Round 2, Vote 1 (HOH Top Goaltenders)

[quoipourquoi]

I know this board tends to be very reluctant to rank Brodeur over any of the big 3 from the Original 6. Would someone care to make the case for Hall and/or Sawchuk over Brodeur?

This is going to be unfair to Brodeur, but because I've seen his entire career, I've disagreed with enough of his Vezina nominations to not necessarily think of him as a nine-time top-three goaltender. I agree with the increased difficulty of being that in a 30-team league however, so I can't deny the consistency he has displayed, even if it is at a slightly lesser level than some of the top-seven. I'm having a lot of trouble with my #4-#7 right now, and I felt really good about it a month ago.

1994 was the epic playoff series between the stacked Rangers and the Devils, so I don't think you can fault Brodeur for that.

He was so good at reading the Rangers in Game 7, and he didn't have a bad game all series.

Averaging stats don't take into account the fact that Brodeur played his best hockey when the series were on the line. Brodeur's save percentages in 2012:

Florida games 1-3: 0.868 ,
Florida games 4-7: 0.974, including winning game 7 in OT when the Devils were outshot 45-36.

Philadelphia games 1-3: 0.905
Philadelphia games 4-5: 0.940
Claude Giroux's headhot in game 4 that got him suspended in game 5 game from frustration immediately after Brodeur's puckhandling killed a dump in.

NY Rangers games 1-3: 0.917
NY Rangers games 4-6: 0.935

There's a reason Brodeur was widely considered one of several Smythe favorites by the media if the Devils won the finals.

I knew the number for the Florida series (though I had it at .950 in the final four games; and trust me, I was dancing a jig for having correctly predicted him to hit a hot streak in the playoffs), but I didn't have it for the other two series. Very interesting.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I knew the number for the Florida series (though I had it at .950 in the final four games; and trust me, I was dancing a jig for having correctly predicted him to hit a hot streak in the playoffs), but I didn't have it for the other two series. Very interesting.

Yeah, as soon as I saw the original number I came up with, I meant to go back and factcheck myself, because it would have been absurdly high.

Game 4: 26/26
Game 5: 30/32
Game 6: 14/16
Game 7: 43/45

Total = 113/119. Save percentage = 0.950

This is what happens when you try to get the data out there in a hurry before you leave home

Edited the earlier post.

Edit: Double checked the other 2 series and the numbers are correct.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Read my initial quote again

There is one key element that tips the edge towards Terry Sawchuk. In a playoff series there is an expectation that the better goalie plays like the better goalie. The difference at the HHOF level is minute but should a HHOF goalie lose a series, especially an upset to a non HHOF goalie? :

1961 Sawchuk got the edge on Cesare Maniago, splitting the first two games in Toronto then closed out the Leafs betaing Bower twice at home and once in Toronto.

View the complete quote then consider the evident gaps in your data and conclusion.

The idea is to win the series.

Your original post focused on losing to a non-HHOF goalie in an upset, not beating one. You said:

The difference at the HHOF level is minute but should a HHOF goalie lose a series, especially an upset to a non HHOF goalie?

Therefore, I focused on instances where Sawchuk and Brodeur were the favorite and lost to a non-HHOF goalie. In the 1961 situation you described above, Toronto was the favorite, so upsetting Sawchuk was not a possibility. You never once mentioned Sawchuk or Brodeur upsetting non-HHOF goalies, you only mentioned their losses.

Perhaps there is some confusion here with the word "upset?" Did you mean something other than a higher seed losing to a lower seed?


EDIT: Not saying cases like the 1961 situation are not worth considering, just that you never mentioned winning at all in your original statement, so there was no need for me to mention it in a rebuttal. I will now look at situations where Sawchuk and Brodeur were lower seeds and forced an upset (both HHOF and non-HHOF goalies).

 

[tarheelhockey]

In previous posts, I've detailed the playoff runs that defined Sawchuk's "golden years" with the Red Wings dynasty. After being dealt to Boston in 1955, he wouldn't see the playoffs again for another 3 years. Since his numbers during that 1951-55 time period were the defining phase of his career, I think it's worth separating them from the whole, analyzing them, and comparing them to the other heavyweights in this thread.

A note about the numbers: Period-by-period shots are not available from 2 games each in 1951 and 1952. Likewise, Gerry McNeil's save numbers from the final game of the 1952 Finals apparently went unreported. I have included as much information as is available for each category below. Due to those missing data points, not all of the shot counts will add up precisely.


