Round 2, Vote 1 (HOH Top Goaltenders)

[Rhiessan71]

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

Pretty much and I explained why too.

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.

Pretty much what I said except that I don't think the gap is as large as I used to.

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.

No one said they didn't. In fact, there are other goalies you could say that about too.
The difference is that no one has done it over and over again as often as Roy has.

You're "back" in the Roy camp?

By all means do some checking(you prolly should of done that before posting this but hey), I have had Hasek as the best ever for a while now.
The only thing about Roy that I have defended forever is his "Playoff King" title because his playoff record, records and accomplishments are untouchable and some are even ridiculous.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Pretty much and I explained why too.

Yeah, turn "overall peak" into "career, part 2", np np. Nothing you mentioned in your explanation adequately explains your use of the word "peak"... at all. And "among the league's best" between '86 and '02 (even if you're still preferring everyone focus on the playoffs instead of seasons in their entirety) is a little disingenuous, given that it glosses over the entire decade between '92 and '02 that Roy never even made a post season all-star team because there were enough goalies in the league playing "better" than him.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Yeah, turn "overall peak" into "career, part 2", np np. Nothing you mentioned in your explanation adequately explains your use of the word "peak"... at all. And "among the league's best" between '86 and '02 (even if you're still preferring everyone focus on the playoffs instead of seasons in their entirety) is a little disingenuous, given that it glosses over the entire decade between '92 and '02 that Roy never even made a post season all-star team because there were enough goalies in the league playing "better" than him.

I'm not trying to get people to focus on the playoffs, that's just how I see it.
I feel (and I know I'm not the only one) that having a good or very good regular season followed by a great playoffs is better than having a great regular season followed by a good to very good playoffs. The entire season is about winning a Cup. Something I think Roy learned in Montreal hardcore where winning the Pres trophy or the Vezina is all well and good but it means nothing if you don't put another banner up in the rafters.

Hasek is the best and most unique goalie I have ever witnessed...in the regular season. Roy is the best and consistently the best I have ever seen in the playoffs.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

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.

A 0.917 in 5 games when one of the games averaged in was a case of the wheels falling off a team that had been living off borrowed time.

Or to put it another way, he was 4-1 in "quality starts" when his team could have been eliminated, and 6-1 in quality starts when either team could have been eliminated.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

Defining Patrick Roy's Peak and Assessing Regular Season Career Value

Roy's prime seems to be generally considered to be 1988-1992. This can be justified by league-adjusted statistics and awards voting. However, with the team factors that likely helped Roy in Montreal, it remains questionable as to how much of a dropoff he actually experienced in his own play after 1992. There are some other factors that support this assertion:

A. League Average Save % Increased Near the End of Roy's Statistical Prime

Here's the league average around those seasons:

1990-91: .886
1991-92: .888
1992-93: .885
1993-94: .895
1994-95: .901
1995-96: .898
1996-97: .905

League average climbs rapidly starting in 1993-94. This was likely because of several factors, including better goaltenders entering the league, an overall switch to the more efficient butterfly style from standup, better and bigger goalie equipment, increased competition for the playoffs with league expansion and the 1-8 conference format, and a generally more defensive style of play. Any metrics relative to league average implicitly assume that league average is directly comparable from one season to another. However, any outside factors that had more of an impact on the average in some seasons than others could have a skewing effect on adjusted scores.

B. The Best Goalies Did Not Make the Largest Save % Gains

It is informative to look at the results of goalies who were starters both before and after the sudden rise in league average save percentages. I used the NHL lockout in 1994 as the break point and looked at the combined periods of 1990-91 through 1993-94 and 1994-95 through 1997-98. Any goalie who played at least 150 games in both samples qualified. Here is the list:

Goalie|Birth Year|GP 91-94|SV% 91-94|GP 95-98|SV% 95-98
Ed Belfour|1965|267|.905|199|.906
Bill Ranford|1966|265|.890|194|.887
Patrick Roy|1965|245|.908|231|.914
Mike Vernon|1963|229|.885|157|.897
Curtis Joseph|1967|229|.909|213|.902
Andy Moog|1960|223|.888|162|.908
Kirk McLean|1966|212|.889|173|.888
Ron Hextall|1964|200|.891|185|.904
Mike Richter|1966|192|.901|209|.908
John Vanbiesbrouck|1963|190|.908|211|.908
Grant Fuhr|1962|169|.887|227|.899
Average|1964|220|.896|196|.902

League average from 1990-91 to 1993-94 was .889, while the average from 1994-95 to 1997-98 was .903. While the league average jumped .014, the average of the goalies playing the most games only went up .006. Some of this would be age-related decline, and there are team factors involved for some of these goalies. But it is interesting that the goalies with the biggest improvement were actually the ones with the weaker numbers from the prior period. The two standup goalies who never really changed their style did not see their numbers rise much (Ranford, McLean). Some of the '80s goalies who incorporated more of the butterfly game and/or moved to more defensive teams as the '90s went on saw their numbers rise quite a lot (Fuhr, Hextall, Moog, Vernon). And the goalies who were the best to begin with, the ones who would continue to be rated among the best in the league throughout the decade did not see that much of an improvement in their numbers from the early '90s to the late '90s (Belfour, Joseph, Vanbiesbrouck, and even Roy who had an average increase). If it was all because of external factors that affected everyone equally (like goalie equipment or overall scoring environment), then we'd expect to see the top guys benefit just as much as the bottom guys.

Does that mean that Roy, Belfour and company were better goalies early on? Possibly. It's also possible that they lost a few of their relative team advantages while the rest of the league was adopting their superior styles of play and catching up to their performance level.

