ResilientBeast
Proud Member of the TTSAOA
They mean as much as unofficial ones listed in newspapers of the time so not definitive by any stretch, but to say they're meaningless is incorrect.
Dishing the Dirt
- Thread starter Sturminator
- Start date
They mean as much as unofficial ones listed in newspapers of the time so not definitive by any stretch, but to say they're meaningless is incorrect.
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
Hey, I agree!
Just going to say you've outright dismissed things today (called it out earlier) so let's all just agree to keep things on the level.
Like I've pointed out as best I can, Gardiner, to me, is the most overrated goalie that goes in the top 20 all time. I get it. I'm in the minority right now. Maybe we'll get a goalie project in the next few years to iron it out!
This is how I look at Gardiner:
1. Played in one of weakest era's for goal tenders, easily weaker than most.
2. Played in the lowest scoring era post consolidation.
3. 4 AS placements is not overly impressive next to players who almost all played in tougher eras for goal tenders.
4. Hart record sucks. Multiple goalies had better during this era and just about everyone is better all time, even those outside the top 20.
5. Playoff record sucks, at least compared to most players ranked above and below him.
I honestly want somebody to tell me any of those 5 things are historically inaccurate?
Worters has a more impressive regular season resume. Especially if you value Hart voting shares more than AS (I do).
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Hey, I agree!
Just going to say you've outright dismissed things today (called it out earlier) so let's all just agree to keep things on the level.
Like I've pointed out as best I can, Gardiner, to me, is the most overrated goalie that goes in the top 20 all time. I get it. I'm in the minority right now. Maybe we'll get a goalie project in the next few years to iron it out!
This is how I look at Gardiner:
1. Played in one of weakest era's for goal tenders, easily weaker than most.
2. Played in the lowest scoring era post consolidation.
3. 4 AS placements is not overly impressive next to players who almost all played in tougher eras for goal tenders.
4. Hart record sucks. Multiple goalies had better during this era and just about everyone is better all time, even those outside the top 20.
5. Playoff record sucks, at least compared to most players ranked above and below him.
I honestly want somebody to tell me any of those 5 things are historically inaccurate?
Worters has a more impressive regular season resume. Especially if you value Hart voting shares more than AS (I do).
1. yes, it was weaker than average
2. Not really. The early 1930s was significantly higher scoring than the late 1920s. Also, not sure what it would matter even if this were true.
3. It's 4 consecutive seasons of 1st or 2nd Teams leading into his death (3 1st Team, 1 2nd Team). Gardiner was also the only goaltender from the advent of the All-Star teams all the way until Glenn Hall to be visually impressive enough to be voted 1st Team All-Star in a season he didn't lead the NHL in GAA.
4. Roy Worters has a better Hart record than Gardiner, but I don't really think they were of the "same era," at least in the sense of competing with each other for awards. Beyond that, it doesn't look like any goaltender was getting much Hart love in the early 1930s.
5. Just plain... wrong. He was highly praised for his individual performances even in seasons his team lost. No, his playoff record is not as good as Bower's.
_______________
Of course, the major case for Gardiner is 1) he was widely regarded as the "best ever" in the early 1930s, or at least it was questioned whether he was better than Vezina (or Lehman by western fans). I'm pretty sure those same people had seen Roy Worters, who as far as I know, never had the same written about him; 2) he was the consensus best goaltender of his time (first half of the 1930s) by everyone who watched him.
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
2. Suppressed scoring means there are few scoring chances, less for goalies to do. Seems like a pretty conventional assumption, no? I can't imagine goalies in the late 20's/early 30's were facing high volume given you had years where the league GPG was sub 2. To be fair, I could be completely off base here.
3. Again, just looking at the AS in a vacuum isn't good enough sir. This is exactly what I'm talking about when it comes to AS votes being used as barometer, at times haphazardly. We need context. 4 straight AS's in that time frame is not the same as doing it elsewhere, in basically any era. I wouldn't think it the same as winning 3 or 4 over say an 8 years stretch, if the goalies those nods came over were superior to Worters, Thompson, Hainsworth. I mean a strong argument can be made this is the weakest era for goalies beyond the 80's and back half of the 2000's and cap era.