Summary

Record in games: 28-18
Record in series: 6-2
Home record (sv%): 16-8 (.936)
Road record (sv%): 12-8 (.924)

Saves/Shots: 1099/1180
Total Save %: .931
PP Goals against (%): 19 (23%)
Opponents' Saves/Shots: 1282/1404
Opponents' Save %: .913



Situational Breakdown

Sawchuk allowed the first goal 20/43 times: 9 times in the first period, 3 times in the second period, 1 times in the third period, 1 time in one OT, and one time in triple-OT.


First periods - 26 goals, GAA of 1.70; 322 shots, sv% of .919

Second periods - 27 goals, GAA of 1.76; 377 shots, sv% of .928
When Detroit was leading after 1 - 18 games, 9 goals, 153 shots, sv% .941
When Detroit was tied after 1 - 17 games, 11 goals, 129 shots, sv% .915
When Detroit was trailing after 1 - 8 games, 7 goals, 84 shots, sv% .917

Third periods - 27 goals, GAA of 1.76; 285 shots, sv% of .905When Detroit was leading after 2 - 22 games, 10 goals, 180 shots, sv% .944
When Detroit was tied after 2 - 11 games, 5 goals, 87 shots, sv% .943
When Detroit trailed after 2 - 10 games, 13 goals, 93 shots, sv% .860

Overtime - 4 games, 2 goals, 12 shots, save% of .833Two additional OT losses, total of 7 periods played, shots unknown



Sawchuk vs. his playoff opponents

Year | Goalie | Gm 1 | Gm 2 | Gm 3 | Gm 4 | Gm 5 | Gm 6 | Gm 7 | Total | Save %
1951|Sawchuk|39/42|41/42|24/24|22/23|20/25|23/26|-|169/182| (.929)
1951|McNeil|60/62|42/42|29/31|24/28|26/28|18/20|-|199/211| (.943)
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
1952|Sawchuk|25/25|23/23|25/27|39/40|-|-|-|112/115| (.974)
1952|Rollins|21/24|-|-|28/31|-|-|-|49/55| (.891)
1952|Broda|-|24/25|30/36|-|-|-|-|54/61| (.885)
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
1952|Sawchuk|29/30|25/26|27/27|26/26|-|-|-|107/109| (.982)
1952|McNeil|29/32|34/36|24/27|?|87/95|-|-|-| (.916)
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
1953|Sawchuk|27/27|18/23|30/32|26/32|12/16|-|-|113/130| (.869)
1953|Henry|36/43|43/46|43/44|38/40|28/34|-|-|188/207| (.908)
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
1954|Sawchuk|37/37|24/27|28/29|26/27|36/39|-|-|151/159| (.950)
1954|Lumley|20/25|27/28|25/28|27/29|46/50|-|-|145/160| (.906)
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
1954|Sawchuk|18/19|25/28|23/25|28/28|21/22|26/30|22/23|163/175| (.931)
1954|Plante|25/28|25/26|32/37|27/29|-|-|-|109/120| (.908)
1954|McNeil|-|-|-|-|22/22|33/34|31/33|86/89| (.966)
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
1955|Sawchuk|31/35|30/31|35/36|21/21|-|-|-|117/123| (.951)
1955|Lumley|29/36|32/34|31/33|31/34|-|-|-|123/137| (.898)
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
1955|Sawchuk|20/22|26/27|22/26|25/30|20/21|33/39|21/22|167/187| (.893)
1955|Plante|26/30|36/40|35/37|37/40|36/41|35/38|30/33|235/259| (.907)
1955|Hodge|-|7/10|-|-|-|-|-|7/10| (.700)

So the question is... how does this compare to the playoff peaks of our other candidates?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Playing Better

Your original post focused on losing to a non-HHOF goalie in an upset, not beating one. You said:

Therefore, I focused on instances where Sawchuk and Brodeur were the favorite and lost to a non-HHOF goalie. In the 1961 situation you described above, Toronto was the favorite, so upsetting Sawchuk was not a possibility. You never once mentioned Sawchuk or Brodeur upsetting non-HHOF goalies, you only mentioned their losses.

Perhaps there is some confusion here with the word "upset?" Did you mean something other than a higher seed losing to a lower seed?


EDIT: Not saying cases like the 1961 situation are not worth considering, just that you never mentioned winning at all in your original statement, so there was no need for me to mention it in a rebuttal. I will now look at situations where Sawchuk and Brodeur were lower seeds and forced an upset (both HHOF and non-HHOF goalies).

