goalie is a fool's ploy, just like it's a fool's ploy to simply look at career numbers for any other position. You have to dig deeper, look at matters such as longevity, peak value and playoff performance.

I also think it's a fool's ploy to simply judge goaltenders based on technique. Technique is nice, but at the end of the day, one thing matters with goaltending: do you stop the puck, and not how you stop the puck. It's much like a pitcher in baseball: find the style that you're most comfortable with, that will bring you results, and go with it. Dominik Hasek has horrible technique. Yet he's able to make it work for him.

At the end of the day, success in goaltending is probably 75 per cent mental. It's based on things like concentration, focus, work ethic, that uncanny ability to come up with the big saves at the big time, etc. Being able to read your opponents, the gift of anticipation, plus work ethic and attitude - those things you can't teach - are what separates the true all-time greats from the rest. I've seen a lot of goalies with all the physical tools - great size and quickness - flop because their mental abilities couldn't match their physical abilities.
 

19nazzy

Registered User
Jul 14, 2003
17,217
31
I can't think of a team Roy played on that didn't have hall-of-fame defensemen in front of him.
1992-1993
1995-1996


And that wasn't my point either, even if you are going to say that (which I don't agree with for the record, but lets assume I do) Roy won 4 cups. And each time had a different core of defensemen (with Foote being the 1 carry over in 96/01). Whereas Brodeur had Niedermayer/Stevens (surefire HHOFers) every time.
 

Hasbro

Family Friend
Sponsor
Apr 1, 2004
52,413
16,379
South Rectangle
In 96 it was Foote, Ozo, Gusarov, Leschynchyn, Lefebvre, Kruup, Klemm and Wolanin (who lost us a couple of games in the playoffs)
 

pitseleh

Registered User
Jul 30, 2005
19,164
2,612
Vancouver
I disagree. First off, computer use has little (actually nothing) to do with the power of the mind. He could still research and contemplate modern physics, and further push our understanding of the universe through his ability to conduct purely conceptual experiments, etc. This is something so intangible and not understood that it cannot be effectively taught. It differs greatly from goaltending.

Sure, some of the aspects you mentioned are attributed to natural gifts, but they can also be incredibly polished through training. There's a much greater understanding to improving physical abilities than there are to unlocking the powers of the mind.

Maybe it would be easier if you picked another example, other than Einstein and intelligence.

My whole point is that Einstein couldn't come in and do things like make a computer or do modern physics. He'd first have to learn about everything he missed in between and would be able to because of his intelligence. The same is true of a past goalie. He would have the tools to be a great goaltender today, but would have to train in modern technique with modern fitness and nutrition to reach that level though.

As for another example, how about music? Miles Davis is considered to be one of the finest musicians of the 20th century. That said, compared to the skill/complexity of music today, a lot of his music doesn't hold a candle. There is no doubt in my mind he'd be able to compose the same kind of music that is possible in jazz, but would have to first catch up to modern ideas in the genre before being able to.
 

Snap Wilson

Registered User
Sep 14, 2003
5,838
0
As for another example, how about music? Miles Davis is considered to be one of the finest musicians of the 20th century. That said, compared to the skill/complexity of music today, a lot of his music doesn't hold a candle.

Poor example. The ideas he developed haven't been improved on much.
 

Sens Rule

Registered User
Sep 22, 2005
21,251
73
The problem of course is that we're debating goalies from different eras and I just don't think you can do that. You can't compare Sawchuck to Roy or Brodeur because they played during completely different eras with different equipment, team defensive styles, etc.

It's fun to debate but you're never going to have a clearcut "greatest of all time" because there are too many factors.

Besides, no one mentioned Ken Dryden and while he didn't have the best GAA or save %, he does have six Stanley Cups.:)

Except Sawchuk, Plante and Hall played at the same time and there is still a debate on who is better. Same with Roy, Hasek and Brodeur.
 

jiggs 10

Registered User
Dec 5, 2002
3,541
2
Hockeytown, ND
Visit site
Sawchuk is still the best ever. Glenn Hall is close, as is Jake the Snake Plante. Hasek is a ways ahead of Brodeur, who is ahead of Roy (if he even belongs in the top 5!). Sawchuk would still be leading the league in wins if he had played with the gigantic equipment Roy and others wore in the 90's! Put them in shin pads, a baseball glove, and no mask and we'll see how great they are! But put Sawchuk (the guy who invented the croutch for goalies) in modern equipment, and he may NEVER get scored on! Ditto Hall. They were playing the end of their careers at the time of Bobby Hull and Bobby Orr, and they still had lower GAA than many of the Michelin Men playing today!
 