4. Worters was an AS and Hart getting goalie into the early/mid 30's. I think he and Gardiner overlap quite well. Former started in 25/26 and Gardiner started in 27/28. They were routinely competing for accolades and by and large, Worters had worse teams around him, especially in Pittsburgh.
5. Let's ignore Bower. How are 4 playoff appearances, 2 of which I look as good/great (1 SC win) not poor compared to Vezina, Benedict, Durnan, Broda, etc? I mean there are numerous players that rank well below Gardiner, traditionally, and have much stronger playoff resumes. And I get it. He was impacted by dying at 29 and not playing on the strongest teams, but is that enough to make up for his lack of resume? I conclude no. Pretty easily.
I've just never been impressed with any G in this era, largely because of the quality of comp. Worters has been the biggest eye opener for me, Lehman in the era before that. Worters being 5'3'' (even that was tiny for the era) and managing to carry some awful teams, while garnering a Hart win and 4 other good finishes, is more impressive than anything Gardiner did for Chicago, in the regular season.
I know it's not the majority opinion, as I stated earlier. Just don't see the pomp with Gardiner, unless you project him out past his death, and I'm not going to do that.
Dreakmur
Registered User
They are as valuable as any other single person’s opinion.
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
So I sort of feel obliged to put out a top 20 list of G's, looking at things post AHL info (namely depth of league) and harder scrutiny on these early era guys specifically since last years excursion through the Habs/Senators years:
1. Roy
2. Hasek
3. Plante
4. Brodeur
5. Hall
6. Sawchuk
7. Dryden
8. Tretiak
9. Brimsek
10. Vezina (If you consider North American cult status, there's an argument for Vezina over Brimsek IMO. Reading what was said about during and post career you really feel like he was the greatest goalie of all time until the 06 guys showed up)
11. Benedict (having read so much content of his Sens career the past year plus, he impressed me. Even within the confines of Green/Nighbor's dynasty, he had some big time performances for Ottawa and came up clutch more than once in the finals)
12. Belfour (when you consider who his comp was, his Vezina and AS record is superb. Sneaky good playoff resume. One of my personal favs growing up)
13. Bower (I could go either way with him/Broda, they're incredibly similar, if Bower gets some credit for the AHL. He peaked as best G in world over Plante/Hall/Sawchuk in 61 and out performed them all head head, in the playoffs/finals more than once.)
14. Broda
15. Durnan (suffers a tad from having some big moments at height of WWII)
16. Parent (really short peak but those 2 years as best in world in the 70's means more than a few years in the 30's for instance, plus the back to back Smythes. Another guy I've come around on some the past few years)
17. Esposito
18. Gardiner (playoff edge over Worters)
19. Worters
20. Holecek
21. Lehman
1. Roy
2. Hasek
3. Plante
4. Brodeur
5. Hall
6. Sawchuk
7. Dryden
8. Tretiak
9. Brimsek
10. Vezina (If you consider North American cult status, there's an argument for Vezina over Brimsek IMO. Reading what was said about during and post career you really feel like he was the greatest goalie of all time until the 06 guys showed up)
11. Benedict (having read so much content of his Sens career the past year plus, he impressed me. Even within the confines of Green/Nighbor's dynasty, he had some big time performances for Ottawa and came up clutch more than once in the finals)
12. Belfour (when you consider who his comp was, his Vezina and AS record is superb. Sneaky good playoff resume. One of my personal favs growing up)
13. Bower (I could go either way with him/Broda, they're incredibly similar, if Bower gets some credit for the AHL. He peaked as best G in world over Plante/Hall/Sawchuk in 61 and out performed them all head head, in the playoffs/finals more than once.)
14. Broda
15. Durnan (suffers a tad from having some big moments at height of WWII)
16. Parent (really short peak but those 2 years as best in world in the 70's means more than a few years in the 30's for instance, plus the back to back Smythes. Another guy I've come around on some the past few years)
17. Esposito
18. Gardiner (playoff edge over Worters)
19. Worters
20. Holecek
21. Lehman
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
I guess I don't see any good reason to put Durnan over Gardiner.