A lot of older goalies didn't survive the early '90s. Many were pushed out by all the young Quebecois goalie prospects entering the league, a wave of talent influenced by Patrick Roy. There was also a greater influx of Europeans following in the footsteps of Pelle Lindbergh and Dominik Hasek, which created an even tighter talent pool (although it should be noted that while the top group of goaltending was quite strong the overall talent depth still isn't comparable to today, since even in the mid-'90s there was usually a significant gap between the starter and backup on teams around the league). There was also better overall goalie coaching, as teams saw the results of the Francois Allaire-Patrick Roy partnership.

"It's a combination of things," says Ottawa Senators goalie coach Phil Myre, who played for six teams during his 14 NHL seasons. "Tighter checking, better equipment, better coaching before the goalies get to the NHL and better coaching once they're in the league."

The concept of a goalie coach is relatively new. Myre was 31 and had been in the league for 10 years before he had his first goalie coach, in 1979-80. "We learned by watching, and by trial and error," he says. "No one talked to us. The only person you had to talk to was your goaltending partner, and you were competing with him. Back then it was always said that goalies reached their peak at 27 or 28. That was true because no one taught us anything. Now kids go to goalie schools starting from the age of eight or nine. They learn proper techniques so they're not making the same mistakes year after year. Plus they're getting more ice time. Some of these kids play 11 months a year. Their skating skills are better. They have people directing them all the way along. There are goalie coaches throughout the minor leagues." (SI)

C. Patrick Roy Was Rated Highly and Played Well Throughout His Career

Subjective rankings of Roy do not seem to match up with him having a great early peak and then falling off to a much lower level. It is not unusual to find references to Patrick Roy as the best goalie in the world anywhere between 1993 and 2002. My recollection is that many people rated Roy as the best in the game ahead of Hasek all along, even though Hasek was the one winning Vezinas. I think they were wrong, but more wrong because they were underrating Hasek than overrating Roy. Roy was also usually the highest-paid goalie in the league, occasionally second to Hasek.

It is also likely that most people considered Grant Fuhr to be better than Roy until at least 1990. See the 1987 Canada Cup, the 1987-88 All-Star and Vezina voting despite a large save percentage gap in Roy's favour, and this player poll taken in January 1990 that gives a 40-17 edge for Fuhr over Roy. Granted, this is likely in large part a case of people focusing a little too much on championships, as they might have done during Roy's later career.

I rate Patrick Roy's 1993-94 regular season very highly. It was the second-best of his career in GVT, and he did it on a worse defensive team while facing more opposing power plays than on the Pat Burns Habs teams. It was good enough to win a Vezina in an ordinary year, it was just Roy's bad luck that Hasek and Vanbiesbrouck also played outstanding that season.

Considering that and his 1993 playoff run, I don't think it makes much sense to claim that Roy's prime ended before 1994. And it's hard to know what to make of him in 1995 and 1996. The lockout year was a shortened season on a weak team. Hasek in 1996 had a similar large save percentage drop during his prime also on a non-playoff squad. The following year had all the turmoil of Le Trade (Roy's 9 GA outing against the Red Wings took his seasonal save percentage down by .004 alone), and Roy did follow it with a great playoff run. By 1997 he was back up to a .923 on Colorado, a great season that again could have won a Vezina if he did it in another season (like 1995-96). From then on he continued to post generally strong numbers in Colorado. As Quoipourqoui pointed out, Roy's five year playoff save percentage peak was 1993-1998. Was Patrick Roy a worse goaltender in 1997 than he was in 1994 or 1992? I think it's at least possible that he wasn't, or at least not very far behind, but that the version of Roy playing behind the Montreal defence looked better relative to everyone else than he would later on.

Note that during Dominik Hasek's prime (1994-1999), Roy was the #2 goalie in the league in save percentage.

1. Dominik Hasek, .930
2. Patrick Roy, .915
3. Martin Brodeur, .914

League average over this period was .902, indicating that Roy was still well above average during this period, particularly since he had less of a shot quality advantage at this point of his career (and faced significantly more power plays against than Brodeur).

On first glance this result pales in comparison to Roy's .909 vs. .883 league average from 1988 to 1992. Yet assume that Roy got a +.007 for playing on Montreal relative to an average goalie (see my last post), and the difference between him and league average is .019, or .006 ahead of where he was from '94 to '99. Is it possible that the improved talent pool, widespread adoption of the butterfly, increased prevalence of defensive systems, better professional coaching and increased competition for playoff spots made an impact of around .006 or more on league average from 1994-99 relative to 1988-1992? I think it is possible. In any event, it seems unlikely that Roy's level of play dropped off by such a massive amount from the early '90s to the late '90s.

I'd say Roy is defined more by elite consistency rather than an all-time great peak. He was very good throughout his career with very few down seasons, all the way through 2002-03. Note also though that Dominik Hasek, outside of 1994-1999, had a .914 save percentage compared to a .903 league average, even though 40% of his sample came at an older age than Roy at his retirement, and nearly all of it was while competing against a deeper talent pool than the 1980s.

D. Overall Regular Season Career Value

Here are the current career GVT numbers in the regular season:

Patrick Roy: 1029 GP, 431.1 GVT
Dominik Hasek: 735 GP, 410.1 GVT

Also, Brodeur, just for reference:
Brodeur: 1191 GP, 307.4 GVT

If we split those up into prime and non-prime, defining Roy's prime as 1988 to 1994 and Hasek's as 1994 to 1999, here is how the two match up:

Patrick Roy, prime: 372 GP, 197.6 GVT, 0.53 GVT/GP
Patrick Roy, rest: 657 GP, 233.5 GVT, 0.36 GVT/GP

Dominik Hasek, prime: 361 GP, 278.9 GVT, 0.77 GVT/GP
Dominik Hasek, rest: 374 GP, 131.2 GVT, 0.35 GVT/GP

I think the overall indication of those numbers is probably about right, in that it shows Hasek's prime significantly surpassing Roy's prime, with the two of them roughly equivalent on a per-game basis in their non-prime performance and the main overall difference being that Roy played an extra 283 games.