Winning a series or game happens to be one of the qualities of playing better.

 

[VanIslander]

Please delete my name from the HOH voting list.

I'll simply follow as a spectator and occasional commentator. I am not committing the time it deserves to participate meaningfully in a project like this.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Sawchuk and Brodeur vs. Higher Seeds


Sawchuk vs. HHOF goalies
Wins
1961: .5 (Bower)
1963: 1 (Hall)
1964: 1 (Hall)
1967: .75 (.5 Hall + .25 Worsley)

Losses
1956: 1 (Plante)
1958: 1 (Plante)
1960: 1 (Bower)
1961: .5 (Hall)
1963: 1 (Bower)
1964: 1 (Bower)
1966: .5 (Worsley)

Total: 3.25/9.25

Sawchuk vs. non-HHOF goalies
Wins
1961: .5 (Maniago)
1967: .75 (.25 Vachon + .5 DeJordy)

Losses
1965: .25 (Hodge)

Total: 1.25/1.5

Combined Total: 4.5/10.75


Brodeur vs. HHOF goalies
Wins
2000: 1 (Belfour)

Losses
2001: 1 (Roy)

Total: 1/2

Brodeur vs. non-HHOF goalies
Wins
1995: 4 (Lacher, Wregget, Hextall, Vernon)
2000: 1 (Boucher)
2012: 2 (Bryzgalov, Lundqvist)

Losses
1995: 1 (Richter)
2004: 1 (Eshe)
2006: 1 (Ward)

Total: 7/10

Combined Total: 8/12


Summary
In chances to upset HHOF goalies Sawchuk was successful 35% of the time, while Brodeur was successful 50% of the time.

In chances to upset non-HHOF goalies Sawchuk was successful 83% of the time and Brodeur was successful 70% of the time.

In all upset chances combined Sawchuk was successful 42% of the time and Brodeur was successful 67% of the time.


Again, there's not much to take away from this because of some extremely small sample sizes (e.g. Sawchuk vs. non-HHOF goalies and Brodeur vs. HHOF goalies). The main point is that using Sawchuk and Brodeur's raw series wins and losses totals vs. HHOF and non-HHOF goalies is not a good way to compare them.


EDIT: In fact, looking at all of Sawchuk's playoff series vs. non-HHOF goalies, he won 3.25 times out of 6.5, or about 50% of the time (59% if you don't include anything after expansion). Looking at all of Brodeur's playoff series vs. non-HHOF goalies, he won 21 times out of 33 or about 64% of the time.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Better Than Most

In previous posts, I've detailed the playoff runs that defined Sawchuk's "golden years" with the Red Wings dynasty. After being dealt to Boston in 1955, he wouldn't see the playoffs again for another 3 years. Since his numbers during that 1951-55 time period were the defining phase of his career, I think it's worth separating them from the whole, analyzing them, and comparing them to the other heavyweights in this thread.

A note about the numbers: Period-by-period shots are not available from 2 games each in 1951 and 1952. Likewise, Gerry McNeil's save numbers from the final game of the 1952 Finals apparently went unreported. I have included as much information as is available for each category below. Due to those missing data points, not all of the shot counts will add up precisely.


Summary

Record in games: 28-18
Record in series: 6-2
Home record (sv%): 16-8 (.936)
Road record (sv%): 12-8 (.924)

Saves/Shots: 1099/1180
Total Save %: .931
PP Goals against (%): 19 (23%)
Opponents' Saves/Shots: 1282/1404
Opponents' Save %: .913



Situational Breakdown

Sawchuk allowed the first goal 20/43 times: 9 times in the first period, 3 times in the second period, 1 times in the third period, 1 time in one OT, and one time in triple-OT.


First periods - 26 goals, GAA of 1.70; 322 shots, sv% of .919

Second periods - 27 goals, GAA of 1.76; 377 shots, sv% of .928
When Detroit was leading after 1 - 18 games, 9 goals, 153 shots, sv% .941
When Detroit was tied after 1 - 17 games, 11 goals, 129 shots, sv% .915
When Detroit was trailing after 1 - 8 games, 7 goals, 84 shots, sv% .917

Third periods - 27 goals, GAA of 1.76; 285 shots, sv% of .905When Detroit was leading after 2 - 22 games, 10 goals, 180 shots, sv% .944
When Detroit was tied after 2 - 11 games, 5 goals, 87 shots, sv% .943
When Detroit trailed after 2 - 10 games, 13 goals, 93 shots, sv% .860