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
He's the one other guy I think overrated in a general sense so I'm not surprised you dropped his name haha.
He's tougher to gauge for me. I am pretty critical of the WWII years but there was still some solid talent beyond the Habs. Just too many stars missing though for me to credit his first and second years as you would the rest.
But again, the difference between he and Gardiner is head to head comp.
Consider Durnan's 3rd and 4th 1st team AS nods came over Brimsek in 46 and 47. Those 2 1st team AS nods are better than anything Gardiner got vs Worters, Thompson, etc. And his last 2 nods were over Rayner and he's not miles behind Thompson or Hainsworth IMO. Don't forget Broda was in the league minus the war years so Durnan was getting nods over him as well.
So when you look at who Durnan was beating for AS nods, next to Gardiner, the former looks a good bit better IMO.
Durnan has a 2,3, 5 Hart record over some solid names, the 2 and 5 coming well after WII so no worry about quality of league with those specifically.
Playoffs favor Durnan, just not sure by how much.
Obviously playing for the Maurice Richard Hab's was a better situation than the 30's Blackhawks, but enough to adjust the difference in AS, Hart, and playoff standing? Eh, can't do it. Unless you think much of those accolades happened largely because of the team rather player. Again, can't go that far, namely because of the Hart record. He was clearly valued as a player, not just G.
Professor What
Registered User
I don't know if there's a better example of peak vs. longevity than Charlie Gardiner. I think it's completely reasonable to believe that had he not died when he did, he would have gone on to have a few more years of dominance. In fact, it almost seems unreasonable to say that he wouldn't have. But, the simple, sad fact is it didn't happen. If we were to do a goalies project now and I took part, in all fairness, I couldn't "cut him slack" for that because the what-if game is too slippery of a slope. Doing so doesn't allow giving full credit for longevity to guys like Benedict, Bower, and Vezina. That said, I'd tend to lean toward saying that he had the best peak of any goalie to that point. I don't personally find that peak to be enough to wipe out the longevity advantage of a Vezina or Benedict, so I'd have them ahead of him, but I also don't think he's on a different rink in a career ranking either, so they're not going to be far ahead. Personally, I'd find it hard to rank another goalie with longevity issues ahead of him unless it was someone with a crazy strong career like Dryden. Now, as far as how he places against Bower is a bigger question to me, and it's going to depend on how much longevity credit is given to Bower's AHL career. I'd say Bower is due some credit, as I think there's plenty of evidence to suggest that he was a very strong player in a reasonably strong league. However, I can't give "full" credit for it as, quite simply, it wasn't the NHL. I think we can probably all agree that Jean Beliveau could have successfully moved to the NHL before he did, but we don't talk about his senior league play because it just wasn't the same thing. Well, Bower certainly wasn't playing senior league, so he gets something, but is it enough? Well, he played into his mid-40s, which is incredibly unusual, but let's remember that Vezina played until 38 at a time that was unheard of and did it with 15 full NHA/NHL seasons. The real difference that I see is that I don't think Bower's peak is as high as the others in this conversation, and Vezina isn't that far ahead of Gardiner in my book. I don't think Gardiner is that far ahead of Bower, but I feel like he's a little ahead. But, that's because I feel that peak beats longevity in this particular debate, and I could well nod my head and move on after hearing an argument for Bower that was based on longevity.
There's also one thing I'd like to say about some of the questions given to consider. It seems to me that in an especially low scoring era, it would be harder for goalies to get a significant amount of Hart support, both because it would be harder to set oneself apart from the crowd statistically since you can only get your numbers down so far, and also because with scoring at a premium. Thus, I wouldn't be too hard on any goalie in a time like that for not doing well in Hart balloting.
Edit: While I was typing this @TheDevilMadeMe made the comment that he can't see any reason to place Durnan ahead of Gardiner. He's exactly the kind of guy that makes me say it would have to be a Dryden level career to make me put a short time goalie ahead of Gardiner. He played only seven seasons, two of which were significantly weakened by World War II, and a third of which might have been slightly weakened. That's just not enough.