However, it seems also clear that Roy's prime numbers are at least somewhat inflated. If we subtract even just 10% of his prime GVT because of shot quality or because of his likely benefits from using league average as a benchmark, that eliminates almost the entire career gap between Roy and Hasek in GVT.

That's without giving any extra credit to Hasek for his peak advantage, or factoring in a single game that he played internationally. Even if you think that Hasek would have been a starter but not a Vezina candidate in the NHL in the late '80s, that still would have meant that his overall career value would have easily surpassed Roy's by this measure. The evidence suggests that with Roy's Montreal years appropriately placed in context, Hasek had not only a significantly superior regular season peak but probably also an equivalent overall NHL regular season career.

Just got the PM that voting is open, hope to have a final post up by tonight on playoff performance relative to expectations.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

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?

I'm still flipping between Brodeur and Sawchuk for #6 and 7 on my list, but just quickly, a big part of the case for Hall over Brodeur is encapsulated in the following two quotes:

Via Overpass earlier in this thread:

"Those Hawk teams never paid much attention to defense," says Scotty Bowman, who coached Hall for four seasons with the St. Louis Blues. "One year Glenn was leading the race for the Vezina Trophy [which in those years went to the goalie who allowed the fewest goals against] by six goals with two games left in the season, and on the plane trip to Toronto all the Black Hawks were talking about was how many goals they needed to make their bonuses. Glenn never said a thing, which he wouldn't, knowing him. So Chicago ends up getting in a couple of shoot-outs, and Glenn lost the Vezina on the last day of the season. It tells you how well Glenn had to have played all season to even have been close."

Jacques Caron, Brodeur's goalie coach in New Jersey, October 1997, i.e. right after the best save percentage season of Brodeur's career:

"The save percentages are great these days, but the quality of the saves isn't. You don't see as many two-on-ones or three-on-ones. We track great scoring chances, and the Devils allow an average of only about four great chances a game."

GVT actually gives Hall with a regular season career edge, which is fairly sizable on a per-game basis, and these numbers don't include team factors:

Brodeur: 1191 GP, 307.4 GVT
Hall: 906 GP, 341.1 GVT

The other consideration for me (since I value peak quite highly) is how many great seasons did Brodeur really have?

If we cut through all the debates about shot counting and puckhandling and save percentage and go straight to GAA, which should make Brodeur look great, especially if his non-save skills were as valuable as some claim, the record actually shows is that Brodeur's top-end GAA finishes were not much better than Ed Belfour's and behind both Hasek and Roy, even though most would contend that of the four Brodeur was the guy who had the most help from his teammates:

Brodeur: 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 8, 10, 10, 10
Belfour: 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 7, 10, 10
Hasek: 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 4, 4, 4, 4, 6, 6, 7
Roy: 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9

The depth of the talent pool and playing in a 30 team league hurt Brodeur some here, but at the same time he had great defensive coaches and players in front of him for much of that time, which should have led to him dominating the GAA rankings, particularly pre-lockout.

Since 2006 Brodeur has some impressive seasons, mainly because he played behind less talent and evidence suggests that shot quality effects are more limited in the post-lockout league. That assumption does not apply over his entire career, however, and I still question how well the rest of it stacks up against his competition here in the top 7. I still see him as a bit of a Scott Niedermayer type, a guy whose late career performance made the rest of his career look better in retrospect. I realize that those who support him would want to make the opposite claim, that his post-lockout play proves he was really great all along, but that doesn't match my subjective perception and I think the statistical case is questionable. There's also the fact that I think Brodeur and Ed Belfour were pretty similar, and it seems a bit out of place to rank Brodeur at #4 with Belfour coming much further down the list. To me, Brodeur is essentially Belfour with more games played per season on generally better teams, resulting in better career numbers, awards recognition and playoff team success.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I
GVT actually gives Hall with a regular season career edge, which is fairly sizable on a per-game basis, and these numbers don't include team factors:

Brodeur: 1191 GP, 307.4 GVT
Hall: 906 GP, 341.1 GVT

Just to clarify, GVT doesn't take into account arena effects, so to the extent that Brodeur was hurt by arena effects, it won't be included.

For comparison sake, here is their playoff GVT:

Brodeur: 181 GP, 56.9 GVT (doesn't include 2012)
Hall: 112 GP, 13.8 GVT

Agree with you that the "run and gun" nature of Hall's Chicago is something of a revelation, but I think it's something that is already captured by Hall's All Star record. Though it's certainly nice to know where that record comes from.

_____________________________________

As for Brodeur vs Belfour - the difference is consistency. Belfour had a few really bad years between his Vezina seasons and his Cup contending years in Dallas, then had another awful year right before he left Dallas. Brodeur didn't have a bad regular season until he turned 38.

In Dallas in particular, Belfour had as much help as Brodeur did I think - Dallas was the perfect Ken Hitchcock team. Outside of Dallas, no he did not.

As for your Jacques Caron quote, keep in mind that that was when Jacques Lemaire was still coaching NJ - Lemaire would "retire" following the 1998 playoffs. He would be replaced by Pat Burns for 2002-2003, but the coaches for the 4 years in between were much more offensive-minded.

I do think Belfour is fairly close to Brodeur, but he's definitely a step behind and one clear step behind could very well be the difference between #4-5 and #15 when you consider all the goalies from other eras that need to make the list.

