Round 2 Voting Results (HOH Top Goaltenders)
- Thread starter TheDevilMadeMe
- Start date
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
My honest opinion? I think it shows that they didn't take the time to take a step back and view where he fits into a historical perspective. And that's fine; there were definitely players on my list that were wrongly placed if scrutinized. I think Lundqvist's greatness kind of creeped up on us, with the best season of his career barely a few months old when we started accepting lists.
I really don't see any case for Lundqvist not being at least top 50, unless you believe that we just shouldn't talk about players who aren't at least almost retired.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Maybe...
Maybe they did, recognizing the weaknesses that were admitted but downplayed in favour of "Eye Candy" stats. Same is true for Thomas, Luongo.
Maybe they did, recognizing the weaknesses that were admitted but downplayed in favour of "Eye Candy" stats. Same is true for Thomas, Luongo.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
Thomas with 2 Vezinas and a Conn Smythe and "OMG stats!" including a record* breaking* save pct. - you'd think he'd be way higher than a guy that has apparently no playoff resume and only finished better than 3rd for the Vezina once in his career...and if you look at top-4 votes for Lundqvist vs. Thomas, Hank wins narrowly. Thomas got by on ancillaries...
So, you can call it minority opinion, but we'll either realize we goofballed it or we'll add Quick or Rask next year or two years from now...
I just don't get what separates Thomas from a lot of other goalies really...for instance, I know a negligible amount about Roger Crozier...but what separates him from Thomas? His '65 and '66 vs. Thomas' '09 and '11? It's that big of a gap, despite Crozier beating out Hall, Bower and Sawchuk (however, late in their careers certainly) for a 1st team AS while Thomas beat out a draft bust and the second-best Niklas Backstrom in the league...
Why is he so much better than Dave Kerr? Without looking too deep, Kerr has two elite seasons (1st and 2nd team all-stars) and what looks like an excellent performance in the 1940 playoffs PLUS several seasons of getting some notoriety...hell, he might even have 2 excellent playoffs if 1937 and 1940 are as good as the stats indicate, I don't know...what's the gap signify? Anything meaningful? Or just that Thomas is a plump, low-hanging fruit?
When a goalie gets by on 2 seasons and 1 overblown playoffs, the opportunities are there to make plenty of comparisons...it seems like an unusually lazy path chosen by the HoH board, who - as a whole - strike me as very meticulous...
So, you can call it minority opinion, but we'll either realize we goofballed it or we'll add Quick or Rask next year or two years from now...
I just don't get what separates Thomas from a lot of other goalies really...for instance, I know a negligible amount about Roger Crozier...but what separates him from Thomas? His '65 and '66 vs. Thomas' '09 and '11? It's that big of a gap, despite Crozier beating out Hall, Bower and Sawchuk (however, late in their careers certainly) for a 1st team AS while Thomas beat out a draft bust and the second-best Niklas Backstrom in the league...
Why is he so much better than Dave Kerr? Without looking too deep, Kerr has two elite seasons (1st and 2nd team all-stars) and what looks like an excellent performance in the 1940 playoffs PLUS several seasons of getting some notoriety...hell, he might even have 2 excellent playoffs if 1937 and 1940 are as good as the stats indicate, I don't know...what's the gap signify? Anything meaningful? Or just that Thomas is a plump, low-hanging fruit?
When a goalie gets by on 2 seasons and 1 overblown playoffs, the opportunities are there to make plenty of comparisons...it seems like an unusually lazy path chosen by the HoH board, who - as a whole - strike me as very meticulous...
MadArcand
Whaletarded
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Era
Pandering to an era or criteria is a major factor in all this. O6/post 1967 era is very well represented as was the pre O6 / post consolidation era. So the Connell.Kerr, Crozier types draw the short straw while someone like Thomas who for the first ten seasons of his pro career was not even close to top 100 goalies worldwide, bouncing around hoping to get 40 games in a season combined amongst a few teams gets an easy ride.
Pandering to an era or criteria is a major factor in all this. O6/post 1967 era is very well represented as was the pre O6 / post consolidation era. So the Connell.Kerr, Crozier types draw the short straw while someone like Thomas who for the first ten seasons of his pro career was not even close to top 100 goalies worldwide, bouncing around hoping to get 40 games in a season combined amongst a few teams gets an easy ride.