NOTENOUGHJTCGOALS

Registered User
Feb 28, 2006
13,542
5,771
I can't think of a team Roy played on that didn't have hall-of-fame defensemen in front of him.

Besides Carolina and Tbay last two year how many of the past 10 or so teams have won a cup without a HoF defenseman?

New Jersey
Detroit
Colorado
New Jersey
Dallas
Detroit
Detroit
Colorado
New Jersey
New York
Montreal

Probably the only ones being the Stars and Avs. Even if you look farther back maybe the Oilers cup after losing Coffey but thats probably it for decades. Few if any teams win without hall of famer defenseman.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
Sawchuk has always been considered the #1 goalie of all time to me. I've always put him there. I hate when people rate Roy as #1. Look at Sawchuk's peak value. His first five years in the league are arguably better than any 5 straight seasons strung together by a goalie. Hasek might be the only one who's had 5 straight better seasons. Plus Sawchuk was a winner. He could have easily won the Conn Smyhte in '67 and then there's the years before the Conn Smthe was even awarded. He'd have been a shoo-in in '52
 

LapierreSports

Registered User
Mar 9, 2007
346
1
Montreal
In the pre-game last night they were interviewing Hasek and next to his stall was was one for Sawchuk. I didn't know he had been honoured that way.

Yes, the Wings have a few stalls left like that for all time greats. Konstantinov also has his stall in the room.
 

19nazzy

Registered User
Jul 14, 2003
17,217
31
Sawchuk has always been considered the #1 goalie of all time to me. I've always put him there. I hate when people rate Roy as #1. Look at Sawchuk's peak value. His first five years in the league are arguably better than any 5 straight seasons strung together by a goalie.
When you're playing against 5 teams, that's different than playing against 21+.
 

19nazzy

Registered User
Jul 14, 2003
17,217
31
Sawchuk is still the best ever. Glenn Hall is close, as is Jake the Snake Plante. Hasek is a ways ahead of Brodeur, who is ahead of Roy (if he even belongs in the top 5!).
Ridiculous. Brodeur has no justification to be rated ahead of Roy.

Sawchuk would still be leading the league in wins if he had played with the gigantic equipment Roy and others wore in the 90's! Put them in shin pads, a baseball glove, and no mask and we'll see how great they are! But put Sawchuk (the guy who invented the croutch for goalies) in modern equipment, and he may NEVER get scored on! Ditto Hall. They were playing the end of their careers at the time of Bobby Hull and Bobby Orr, and they still had lower GAA than many of the Michelin Men playing today!
Lets put players who can shoot it 105 MPH and have guys that are 6'7 275+ pounds back in the day and see what happens then.

And lets take a look at the 'gigantic' equipment Roy wore when he won his first Stanley Cup.
Patrick%20Roy%201.jpg



Take a look at Brodeur and Hasek's pads when they won their first Stanley Cup and we'll see who is bigger.
 

Chili

En boca cerrada no entran moscas
Jun 10, 2004
8,440
4,269
Well, how would the shooters look?

They would have straight wooden sticks, very little protective pads, the skates of that time, be skating on ice that might not be great at times. Things would be different for them but not as dramatic as a goaler from today trying to play with no catching glove, no blocker, no mask, small pads and even for awhile deal with a rule that penalized them for going down on the ice.
 

meehan

Registered User
Mar 20, 2003
1,963
1
new york
Visit site
Ridiculous. Brodeur has no justification to be rated ahead of Roy.


Lets put players who can shoot it 105 MPH and have guys that are 6'7 275+ pounds back in the day and see what happens then.

And lets take a look at the 'gigantic' equipment Roy wore when he won his first Stanley Cup.
Patrick%20Roy%201.jpg



Take a look at Brodeur and Hasek's pads when they won their first Stanley Cup and we'll see who is bigger.

Not saying either is better than Roy but how many Vezina's has he won since Brodeur and Hasek came into the league? Most of Roy's individual hardware was won when the league didn't have as many great goalies.
 

Bear of Bad News

Your Third or Fourth Favorite HFBoards Admin
Sep 27, 2005
13,343
26,510
Not saying either is better than Roy but how many Vezina's has he won since Brodeur and Hasek came into the league? Most of Roy's individual hardware was won when the league didn't have as many great goalies.

Yeah, because Grant Fuhr, Billy Smith, Andy Moog, Tom Barrasso, John Vanbiesbrouck and Bill Ranford were just awful. :shakehead
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->