______________

Edit: I do agree with you that Brodeur was generally better from 2002-2008 than he was before then.

 

[BM67]

Goalie|Birth Year|GP 91-94|SV% 91-94|GP 95-98|SV% 95-98
Ed Belfour|1965|267|.905|260|.908
Bill Ranford|1966|265|.880|230|.886
Patrick Roy|1965|245|.908|292|.915
Mike Vernon|1963|229|.885|206|.901
Curtis Joseph|1967|229|.909|280|.904
Andy Moog|1960|223|.888|162|.908
Kirk McLean|1966|212|.889|203|.890
Ron Hextall|1964|200|.891|208|.902
Mike Richter|1966|192|.901|277|.908
John Vanbiesbrouck|1963|190|.908|273|.907
Grant Fuhr|1962|169|.887|266|.898
Average|1964|220|.896|196|.902

Not looking further than Belfour, Ranford and Roy, this seems to run to 1998-99 for the second period, and not to 1997-98 as stated.

Also, Ranford's SV% from 91-94 should be .890.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

For comparison sake, here is their playoff GVT:

Brodeur: 181 GP, 56.9 GVT (doesn't include 2012)
Hall: 112 GP, 13.8 GVT

To be fair to Hall, the team effects described would likely be even stronger in the playoffs against teams like the Montreal Canadiens. Brodeur probably still has a better playoff record considering that, I'm just not sure it's enough of one to make up what I see as a career and prime regular season advantage for Hall.

As for your Jacques Caron quote, keep in mind that that was when Jacques Lemaire was still coaching NJ - Lemaire would "retire" following the 1998 playoffs. He would be replaced by Pat Burns for 2002-2003, but there were much more offensive-minded coaches for the 4 years in between.

I'm aware of the style of play differences. That's actually a very big part of the problem with Brodeur's pre-lockout record. From 1999 to 2002 he had a .907 save percentage, just .001 above league average (.909 on the road). On perhaps the best team in the league in 2000-01, Brodeur still had a higher GAA than Manny Fernandez did in 42 GP on the expansion Minnesota Wild playing for Jacques Lemaire. Unless the Devils were at the very bottom of the league in shot quality, or Brodeur's non-save skills were far more valuable than he is getting credit for, that is not a very impressive record at all for a guy in contention for #4 all-time. I don't rate that as any better than post-prime Sawchuk, for example, and it's probably a significantly worse stretch of four seasons than anything Hall ever did.

And if team factors had such a big impact, then that suggests Brodeur's numbers were largely inflated in the Lemaire years as well (which is actually somewhat understandable given that Marty was only 21-25 years old back then). It does however leave his entire case for a top four finish resting on 2003-2008, which isn't nearly the kind of elite longevity he is usually credited with and probably needs to make up some of the gap in absolute peak compared to the other guys.

I do think Belfour is fairly close to Brodeur, but he's definitely a step behind and one clear step behind could very well be the difference between #4-5 and #15 when you consider all the goalies from other eras that need to make the list.

Yeah, I know you rate Belfour pretty high. I think we'll both be lobbying for him whenever he gets on the list, because he seems to be underrated in a lot of places. I agree the gaps aren't necessarily large, but with all the other eras that could be represented it seems unlikely that three of the top four would have played in the same couple of decades, particularly when there is some consensus that the #3 guy ranks some distance behind the other two.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

Not looking further than Belfour, Ranford and Roy, this seems to run to 1998-99 for the second period, and not to 1997-98 as stated.

Also, Ranford's SV% from 91-94 should be .890.

My mistake, I'll fix the table. Thanks.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

To be fair to Hall, the team effects described would likely be even stronger in the playoffs against teams like the Montreal Canadiens. Brodeur probably still has a better playoff record considering that, I'm just not sure it's enough of one to make up what I see as a career and prime regular season advantage for Hall.

Right.

I'm aware of the style of play differences. That's actually a very big part of the problem with Brodeur's pre-lockout record. From 1999 to 2002 he had a .907 save percentage, just .001 above league average (.909 on the road). On perhaps the best team in the league in 2000-01, Brodeur still had a higher GAA than Manny Fernandez did in 42 GP on the expansion Minnesota Wild playing for Jacques Lemaire. Unless the Devils were at the very bottom of the league in shot quality, or Brodeur's non-save skills were far more valuable than he is getting credit for, that is not a very impressive record at all for a guy in contention for #4 all-time. I don't rate that as any better than post-prime Sawchuk, for example, and it's probably a significantly worse stretch of four seasons than anything Hall ever did.

And if team factors had such a big impact, then that suggests Brodeur's numbers were largely inflated in the Lemaire years as well (which is actually somewhat understandable given that Marty was only 21-25 years old back then). It does however leave his entire case for a top four finish resting on 2003-2008, which isn't nearly the kind of elite longevity he is usually credited with and probably needs to make up some of the gap in absolute peak compared to the other guys.

Shout counting effects were at their height during this era, right? I realize that doesn't account for all of the gap between save percentage and perception (as captured by awards voting), but it accounts for some of it.

Yeah, I know you rate Belfour pretty high. I think we'll both be lobbying for him whenever he gets on the list, because he seems to be underrated in a lot of places. I agree the gaps aren't necessarily large, but with all the other eras that could be represented it seems unlikely that three of the top four would have played in the same couple of decades, particularly when there is some consensus that the #3 guy ranks some distance behind the other two.

Yeah, I hear you. Roy, Hasek, and Belfour were all born in the same calendar year, and Brodeur was born 7 years later. That's an awful lot of goaltending talent with overlapping careers. That's really not different than how it was before Roy came along though, right? Before Roy, the consensus top 3 seemed to be Sawchuk, Plante, and Hall in some order.