There's also one thing I'd like to say about some of the questions given to consider. It seems to me that in an especially low scoring era, it would be harder for goalies to get a significant amount of Hart support, both because it would be harder to set oneself apart from the crowd statistically since you can only get your numbers down so far, and also because with scoring at a premium. Thus, I wouldn't be too hard on any goalie in a time like that for not doing well in Hart balloting.
Edit: While I was typing this @TheDevilMadeMe made the comment that he can't see any reason to place Durnan ahead of Gardiner. He's exactly the kind of guy that makes me say it would have to be a Dryden level career to make me put a short time goalie ahead of Gardiner. He played only seven seasons, two of which were significantly weakened by World War II, and a third of which might have been slightly weakened. That's just not enough.
Dreakmur
Registered User
I’m glad you had Belfour ahead of Bower. If you account for Bower’s competition, you have to do the same for Belfour.
This list looks pretty close to what I would agree with.
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
I think you're highlighting where Gardiner gets some of his increased value. I'm not blaming anyone or saying I haven't done it on numerous occasions myself.
Unconscious bias.
You see how quickly people are suggesting the "what if" angle for him? I think that might be bleeding into the overall perception.
It is reasonable to think he would have had at least a few more years of AS level play had he not passed away. The danger is projecting as it pertains to value. If you give him credit for another 2, 3, 4 years, then you have to start considering Mario Lemieux getting cancer and missing significant, prime time, because of it. Once you open that box, it's hard to draw a line.
People might counter with what about the WWII years? The problem with that is those players didn't pass away. Some of them were AS's before AND after the war. It's more logical to give them a small fudge. For all we know Gardiner could have lived a full life but fell off a cliff performance wise at age 30.
But at the end of the day, he has 4 AS (3 1st team), consecutively.
It's pretty easy to see the list of G's who have as or more than that. And they're almost all in era's with better/significantly better comp at the position.
As you can see, Worters won a Hart vote in a very low scoring period, on a subpar team relative to the others. Where are the Hart votes for Gardiner? This ties into the Durnan comparison? He was valued, even being on a stronger team by his Hart voting shares.
I really think Gardiner is overrated when he's up in the top 12, which is where he usually ends up on lists around here.
Yes sir.
He feels like the 3rd or 4th best C during the Gretzky/Mario primes. And that's not even bringing up Brodeur! He was up against my 1st, 2nd, and 4th goalies all time for recognition. Belfour has a really good playoff record from 94 to 2000 and was strong during the run to the finals in 92.
Professor What
Registered User
I agree that top 12 is probably a little too high, but not much really. Looking at the top 40 goalie list on here, I'd put him behind Benedict and Broda. I think Broda gets hurt by all-star balloting since it was basically synonymous with GAA at the time and thus doesn't recognize what he actually did, and his playoff record is very strong. Belfour has enough longevity and success relative to competition that I'd probably just edge him over Gardiner. So there he is at 14. I'd slide Bower ahead of Worters and both of them ahead of Parent, but I'd also lean toward Holecek ahead of those guys, so I'd end up with Bower at 18 most likely. It's close enough that there's some wiggle room. I also know that there is a tendency to look at a guy like Gardiner and play the what-if game, but I do my best not to do that, and I don't think I am.
As far as all-star teams, it's not really fair to Gardiner to say that he has four in a row and leave it there. All-star teams started in 1930-31, meaning he made one in each available season. Now, I'll concede that there was no way he was going to make one in his first two seasons, but he played on some absolutely atrocious teams, so I don't think it's fair to put him down too much over his record. And as for Worters' Hart, look at the rosters of the Canadiens and the Bruins, then look at the Americans' roster. As they say on Sesame Street, one of these things is not like the others. The Americans would have been total garbage without Worters. Even in that ridiculously low-scoring season, they were the third-lowest scoring team in the league, with only two dumpster fires scoring fewer goals. Four teams with worse records outscored them. Basically, Worters' Hart was a perfect storm. Therefore, I said it's harder, not impossible. Honestly, I think Worters had a season for the ages in 1928-29.