Overtime - 4 games, 2 goals, 12 shots, save% of .833Two additional OT losses, total of 7 periods played, shots unknown



Sawchuk vs. his playoff opponents

Year | Goalie | Gm 1 | Gm 2 | Gm 3 | Gm 4 | Gm 5 | Gm 6 | Gm 7 | Total | Save %
1951|Sawchuk|39/42|41/42|24/24|22/23|20/25|23/26|-|169/182| (.929)
1951|McNeil|60/62|42/42|29/31|24/28|26/28|18/20|-|199/211| (.943)
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
1952|Sawchuk|25/25|23/23|25/27|39/40|-|-|-|112/115| (.974)
1952|Rollins|21/24|-|-|28/31|-|-|-|49/55| (.891)
1952|Broda|-|24/25|30/36|-|-|-|-|54/61| (.885)
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
1952|Sawchuk|29/30|25/26|27/27|26/26|-|-|-|107/109| (.982)
1952|McNeil|29/32|34/36|24/27|?|87/95|-|-|-| (.916)
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
1953|Sawchuk|27/27|18/23|30/32|26/32|12/16|-|-|113/130| (.869)
1953|Henry|36/43|43/46|43/44|38/40|28/34|-|-|188/207| (.908)
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
1954|Sawchuk|37/37|24/27|28/29|26/27|36/39|-|-|151/159| (.950)
1954|Lumley|20/25|27/28|25/28|27/29|46/50|-|-|145/160| (.906)
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
1954|Sawchuk|18/19|25/28|23/25|28/28|21/22|26/30|22/23|163/175| (.931)
1954|Plante|25/28|25/26|32/37|27/29|-|-|-|109/120| (.908)
1954|McNeil|-|-|-|-|22/22|33/34|31/33|86/89| (.966)
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
1955|Sawchuk|31/35|30/31|35/36|21/21|-|-|-|117/123| (.951)
1955|Lumley|29/36|32/34|31/33|31/34|-|-|-|123/137| (.898)
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
1955|Sawchuk|20/22|26/27|22/26|25/30|20/21|33/39|21/22|167/187| (.893)
1955|Plante|26/30|36/40|35/37|37/40|36/41|35/38|30/33|235/259| (.907)
1955|Hodge|-|7/10|-|-|-|-|-|7/10| (.700)

So the question is... how does this compare to the playoff peaks of our other candidates?

Better than all except Plante and Dryden. Roy enjoys an OT edge.
Sawchuk weak 1951 at home - 3 loses, 7 home loses 1951-55 overall, 1953 overall.1955 Finals, perhaps an unnecessary game 7. 1956-60 Plante was 40W - 9L never going to seven games in a series,only twice to game 6.Only bump in the road game was 1956 vs Rangers at home and 1958 vs Boston, both Game 2, Still 25W - 2L at home. Dryden let a few series run a game longer - 1971 Minnesota, 1973 Chicago, few early bumps in the road games vs Vancouver and Detroit.

 

[Canadiens1958]

1951-1955

Sawchuk vs. HHOF goalies
Wins
1961: .5 (Bower)
1963: 1 (Hall)
1964: 1 (Hall)
1967: .75 (.5 Hall + .25 Worsley)

Losses
1956: 1 (Plante)
1958: 1 (Plante)
1960: 1 (Bower)
1961: .5 (Hall)
1963: 1 (Bower)
1964: 1 (Bower)
1966: .5 (Worsley)

Total: 3.25/9.25

Sawchuk vs. non-HHOF goalies
Wins
1961: .5 (Maniago)
1967: .75 (.25 Vachon + .5 DeJordy)

Losses
1965: .25 (Hodge)

Total: 1.25/1.5

Combined Total: 4.5/10.75

Brodeur vs. HHOF goalies
Wins
2000: 1 (Belfour)

Losses
2001: 1 (Roy)

Total: 1/2

Brodeur vs. non-HHOF goalies
Wins
1995: 4 (Lacher, Wregget, Hextall, Vernon)
2000: 1 (Boucher)
2012: 2 (Bryzgalov, Lundqvist)

Losses
1995: 1 (Richter)
2004: 1 (Eshe)
2006: 1 (Ward)

Total: 7/10

Combined Total: 8/12


Summary
In chances to upset HHOF goalies Sawchuk was successful 35% of the time, while Brodeur was successful 50% of the time.

In chances to upset non-HHOF goalies Sawchuk was successful 83% of the time and Brodeur was successful 70% of the time.