There are also special circumstances surrounding the more modern guys. Hasek is European of course. Brodeur was part of the generation of Quebecois who played goal after Roy made it glamorous, so you could say the talent pool among goalies may have increased faster than other positions. Coaching for goalies definitely improved more than other positions.

I will say one thing though - I reluctantly ranked Hall over Sawchuk on my initial list and I am much more confident about that now.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

Shout counting effects were at their height during this era, right? I realize that doesn't account for all of the gap between save percentage and perception (as captured by awards voting), but it accounts for some of it.

Some of it, yes, but he was still at only .909 on the road, and even setting aside save percentages entirely went just 12, 8, 13, 6 in GAA. With puckhandling and everything he may have been a bit better than his save stats suggest, but again those are not all-time great seasons by any means. It's not an exact parallel, but I think there are some similarities between Brodeur's post-lockout vs. rest of career and Sawchuk's early Detroit prime vs. rest of career. Maybe that's why I'm finding it hard to choose between them.

Yeah, I hear you. Roy, Hasek, and Belfour were all born in the same calendar year, and Brodeur was born 7 years later. That's an awful lot of goaltending talent with overlapping careers. That's really not different than how it was before Roy came along though, right? Before Roy, the consensus top 3 seemed to be Sawchuk, Plante, and Hall in some order.

There are also special circumstances surrounding the more modern guys. Hasek is European of course. Brodeur was part of the generation of Quebecois who played goal after Roy made it glamorous, so you could say the talent pool among goalies may have increased faster than other positions. Coaching for goalies definitely improved more than other positions.

Fully agree on the last part.

It's certainly an interesting parallel with two different contemporary trios in the top seven. To be clear I'm not ruling out the possibility that three guys from the same era could all be in the top 4 or 5, it's just that comparing eras is very tough with goalies so we should at least be aware of the possibility of being biased towards one time or another. In a very close call it might be enough to tilt things one way or another.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Quebec Goalies

Right.



Shout counting effects were at their height during this era, right? I realize that doesn't account for all of the gap between save percentage and perception (as captured by awards voting), but it accounts for some of it.



Yeah, I hear you. Roy, Hasek, and Belfour were all born in the same calendar year, and Brodeur was born 7 years later. That's an awful lot of goaltending talent with overlapping careers. That's really not different than how it was before Roy came along though, right? Before Roy, the consensus top 3 seemed to be Sawchuk, Plante, and Hall in some order.

There are also special circumstances surrounding the more modern guys. Hasek is European of course. Brodeur was part of the generation of Quebecois who played goal after Roy made it glamorous, so you could say the talent pool among goalies may have increased faster than other positions. Coaching for goalies definitely improved more than other positions.

I will say one thing though - I reluctantly ranked Hall over Sawchuk on my initial list and I am much more confident about that now.

This is accepted gospel that is very misleading.

Martin Brodeur was drafted in 1990:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/draft/NHL_1990_entry.html

Patrick Roy started in 1985-86 NHL season as a rookie. His early success had absolutely zero impact on Martin Brodeur's development. It did focus attention on Quebec goalies so the NHL suddenly started drafting them higher.

Basically Martin Brodeur is the product of the Bourassa goalie template developed by his dad Denis Brodeur and other Bourassa zone coaches. First recognized product would be Corrado Micalef, followed by the likes of Felix Potvin, Stephane Fiset, Martin Brodeur, Roberto Luongo,Eric Fichaud and others from the north-east Montreal or old Bourassa region.

Quebec has other regions that have produced goalies. The Mauricie in the post depression era produced in short order, Jacques Plante, Marcel, Paille, Robert Perreault, Claude Pronovost. Had a few solid coaches.

Connie Dion - old Red Wing goalie, in the area between Sherbrooke and the Beauce helped develop programs that produced a range of solid NHL goalies over two generations.

 

[seventieslord]

I agree the gaps aren't necessarily large, but with all the other eras that could be represented it seems unlikely that three of the top four would have played in the same couple of decades, particularly when there is some consensus that the #3 guy ranks some distance behind the other two.

That is a good point, and why I'm currently leaning towards Hall for 4th.

I will say one thing though - I reluctantly ranked Hall over Sawchuk on my initial list and I am much more confident about that now.

Oh, absolutely. I am pretty sure Hall's going as many as three spots ahead of Sawchuk when I submit.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

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.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one, apparently.

Edit: I apologize for saying "we should all consider your opinion of Brodeur in light of what you think about his 2012 playoffs." That was an unnecessary cheap shot, and again I apologize. Just getting frustrated that you seem to think the Devils' team performance when they won 3 Cups had little to do with the players, and everything to do with The System. And now you seem to think the Devils as a team played well in the 2012 playoffs, but Brodeur wasn't impressive. Did any Devils player in the 2012 playoffs play well? Or was it just The System again?

No problem.

Its just about a given one of us will toss out something like that when we're discussing Brodeur.

And I have nothing but admiration for the Devils' players (who play that system).

 

[BM67]

even though most would contend that of the four Brodeur was the guy who had the most help from his teammates

Most might contend that, but are they right to do so?

During Brodeur's career he has been an all-star 7 times, and he's been by joined by 8 of his teammates. Add 1 Selke and 1 Norris to that.

During Roy's career, he had 11 teammates named to the all-star teams, as well as 1 Norris, 3 Selke, 1 Art Ross and 2 Hart winners.

Since 1993-94 there have only been 9 players to play in more games for NJ than Brodeur has wins, and only 1 of them (Elias) comes within 360 games of Brodeur's actual GP total. LINK

When someone can say Brodeur was helped more by his teammates than Dryden, you know Brodeur's help is getting overrated. Most people here don't go to that extreme, but it's just a symptom of a general belief that spawns such things as the "system".