Dreakmur
Registered User
I thought Broda was over-rated by the Verona winner getting the 1st all-star nod.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Broda was regularly the "3rd team" All-Star for a really long time though.
Dreakmur
Registered User
When voting followed pretty closely the GAAs of the teams, those voting results have always seemed wonky to me.
Professor What
Registered User
That Broda managed to lead the league in GAA twice is rather remarkable to me. It's not exactly like he had awesome defensive units in front of him. He had Red Horner for a while, but Horner is a weaker HOF induction who may be there largely for his PIM numbers. Heck, Broda even had the bad luck of missing out on Babe Pratt's Hart season since he was in the military. Compare that to Durnan who had each of Butch Bouchard, Ken Reardon, and Doug Harvey for significant parts of his time in Montreal. I'd dare say Durnan's job was easier. I don't think Broda gets a fair shake from his All-Star record.
Dreakmur
Registered User
Toronto had a famous defensive coach and a lot of quality defensive forwards, along with pretty steady blueline.
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
Yeah, let me be absolutely clear. Most of the folks who vote on those projects are knowledgeable enough (many of them more than me) and fair/balanced enough to get my approval. That includes multiple members of our ATD this year. I was a part of the top 100 project until I had to bow out dealing with a divorce about halfway through. I've seen a few people further back where I thought their votes to be worthless, but those instances are pretty rare.
But we're human. My biggest struggle isn't really analytically, though I'm nowhere near infallible haha, it's letting emotion get the better of me, especially in debate. Even today, I felt worked up a bit. Not nearly as I used to, but it was there. It's more natural for some than others. Just taken a long time for me and some life changes to cope with it more constructively.
I think when you read on Gardiner you get a strong sense of what if. And how can you not? The man passed away at 29, playing as an AS caliber goalie.
When you see it brought up as much as it is, it's hard to conclude it doesn't at least partially influence how some people end up ranking/projecting. Even if just slightly. We all do it.
Just sticking to the many things I've outlined, namely weak goal tending era, lack of any significant Hart votes (when other G's had better in same time period) and shorter than normal career, he's overrated.
Even IF you give him a 5th AS nod, I don't think it changes all that much, simply because the era isn't nearly as strong as the 06, through the 70's and 90's-2000's. And again, that's appeasing the projecting game. 5 AS's still wouldn't pass Durnan/Brimsek or make the competition pool tip in Gardiner's favor.
Just going by what we have, as we would any other player, Gardiner's major bullet points are:
4 AS (3 1st teams), consecutively.
7th Hart (other goalieS won and/or had better Hart shares during his career)
1 SC w/what any reputable person would say is 2 good/great playoff runs (3rd and 4th sample size make them more or less irrelevant, 2 games each)
And again, this is all in an era that features, IMO, the 3rd worst crop of goal tenders ever. Only the current era, and 80's come in worse in my book. Yes, he played on a weaker team, but that should only account for a minor correction. We don't give Marcel Dionne much/if any extra credit for playing on the lowly Kings.
Now considering era and the above major bullet points
Compare him to
Belfour (who played during peak Roy, Hasek, Broduer)
We'll just do AS and Hart shares since Vezina's meant different things.
Belfour AS - 1, 1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5, 5
Belfour Hart - 3, 10, 15, 15,
But say you give Gardiner 3 modern Vezina's for his 1st team AS nods and then fairly remove all the goalies that rank above Worters/Thompson/Hainsworth from Belfour's era, a modern Vezina comparison would be a landslide for Belfour.
As it were, Belfour's Vezina is 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4 without taking away any of those studs named above.
And is anyone going to suggest Gardiner has more value as a postseason goalie?
I'd be shocked.
That's the Eagle.
Look at Tony Esposito:
Tougher era, better AS recored, far better Hart record, playoff record that is subpar all time, but not as bad as some make it out to be and again, playoffs aren't a strong point for Gardiner as it were. I'd give Gardiner the edge based on 2 worthy years, but it's not enough to bridge the era, AS, Hart record. Be sure they're close (rankings show that above), I just feel strongly about peer competition when comparing these guys.
There are many who would think it nuts to rank Espo over Gardiner. Some disagree with Belfour.