In all upset chances combined Sawchuk was successful 42% of the time and Brodeur was successful 67% of the time.


Again, there's not much to take away from this because of some extremely small sample sizes (e.g. Sawchuk vs. non-HHOF goalies and Brodeur vs. HHOF goalies). The main point is that using Sawchuk and Brodeur's raw series wins and losses totals vs. HHOF and non-HHOF goalies is not a good way to compare them.

What happened to the 1951-55 games? Also most of Brodeur's career gets swept under the carpet.

So you arbitrarily reduce the sample space then claim not much to take away because of a small sample space.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

What happened to the 1951-55 games? Also most of Brodeur's career gets swept under the carpet.

So you arbitrarily reduce the sample space then claim not much to take away because of a small sample space.

That particular post only focused on upset opportunities, Detroit was the #1 seed from 1951-55, so they did not get any upset opportunities.

I have added text to the end of that post to show Sawchuk's and Brodeur's complete records vs. non-HHOF competition.


EDIT: I didn't originally credit Sawchuk for half a series win against McNeil in the 1954 Cup Finals, the final statement of post #682 has been corrected.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Playing Better

That particular post only focused on upset opportunities, Detroit was the #1 seed from 1951-55, so they did not get any upset opportunities.

I have added text to the end of that post to show Sawchuk's and Brodeur's complete records vs. non-HHOF competition.

The focus is "an expectation that the better goalie plays like the better goalie."

The winning is the opposite of losing in the playoffs, no ties.The losing can be in the form of a loss to a HHOF < upset loss to a HHOF goalie < loss to a goalie < upset loss to a goalie.

So Detroit provided plenty of upset opportunities for other teams.Preventing upsets is part of playing better as well.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

The focus is "an expectation that the better goalie plays like the better goalie."

The winning is the opposite of losing in the playoffs, no ties.The losing can be in the form of a loss to a HHOF < upset loss to a HHOF goalie < loss to a goalie < upset loss to a goalie.

So Detroit provided plenty of upset opportunities for other teams.Preventing upsets is part of playing better as well.

Using the above ranking system, sample size will always be a problem because of how different the eras were that these two played in. How many times did Brodeur even face a HHOF goaltender in the playoffs? 2 have been mentioned previously, is there a third? It goes the other way with Sawchuk...we have him facing non-HHOF goaltenders only 6.5 times in his career. Also, not all upsets are created equal depending on the quality of the opposing team. A much more in depth analysis is needed for a fair comparison, which was the whole point of all this, to show that your original post which said, "Brodeur lost this many times and Sawchuk only this many times, so Sawchuk is better," was much much too simplistic.

 

[quoipourquoi]

So the question is... how does this compare to the playoff peaks of our other candidates?

Well, since I have Roy's numbers in front of me, let's put his five-year playoff peak at 1993-1997:

1993
Roy: 190/203; .936
Hextall: 193/211; .915

Roy: 130/142; .915
Fuhr: 88/104; .846

Roy: 137/147; .932
Healy: 127/142; .894

Roy: 144/155; .929
Hrudey: 162/177; .915

1994
Roy: 212/228; .930
Casey: 125/137; .912

1996
Roy: 139/156; .891
Hirsch: 145/166; .873

Roy: 159/173; .919
Belfour: 165/181; .912

Roy: 153/169; .905
Osgood: 116/135; .859

Roy: 147/151; .974
Vanbiesbrouck: 108/119; .908

1997
Roy: 170/183; .929
Hackett: 165/190; .868

Roy: 164/175; .937
Joseph: 136/155; .877

Roy: 187/201; .930
Vernon: 100/110; .909



That's twelve series in five years in which he always had a higher save percentage than his competition.

EDIT: It's funny. I only just now noticed that his five-year playoff peak came immediately after his five-year regular season peak (1987-1992).

 

[Canadiens1958]

Counting

Using the above ranking system, sample size will always be a problem because of how different the eras were that these two played in. How many times did Brodeur even face a HHOF goaltender in the playoffs?[/B] 2 have been mentioned previously, is there a third? It goes the other way with Sawchuk...we have him facing non-HHOF goaltenders only 6.5 times in his career. Also, not all upsets are created equal depending on the quality of the opposing team. A much more in depth analysis is needed for a fair comparison, which was the whole point of all this, to show that your original post which said, "Brodeur lost this many times and Sawchuk only this many times, so Sawchuk is better," was much much too simplistic.