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

I will say one thing though - I reluctantly ranked Hall over Sawchuk on my initial list and I am much more confident about that now.

Same here. I've always held Hall over Sawchuk "intuitively", but without the confidence of actually having seen enough of either to really do a subjective comparison justice (which, imo, takes following a player through the regular - and possibly post - season rather than just watching footage of games that have been selected for re-broadcast through the years). The discussions I've been privy to around here in recent years make me feel a lot more confident and informed in terms of where I rank one vs the other (and, indeed, others).

I've had Sawchuk at the bottom of these seven for some time now, and I'm not sure if there's anything left out there unsaid that might convince me to try to find a higher spot for him (given the competition). ContrarianGoaltender has me thinking a bit about dropping Brodeur a step (or two), though, so we'll see.

When someone can say Brodeur was helped more by his teammates than Dryden, you know Brodeur's help is getting overrated. Most people here don't go to that extreme, but it's just a symptom of a general belief that spawns such things as the "system".

That much is certainly true.

 

[quoipourquoi]

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.

Dominik Hasek did not win five-straight Vezinas.

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.

So has Jean-Sebastien Giguere. The difference is that Roy has eight playoffs at that "level" (1986, 1989, 1993, 1994, 1996, 1997, 2000, 2001). What you're saying is akin to calling Jose Theodore as good of a regular season goalie as the top-seven, because he has a regular season where, individually, he performed at just as high of a "level" as they ever did.



Solid post, TCG (though cumulating save percentage from multiple seasons is a pretty quick way to mess up the numbers). I agree with the argument that Hasek had the better peak in the regular season. I don't think there's as much separation as you believe, and that's where we differ here. But I believe in terms of regular season career value, while Hasek's five best years are better than Roy's five best years, Roy makes it up with what we may come to find is the best out-of-prime career.

(Personally, I wouldn't count 1993 as his prime, because if we are going to claim that because Patrick Roy had a great playoff, he must have still been in his prime, then we are probably going to come to the conclusion that his prime began in 1986 and ended in 2003.)


We've looked at Hasek's prime (1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999), we've looked at Hasek's international career, and we've looked at Roy's prime (1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992). Now let's look at what's left:

Hasek
1993: 28 Games (38th); 7th in save percentage
2000: 35 Games (30th); 3rd in save percentage
2001: 67 Games (6th); 5th in save percentage
2002: 65 Games (13th); 9th in save percentage
2003: Did Not Play
2004: 14 Games (59th)
2006: 43 Games (25th); 2nd in save percentage
2007: 56 Games (18th); 13th in save percentage
2008: 41 Games (32nd); 35th in save percentage


Hasek's had some high-GP seasons, but it's worth noting that three of his eleven top-ten finishes (two of which were top-fives) came with some pretty low GP figures. 43 Games would have been a lot in the late-90s, but by 2006, a lot more was expected from starting goaltenders. By contrast, every year of Patrick Roy's career was within the top-20 in GP. Needless to say, if the most-used goaltending statistic wasn't an averaging statistic, Hasek's 1993/2000/2006 do not go down in the books as top-ten seasons, as the only qualification to be an officially-ranked goaltender is one-third of the season.


Roy
1986: 47 Games (10th); 19th in save percentage
1993: 62 Games (9th); 8th in save percentage
1994: 68 Games (6th); 3rd in save percentage
1995: 43 Games (1st); 14th in save percentage
1996: 61 Games (7th); 10th in save percentage
1997: 62 Games (8th); 4th in save percentage
1998: 65 Games (7th); 7th in save percentage
1999: 61 Games (16th); 8th in save percentage
2000: 63 Games (8th); 10th in save percentage
2001: 62 Games (10th); 13th in save percentage
2002: 63 Games (15th); 2nd in save percentage
2003: 63 Games (11th); 6th in save percentage


So, what if we stopped giving goalies who miss games from injury the amount of credit that we do not extend to players in an Art Ross race?

Top-10 Save Percentage Finishes (among goalies in the Top-20 GP)
Hasek
(1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 3, 6, 8)
Roy
(1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 8, 8, 8, 14)

 

[quoipourquoi]

During Brodeur's career he has been an all-star 7 times, and he's been by joined by 8 of his teammates. Add 1 Selke and 1 Norris to that.

During Roy's career, he had 11 teammates named to the all-star teams, as well as 1 Norris, 3 Selke, 1 Art Ross and 2 Hart winners.

Scott Stevens and Adam Foote were a lot more useful than their amount of All-Star selections and trophies reflect.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Just got the PM that voting is open, hope to have a final post up by tonight on playoff performance relative to expectations.

I just re-read/skimmed the entire thread. I'll be holding off on voting for another 16 hours, so if anyone else has a final argument to make, I'll be glad to take it into consideration prior to my vacation. My #4-7 is a mess right now.

 

[Rob Scuderi]

I just re-read/skimmed the entire thread. I'll be holding off on voting for another 16 hours, so if anyone else has a final argument to make, I'll be glad to take it into consideration prior to my vacation. My #4-7 is a mess right now.