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
Oh yeah, totally, any modern goalie who's built any kind of all-time resume.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
I'll ask you directly, C1958 because maybe you'll spin your hockey rolodex of memories and come up with something.
Is there any goalie on the board that was one shot away from not making this list? I'll just pick one at random as it doesn't matter, Andrei Kostitsyn takes a long wrist shot that Thomas burbs up into the slot at the 2:29 mark of OT in game 7 of the 2011 Eastern Conference Quarterfinals that nearly caroms in off of Seidenberg (as he's not expecting such a bad rebound). If that goes in, there's zero chance Thomas is on this list...he might get mentioned in passing because he has two Vezina's and they just happened, but he's not a serious contender...
Can you spot a goalie where reasonably (no butterfly effect stuff) he is one shot from being on or off this list? I don't know the answer to this, it's an honest question...I just would hope that most of these goalies (the best 40 of all time, as it were) are not hanging on by such a fragile thread...
Crease
Chief Justice of the HFNYR Court
- Jul 12, 2004
- 24,108
- 25,587
MF, I know you're not directing this to me, but one that comes to mind for me is Mike Richter's penalty shot save in Game 4 of the '94 Finals. Now Richter didn't make the top 40 but he was involved in discussions along the way. That save preserved the lead/win for the Rangers in a game that would have tied up the series at 2-2. Butterfly Effect comes into play here because the premise to this is that without the Cup in '94, Richter doesn't get consideration in this project.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Good one. And without that Cup, does Richter get a shot to start in the 1996 World Cup, which is where he cemented his reputation as a "clutch" goalie?
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
Who says he is?
On the aggregate list Thomas was 35th and Kerr 41st, both being on everyone's list.
I had Kerr ahead of Thomas, but Kerr generated little positive feedback and his not being in the HHOF seemed a bone of contention (though being in didn't help Cheevers). This led me to believe I had overrated him.
And yes, laziness must be the reason some of us couldn't see this your way.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Our only laziness IMO was not even talking about Dzurilla because it was "too hard." And I'm including myself in that - after a lot of debate with myself, I couldn't bring myself to bump anyone from my top 8 for him without more discussion.
Bear of Bad News
Your Third or Fourth Favorite HFBoards Admin
- Sep 27, 2005
- 13,544
- 27,093
"Laziness" does come off as more than a bit of a shot.
This project was difficult. Did we miss some things? Almost surely. Was it because of laziness? Definitely not.
The fact that we don't agree with you doesn't make us lazy.
This project was difficult. Did we miss some things? Almost surely. Was it because of laziness? Definitely not.
The fact that we don't agree with you doesn't make us lazy.
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
Isn't the consensus that's its harder to win a Vezina now than ever before?
I don't know of any other 2 time Vezina winners not making the list (Charlie Hodge, but he shared one as a backup).
And again, the what if argument. Perhaps we should start a what if list. I'm sure you know where that will lead us.
Bear of Bad News
Your Third or Fourth Favorite HFBoards Admin
- Sep 27, 2005
- 13,544
- 27,093
Hodge's would have been won under the old system (most prevalent goaltender on team with fewest goals against). Other than stature, the best comparable (before the past 30 years) is first-team all-star selections.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
One Start
One shot or one start? Basically the same.
Billy Smith / Chico Resch:
http://www.flyershistory.com/cgi-bin/poboxscore.cgi?O19800012
Arbour started the 1980 playoffs alternating his two goalies. Smith played in game 1 a 8 - 1 rout. Resch gave up 4 goals in the first period of game two and never saw significant playoff work with the Islanders afterwards, much to Billy Smith's benefit. Chances are, no HHOF for Smith, no top 40.
Johnny Bower, 1959 Leafs incredible run to make the playoffs. Overlooked is the fact that in the last two Sunday games Bower gave up five and four goals well <.900 yet the Leafs scored six in each and won. Team does not bail-out Bower, they do not make the playoffs and Ed Chadwick comes back in the picture. No HHOF or top 40 Bower.