O6 nonHHOF goalers that Sawchuk actually faced in a playoff game - McNeil,Rollins, Henry, Hodge, Maniago, DeJordy,Vachon,

Hall faced fewer - Simmons in 1957 and 1962,Hank Bassen in 1961, Bob Champoux in 1964, Charlie Hodge in 1965,Roger Crozier in 1964-1966.Only won series in 1961 and 1965.Hall had a losing playoff record.

Brodeur 113W-91L vs Sawchuk 54W - 48L are fairly similar yet Sawchuk faced more HHOF quality goalies - Broda,Lumley, Plante, Bower, Hall,Worsely, in the O6 era, approaching 70 games.

The sample size of over 100 games is sufficient regardless of how it is subgrouped.

 

[pluppe]

Re: ContrarianGoaltender's point about power play opportunities faced, some of us had a discussion on the ATD board some time ago about how the cost of skaters taking minor penalties. Looking at the career GA records and penalty records for Nick Lidstrom and Chris Pronger, it appears that even-strength GA and minor penalties against are substitutes to some degree. Lidstrom has been on the ice for
more goals against than Pronger, and Pronger takes way more minorppenalties. One can easily create a model where GA and minor penalties in the defensive zone are substitutes. The defensive player gets beaten and either concedes a scoring chance or takes a penalty.

Could this be true on the team level as well? Are teams with low PPOA conceding dangerous scoring chances at EV as well, or vice versa?

It could mean something but considering that Montreals goals against follow the same line (finishing with the least or second least goals against in all seasons between 86/87 - 91/92 and then falling off at the same point as Roys numbers) a more probable explanation is that they were simply better defensively than the rest of the league. As oppose to Pronger/Lidström were we are talking about 2 great defensive players with different approaches.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I'm not sure what value we're getting out of counting series wins over HHOF goalies.

Taking examples from my Sawchuk post above, Gerry McNeil faced Sawchuk 3 times in the playoffs and was very strong each time. Sawchuk, however, was equally good and his 1952 was simply phenomenal leading to a sweep.

Compare to beating a washed-up Broda in 1952 or a rookie Plante in 1954, neither of whom put up much of a fight and got replaced.

The non-HOFers were much tougher opponents in these series, and IMO that doesn't diminish or enhance anything.

 

[Canadiens1958]

1962 Finals Game 5

I'm not sure what value we're getting out of counting series wins over HHOF goalies.

Taking examples from my Sawchuk post above, Gerry McNeil faced Sawchuk 3 times in the playoffs and was very strong each time. Sawchuk, however, was equally good and his 1952 was simply phenomenal leading to a sweep.

Compare to beating a washed-up Broda in 1952 or a rookie Plante in 1954, neither of whom put up much of a fight and got replaced.

The non-HOFers were much tougher opponents in these series, and IMO that doesn't diminish or enhance anything.

1962 Finals game 5. Game 4 first period Johnny Bower suffers a series ending injury. Replaced by the Leafs best alternative Don Simmons, by then an AHL/NHL tweener. Hawks go on to win and tie the series.

Game 5 is in Toronto, Hall vs Simmons, Glenn Hall flinches twice - opening faceoff and again when the Hawks have rebounded from a 2-0 deficit to take a 3-2 lead early in the second period. At that point the series is over, just the final scores are to be determined.

http://www.flyershistory.com/cgi-bin/poboxscore.cgi?O19620017

Instead of seizing the moment and allowing the Hawks to repeat as SC champions, Hall sets the template for the 1963-67 Hawks.

 

[pappyline]

1962 Finals game 5. Game 4 first period Johnny Bower suffers a series ending injury. Replaced by the Leafs best alternative Don Simmons, by then an AHL/NHL tweener. Hawks go on to win and tie the series.

Game 5 is in Toronto, Hall vs Simmons, Glenn Hall flinches twice - opening faceoff and again when the Hawks have rebounded from a 2-0 deficit to take a 3-2 lead early in the second period. At that point the series is over, just the final scores are to be determined.

http://www.flyershistory.com/cgi-bin/poboxscore.cgi?O19620017

Instead of seizing the moment and allowing the Hawks to repeat as SC champions, Hall sets the template for the 1963-67 Hawks.

Well....Toronto outshot Chicago 44-30 in the game and 19-6 in the third period so i don't think Hall should shoulder all the blame. Toronto was a much deeper team than Chicago

 

[Iain Fyffe]

Averaging stats don't take into account the fact that Brodeur played his best hockey when the series were on the line. Brodeur's save percentages in 2012:

Florida games 1-3: 0.868 ,
Florida games 4-7: 0.950, including winning game 7 in OT when the Devils were outshot 45-36.