I'm so glad we're only adding 4

I think I have 1-4 down at this point, but 5-7 is painstaking for me.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Applied to Original 6 goalies

Roy's prime seems to be generally considered to be 1988-1992. This can be justified by league-adjusted statistics and awards voting. However, with the team factors that likely helped Roy in Montreal, it remains questionable as to how much of a dropoff he actually experienced in his own play after 1992. There are some other factors that support this assertion:

A. League Average Save % Increased Near the End of Roy's Statistical Prime

Here's the league average around those seasons:

1990-91: .886
1991-92: .888
1992-93: .885
1993-94: .895
1994-95: .901
1995-96: .898
1996-97: .905

League average climbs rapidly starting in 1993-94. This was likely because of several factors, including better goaltenders entering the league, an overall switch to the more efficient butterfly style from standup, better and bigger goalie equipment, increased competition for the playoffs with league expansion and the 1-8 conference format, and a generally more defensive style of play. Any metrics relative to league average implicitly assume that league average is directly comparable from one season to another. However, any outside factors that had more of an impact on the average in some seasons than others could have a skewing effect on adjusted scores.

B. The Best Goalies Did Not Make the Largest Save % Gains

It is informative to look at the results of goalies who were starters both before and after the sudden rise in league average save percentages. I used the NHL lockout in 1994 as the break point and looked at the combined periods of 1990-91 through 1993-94 and 1994-95 through 1997-98. Any goalie who played at least 150 games in both samples qualified. Here is the list:

Goalie|Birth Year|GP 91-94|SV% 91-94|GP 95-98|SV% 95-98
Ed Belfour|1965|267|.905|199|.906
Bill Ranford|1966|265|.890|194|.887
Patrick Roy|1965|245|.908|231|.914
Mike Vernon|1963|229|.885|157|.897
Curtis Joseph|1967|229|.909|213|.902
Andy Moog|1960|223|.888|162|.908
Kirk McLean|1966|212|.889|173|.888
Ron Hextall|1964|200|.891|185|.904
Mike Richter|1966|192|.901|209|.908
John Vanbiesbrouck|1963|190|.908|211|.908
Grant Fuhr|1962|169|.887|227|.899
Average|1964|220|.896|196|.902

League average from 1990-91 to 1993-94 was .889, while the average from 1994-95 to 1997-98 was .903. While the league average jumped .014, the average of the goalies playing the most games only went up .006. Some of this would be age-related decline, and there are team factors involved for some of these goalies. But it is interesting that the goalies with the biggest improvement were actually the ones with the weaker numbers from the prior period. The two standup goalies who never really changed their style did not see their numbers rise much (Ranford, McLean). Some of the '80s goalies who incorporated more of the butterfly game and/or moved to more defensive teams as the '90s went on saw their numbers rise quite a lot (Fuhr, Hextall, Moog, Vernon). And the goalies who were the best to begin with, the ones who would continue to be rated among the best in the league throughout the decade did not see that much of an improvement in their numbers from the early '90s to the late '90s (Belfour, Joseph, Vanbiesbrouck, and even Roy who had an average increase). If it was all because of external factors that affected everyone equally (like goalie equipment or overall scoring environment), then we'd expect to see the top guys benefit just as much as the bottom guys.

Does that mean that Roy, Belfour and company were better goalies early on? Possibly. It's also possible that they lost a few of their relative team advantages while the rest of the league was adopting their superior styles of play and catching up to their performance level.

A lot of older goalies didn't survive the early '90s. Many were pushed out by all the young Quebecois goalie prospects entering the league, a wave of talent influenced by Patrick Roy. There was also a greater influx of Europeans following in the footsteps of Pelle Lindbergh and Dominik Hasek, which created an even tighter talent pool (although it should be noted that while the top group of goaltending was quite strong the overall talent depth still isn't comparable to today, since even in the mid-'90s there was usually a significant gap between the starter and backup on teams around the league). There was also better overall goalie coaching, as teams saw the results of the Francois Allaire-Patrick Roy partnership.



C. Patrick Roy Was Rated Highly and Played Well Throughout His Career

Subjective rankings of Roy do not seem to match up with him having a great early peak and then falling off to a much lower level. It is not unusual to find references to Patrick Roy as the best goalie in the world anywhere between 1993 and 2002. My recollection is that many people rated Roy as the best in the game ahead of Hasek all along, even though Hasek was the one winning Vezinas. I think they were wrong, but more wrong because they were underrating Hasek than overrating Roy. Roy was also usually the highest-paid goalie in the league, occasionally second to Hasek.

It is also likely that most people considered Grant Fuhr to be better than Roy until at least 1990. See the 1987 Canada Cup, the 1987-88 All-Star and Vezina voting despite a large save percentage gap in Roy's favour, and this player poll taken in January 1990 that gives a 40-17 edge for Fuhr over Roy. Granted, this is likely in large part a case of people focusing a little too much on championships, as they might have done during Roy's later career.

I rate Patrick Roy's 1993-94 regular season very highly. It was the second-best of his career in GVT, and he did it on a worse defensive team while facing more opposing power plays than on the Pat Burns Habs teams. It was good enough to win a Vezina in an ordinary year, it was just Roy's bad luck that Hasek and Vanbiesbrouck also played outstanding that season.

Considering that and his 1993 playoff run, I don't think it makes much sense to claim that Roy's prime ended before 1994. And it's hard to know what to make of him in 1995 and 1996. The lockout year was a shortened season on a weak team. Hasek in 1996 had a similar large save percentage drop during his prime also on a non-playoff squad. The following year had all the turmoil of Le Trade (Roy's 9 GA outing against the Red Wings took his seasonal save percentage down by .004 alone), and Roy did follow it with a great playoff run. By 1997 he was back up to a .923 on Colorado, a great season that again could have won a Vezina if he did it in another season (like 1995-96). From then on he continued to post generally strong numbers in Colorado. As Quoipourqoui pointed out, Roy's five year playoff save percentage peak was 1993-1998. Was Patrick Roy a worse goaltender in 1997 than he was in 1994 or 1992? I think it's at least possible that he wasn't, or at least not very far behind, but that the version of Roy playing behind the Montreal defence looked better relative to everyone else than he would later on.