But if you remove every urge to project and look just at what players did in real life?
Gardiner needs to drop all time. IMO.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
The 1st Team AS nod always went to the Vezina winner, but the 2nd and 3rd teams don't look nearly so tied to GAA.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Gardiner = clear cut #1 of his era, basically the 15 years between the end of the Vezina/Lehman/Benedict trio and the emergence of Brimsek. (Yes, yes, you could make an argument for Worters; it's just that the people who saw them play all seemed to prefer Gardiner, from what I read).
Belfour (or Bower for that matter) = #4 of his era, obviously behind 3 true greats, but still.
Professor What
Registered User
"Pretty steady" and Hall of Fame caliber aren't the same thing. Durnan had much stronger help on the blue line, not to mention the advantage of a significant part of his career on a stacked team while much of the rest of the league was depleted. Broda wasn't even in the league when it was the most drained. That still looks better on Broda than Durnan.
I don't think anything you said is nuts. I'm not trying to present my opinion as gospel, because I know it's not. I don't think it's "nuts" to have any of those guys ahead of Gardiner. But at the same time, I look at the rosters that Chicago had during his time there, and they weren't impressive at all. He played with a few Hall of Famers in those first couple of years, but they were shells of their former selves. Later, he did get a young Art Coulter who was just coming into stride when Gardiner died and Lionel Conacher, who was a very strong player, but overall, he wasn't working with that much.
Does Chicago win the 1934 Cup without him? I don't see any way they do. Each year they made the playoffs, save one, he significantly reduced his GAA, and I'd say he was a pretty good playoff performer as a whole. In 1929-30, Chicago only got one round and two games, but was that really Gardiner's fault? He gave up one goal in a game one loss and then two in a 3OT second game tie. The problem was a lack of offensive support.
Anyway, we agree that he's overrated in the goalies project, just not on how much. Even when we disagree, I don't have any really strong disagreements with who you have ahead of him other than Parent and Durnan, and their problem in comparison is, once again, a lack of longevity.
Edit: That goalie project is almost a decade old now. I think a new one would be fun to do.
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
But still?
Come on man, that's not how it works.
Gardiner, is not the clear cut #1 of his era for starters. One I think you'd find some other people on the HoH forum who'd agree. Two, Worters Hart record bridges the AS gap, IMO.
Gardiner was getting AS nods yet other lesser goalies were viewed as more valuable (Worters certainly winning over the likes of every big name in 1929 and finishing 2nd the year prior over everyone not named Morenz). Even in the 1st team AS years, you don't see any real Hart votes for Gardiner.
Thompson and Roach (3rd, 7 votes behind Bill Cook) have better Hart placements even.
So even IF you still think Gardiner is the clear but best guy, he did it against not one single G that ranks in the top 20 all time, outside of maybe Worters (i have him just inside 20).
There is no real comparison between those folks and the 06 era or the 90's. It's night and day and that's significant when evaluating value.
It's why Bower being best in the world in 61 (while finishing ahead of everyone not named Geoffrion for league MVP) is vastly more impressive than any single season Gardiner put together.
Bower on the whole can only be placed behind Gardiner if you think Gardiner far better in the regular season, despite disparity in league and positional competition. I'd assume you believe that as you've stated that Bower is comfortably ahead as far as postseason's go. So I guess we clearly disagree on their regular season merits. No biggie.
Edit:
And to be clear, I'm not suggesting that 12 to 18 is some massive gap. It's all one tier more or less IMO.
Dreakmur
Registered User
Defensive play is less about the talent of individual players and more about how those players work together within a system. When Broda left for WWII, his replacement - Paul Bibeault - maintained a similar pace.
There’s a reason less talented teams try to beat more talented teams by playing defensively.
Last edited:
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Wait, what? I just noticed this here.
Playoffs are a major reason Durnan can't hold Gardiner's jock.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Still though, Bower's team was at least as defensive-minded as Broda's, if not more so.
Ad
Latest posts
-
Post-Series Talk: Boston Bruins Defeat Toronto Maple Leafs (win 4-3)- Latest: Lafleurs Guy
-