Philadelphia games 1-3: 0.905
Philadelphia games 4-5: 0.940
Claude Giroux's headhot in game 4 that got him suspended in game 5 game from frustration immediately after Brodeur's puckhandling killed a dump in.

NY Rangers games 1-3: 0.917
NY Rangers games 4-6: 0.935

There's a reason Brodeur was widely considered one of several Smythe favorites by the media if the Devils won the finals.

This is pretty selective. If Brodeur had played better early in the Florida series, it wouldn't have been on the line later. The Philadelphia series was never on the line, the Devils won 4-1. And you seem to have left off the .792 save precentage he posted in game six of the finals, when his team's entire season was on the line.

In the five games in which his team could have been eliminated, Brodeur posted a .917 save percentage, which happens to be exactly the same as his overall postseason save percentage in 2012.

 

[BM67]

The winning percentage of teams each faced in the playoffs:

Pre OTL Pt

Roy 35S 0.552 (10 series vs sub-500 teams)
Hasek 14S 0.572 (2 series vs sub-500 teams)
Brodeur 12S 0.591 (1 series vs sub-500 teams)
Sawchuk 21S 0.578 (3 series vs sub-500 teams)
Plante 28S 0.540 (12 series vs sub-500 teams)
Hall 24S 0.558 (8 series vs sub-500 teams)
Dryden 21S 0.605 (3 series vs sub-500 teams)

With OTL Pt
Brodeur 25S 0.602
Hasek 11S 0.603
Roy 11S 0.610

Cup years
Sawchuk52 0.543
Plante53 0.493
Sawchuk54 0.568
Sawchuk55 0.582
Plante56 0.536
Plante57 0.521
Plante58 0.496
Plante59 0.479
Plante60 0.529
Hall61 0.564
Sawchuk67 0.611
Dryden71 0.641
Dryden73 0.568
Dryden76 0.627
Dryden77 0.594
Dryden78 0.590
Dryden79 0.567
Roy86 0.527
Roy93 0.543
Brodeur95 0.646
Roy96 0.604
OTL Pt
Brodeur 00 0.618
Roy01 0.604
Hasek02 0.582
Brodeur03 0.591

Series record vs. teams 0.600+

Hasek 5W 5L (2-3/3-2 before/after OTL)
Roy 7W 7L (3-5/4-2 before/after OTL)
Brodeur 10W 6L (3-2/7-4 before/after OTL)
Sawchuk 3W 4L (1-1 in platoon)
Plante 0W 7L (0-6 in platoon)
Hall 3W 7L (0-2 in platoon)
Dryden 8W 2L

Brodeur has faced the President's Trophy winner 4 times in the playoffs, but never played for one. Roy has faced the President's Trophy winner 5 times in the playoffs, and played for 2. Hasek has played for a couple, and faced one.

Four times Brodeur has lost to the eventual Stanley Cup winner, and three times to the team that lost in the Final. Only 4 of the teams Brodeur has lost to have lost in the next round of the playoffs.

 

[Canadiens1958]

1971 & 1972 Toronto/1973 Boston Playoffs - Jacques Plante

Jacques Plante was sold to Toronto during the 1970 off-season. He settled comfortably into a mentoring role - Bernie Parent. Excellent goalie management allowed the Leafs to optimize Plante's performance while developing Bernie Parent. Sadly they mismanaged the business end with Parent.

Data culled from the HSP project and reference to BM67 post #123 this thread.

1971 Quarter Finals vs NEW YORK RANGERS

Game 1 - Away, TOR 4 NYR 5,Plante (26/31) (8/10/13) first goal 6:05 (1-1)
Game 2 - Away, TOR 4 NYR 1, Parent 55:18 (20-21)Plante 4:42(3/3) (4/11/8) first goal 36:11 (3-1) Parent mask game.
Game 3 - Home, TOR 3 NYR 1, Parent (33/34)
Game 4 - Home, TOR 2 NYR 4, Parent (28/32)
Game 5 - Away, TOR 1 NYR 3, Parent(26/29)
Game 6 - Home, TOR 1 NYR2 OT, Plante (36/38),(10/9/14/5) first goal 32:39

Notes - 2PG game 1,1ea 1st & 2nd period.