Note that during Dominik Hasek's prime (1994-1999), Roy was the #2 goalie in the league in save percentage.

1. Dominik Hasek, .930
2. Patrick Roy, .915
3. Martin Brodeur, .914

League average over this period was .902, indicating that Roy was still well above average during this period, particularly since he had less of a shot quality advantage at this point of his career (and faced significantly more power plays against than Brodeur).

On first glance this result pales in comparison to Roy's .909 vs. .883 league average from 1988 to 1992. Yet assume that Roy got a +.007 for playing on Montreal relative to an average goalie (see my last post), and the difference between him and league average is .019, or .006 ahead of where he was from '94 to '99. Is it possible that the improved talent pool, widespread adoption of the butterfly, increased prevalence of defensive systems, better professional coaching and increased competition for playoff spots made an impact of around .006 or more on league average from 1994-99 relative to 1988-1992? I think it is possible. In any event, it seems unlikely that Roy's level of play dropped off by such a massive amount from the early '90s to the late '90s.

I'd say Roy is defined more by elite consistency rather than an all-time great peak. He was very good throughout his career with very few down seasons, all the way through 2002-03. Note also though that Dominik Hasek, outside of 1994-1999, had a .914 save percentage compared to a .903 league average, even though 40% of his sample came at an older age than Roy at his retirement, and nearly all of it was while competing against a deeper talent pool than the 1980s.

D. Overall Regular Season Career Value

Here are the current career GVT numbers in the regular season:

Patrick Roy: 1029 GP, 431.1 GVT
Dominik Hasek: 735 GP, 410.1 GVT

Also, Brodeur, just for reference:
Brodeur: 1191 GP, 307.4 GVT

If we split those up into prime and non-prime, defining Roy's prime as 1988 to 1994 and Hasek's as 1994 to 1999, here is how the two match up:

Patrick Roy, prime: 372 GP, 197.6 GVT, 0.53 GVT/GP
Patrick Roy, rest: 657 GP, 233.5 GVT, 0.36 GVT/GP

Dominik Hasek, prime: 361 GP, 278.9 GVT, 0.77 GVT/GP
Dominik Hasek, rest: 374 GP, 131.2 GVT, 0.35 GVT/GP

I think the overall indication of those numbers is probably about right, in that it shows Hasek's prime significantly surpassing Roy's prime, with the two of them roughly equivalent on a per-game basis in their non-prime performance and the main overall difference being that Roy played an extra 283 games.

However, it seems also clear that Roy's prime numbers are at least somewhat inflated. If we subtract even just 10% of his prime GVT because of shot quality or because of his likely benefits from using league average as a benchmark, that eliminates almost the entire career gap between Roy and Hasek in GVT.

That's without giving any extra credit to Hasek for his peak advantage, or factoring in a single game that he played internationally. Even if you think that Hasek would have been a starter but not a Vezina candidate in the NHL in the late '80s, that still would have meant that his overall career value would have easily surpassed Roy's by this measure. The evidence suggests that with Roy's Montreal years appropriately placed in context, Hasek had not only a significantly superior regular season peak but probably also an equivalent overall NHL regular season career.

Just got the PM that voting is open, hope to have a final post up by tonight on playoff performance relative to expectations.

This is rather interesting but why stop at the 1980s/1990s goalies?

The Original 6 goalies would have benefited from the lighter, bigger,better equipment, the advances in medical technology, the advances in defensive systems, goalie coaching and other advantages listed in TCGs study above.

There seems to be a +.006 to +.019 increase to goalies SV%. Let's apply this range to the O6 goalies under consideration. From hockeydb: actual sv%/+.006/+.019

Jacques Plante
http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid[]=4310

.926/.932/.945
.929/.935/.948
.020/.926/.939
.925/.931/.944
.915/.921/.934
.906/.912/.925
.923/.929/.942
.913/.919/.932
.910/.916/.929
.902/.908/.921

Terry Sawchuk
http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=4794

.925/.931/.944
.912/.918/.931
.920/.926/.939
.906/.912/.925
.898/.904/.917
.907/.913/.926
.898/.904/.917
.886/.892/.905
.912/.918/.931
.916/.922/.935
.913/.919/.932
.903/.919/.922
.919/.925/.938


Glenn Hall
http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=2096

.922/.928/.941
.927/.933/.946
.909/.915/.928
.897/.903/.916
.920/.926/.939
.913/.919/.932
.915/.921/.934
.929/.935/.948
.922/.928/.941
.921/.927/.940

Compared to the other goalies under consideration from the post 1985 era, the Original 6 goalies more than hold their own.

Ken Dryden, the remaining candidate, should recieve similar bumps:

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=1447

but available data is incomplete.

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

Ken Dryden, the remaining candidate, should recieve similar bumps:

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=1447

but available data is incomplete.

Here you go:

Ken Dryden
Year SOG SVS PCT
1970-71 211 202 0.957
1971-72 2030 1888 0.930
1972-73 1606 1487 0.926
1974-75 1590 1441 0.906
1975-76 1651 1530 0.927
1976-77 1466 1349 0.920
1977-78 1336 1231 0.921
1978-79 1192 1084 0.909

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I don't think you can just assume that goalies who played before the run-and-gun 80s would have had their save percentages hurt as much as those who played in the 80s.

Anyway, there's a good reason to rank save percentages vs peers, just like stats for forwards.

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

I don't think you can just assume that goalies who played before the run-and-gun 80s would have had their save percentages hurt as much as those who played in the 80s.

Anyway, there's a good reason to rank save percentages vs peers, just like stats for forwards.

The most of the '70s were pretty high scoring too, just not quite at early '80s levels

Of course, though, comparing peer vs peer is the way to go.....