Jacques Plante SV%

1st period .944 17/18
2nd period ..842 16/19
3rd period .933 28/30
overtime .800 4/5
Home .947 36/38
Away .853 26/31
Series .903 65/72

1972 Quarter Finals vs BOSTON

Game 1 - Away, TOR 0 BOS 5 Plante (24/29) (7/9/13) first goal 37:24 (0-1)
Game 2 - Away, TOR 4 BOS 3OT,Parent(37/40)
Game 3 - Home, TOR 0 BOS 2, Parent (33/35)
Game 4 - Home, TOR 4 BOS 6, Parent (31/36) 1 ENG
Game 5 - Away, TOR 2 BOS 3,Parent (34/37)


Jacques Plante SV%

1st period 1.000 7/7
2nd period .778 7/9
3rd period .769 10/13
Away & Series .828 24/29

1973 Quarter Finals vs NEW YORK RANGERS

Boston had aquired Jacques Plante late in the season from Toronto

Game 1 - Home, NYR 6 BOS 2 Plante (25/31) (7/13/11) first goal 315:59 (1-1)
Game 2 - Home, NYR 4 BOS 2,Plante (28/32)
Game 3 - Away, NYR 2 BOS 4, Johnston (35/37)
Game 4 - Away, NYR 4 BOS 0, Johnston (31/36) 1 ENG
Game 5 - Home, NYR 6 BOS 3,Brooks/Johnston (30/36)


Jacques Plante SV%

1st period .875 14/16
2nd period .750 18/24
3rd period .913 21/23

Home & series .841 53/63

 

[Canadiens1958]

Outshot

Well....Toronto outshot Chicago 44-30 in the game and 19-6 in the third period so i don't think Hall should shoulder all the blame. Toronto was a much deeper team than Chicago

Look at the game summary, First period and early second period Hawks were outshooting Toronto, leading 3-2 then Hall weakened. The third people was slush time.

 

[seventieslord]

I'm not sure what value we're getting out of counting series wins over HHOF goalies.

Taking examples from my Sawchuk post above, Gerry McNeil faced Sawchuk 3 times in the playoffs and was very strong each time. Sawchuk, however, was equally good and his 1952 was simply phenomenal leading to a sweep.

Compare to beating a washed-up Broda in 1952 or a rookie Plante in 1954, neither of whom put up much of a fight and got replaced.

The non-HOFers were much tougher opponents in these series, and IMO that doesn't diminish or enhance anything.

You are right. It is a smokescreen and/or red herring.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

So at this point (before CG posts his next 2 evaluations of Roy) I see it like this....

Absolute Peak
Hasek owns this. Roy made up a lot of ground up with the adjusted numbers but that was then tempered by team factors. In the end, the gap between the two is not nearly as large as was being made at the beginning of this thread but I think Hasek still has a noticeable advantage, mostly in regular season peak.

Overall Peak
I think this is Roy over all, His Conn Smythe's 16 years apart with one more in between and almost a 4th in '96. He was pretty much considered amongst the leagues best from his first playoffs in '86 until his last game with the Av's in '02.

Did you just use Roy's career to compare against Hasek's peak in that "overall" section??

In any event, I don't think anyone touches Hasek for "absolute peak" ('96-98 with his back-to-back Harts/Pearson). And as for "overall peak", well, I don't know how many years everyone wants to wedge into a peak, but it seems to me that 5 straight Vezinas (or 6 over an even "longer than necessary" 8 years) is a more than suitable length, and pretty easily leads to a Hasek "win" here, too, imo.

Career
I think Hasek has made up some ground on this front since the beginning of the thread but IMO, Roy still has the edge here.
To be honest, they are both prolly behind Brodeur on this one.

Playoffs
Roy period! His playoff record and accomplishments are just untouchable by Hasek or anyone else for that matter.

Still no real dispute here, except to say that both Brodeur and Hasek have post seasons where, individually, they performed at just as high of a "level" as Roy ever did.

Anyway, that's what I see so far.
As for who I would rank GOAT at this point...Roy making up ground on the absolute peak front has swung me back into the Roy camp for now. Hasek's absolute peak advantage has always been his biggest factor for me.
This of course could change again, as it has for me half a dozen times over the last 5 years.
It's just so damned close between these two.

You're "back" in the Roy camp?

 

[TasteofFlames]

Brodeur has faced the President's Trophy winner 4 times in the playoffs, but never played for one. Roy has faced the President's Trophy winner 5 times in the playoffs, and played for 2. Hasek has only played for a couple, but never faced one.

I might be misinterpreting what you're saying, but Hasek has faced at least one President's trophy winner: Dallas in '99.