Similar analogies for Worsley in 1965, Tretiak in 1972.
One shot or one start? Basically the same.
Billy Smith / Chico Resch:
http://www.flyershistory.com/cgi-bin/poboxscore.cgi?O19800012
Arbour started the 1980 playoffs alternating his two goalies. Smith played in game 1 a 8 - 1 rout. Resch gave up 4 goals in the first period of game two and never saw significant playoff work with the Islanders afterwards, much to Billy Smith's benefit. Chances are, no HHOF for Smith, no top 40.
Johnny Bower, 1959 Leafs incredible run to make the playoffs. Overlooked is the fact that in the last two Sunday games Bower gave up five and four goals well <.900 yet the Leafs scored six in each and won. Team does not bail-out Bower, they do not make the playoffs and Ed Chadwick comes back in the picture. No HHOF or top 40 Bower.
Similar analogies for Worsley in 1965, Tretiak in 1972.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
Lazy was a poor choice of words, especially in light of the work that went into the project. I shouldn't have commented on it in such a fashion, my apologies.
My point - behind my obtuse use of language - was that it seems that it was a matter of two seasons happening in the past three years being selected over 2 (or more) seasons happening 50 years ago. Which normally the HoH board is pretty keen on preventing. But in this case, it felt kind of glossed over. Which, in no small part, was I a part of the glossing due to time constraints...
Yes, my use of the term lazy here was reckless, but I'd still like to the point to be evaluated even in retrospect. I'm legitimately surprised by how much of a surge Thomas got towards the top of the final poll...so that's why I'm asking, is there really this gap that exists between his two seasons and Kerr's two? Crozier's two? (for instance)
@DB - it's not so much the "what if" part that I'm interested in. It's the "we put a goalie in the upper reaches of historical fame, but his entire resume crumbles into the sea if Andrei Kostitsyn scored a goal on him in a first round series" - it's just hard to find on the list and harder to justify. That's the worry that I have when you put a goalie with such a weak resume on the board: you have to put other goalies with weak resumes on the board too or else it lends itself to inconsistency. The "what if" game is Resch over Smith, or the Rangers keeping Vanbiesbrouck over Richter or something like that...I mean, at a microlevel, maybe if that controversial goal from the '04 Finals counted and Kiprusoff won the Cup, he probably gets more than a passing glance. Personally, I'd put him on the list ahead of Thomas, but that's probably not a surprise to many. But with Kipper, there's no single shot that takes him from 36th to 86th...or where ever it drops him...
Marcel Dionne is #50 on the HoH Top-70 players of all time list...is there a single goal or assist that you can take away from Dionne that would drop him out of the top 70? Forsberg at #65...if he doesn't score that shootout goal in '94, does he drop out of the top 70? Any other goal of his?
Again, it's not the "what if" part that I'm interested in...it's the "look at how filmsy of a resume we have way up there, but it's inconsistent with previous lists and this list" part that is concerning to me...
@C1958 - Even with the Smith/Resch example, let's say Smith gets moved and Resch wins the Cups with the Isles...there's nothing certain about what Smith could do outside of Al Arbour. What if he's the missing piece in Washington or Minnesota...what if he gets to Calgary in the early 80's before Vernon surfaces...that doesn't preclude him from the list, like a single shot would do to Thomas...though your point is well taken.
I think Tretiak probably still gets similar love here, I mean, Holecek made top-20, Tretiak with or without '72 is getting recognized I have to believe.
Bower and Worsley are interesting, especially Bower.
My point - behind my obtuse use of language - was that it seems that it was a matter of two seasons happening in the past three years being selected over 2 (or more) seasons happening 50 years ago. Which normally the HoH board is pretty keen on preventing. But in this case, it felt kind of glossed over. Which, in no small part, was I a part of the glossing due to time constraints...
Yes, my use of the term lazy here was reckless, but I'd still like to the point to be evaluated even in retrospect. I'm legitimately surprised by how much of a surge Thomas got towards the top of the final poll...so that's why I'm asking, is there really this gap that exists between his two seasons and Kerr's two? Crozier's two? (for instance)
@DB - it's not so much the "what if" part that I'm interested in. It's the "we put a goalie in the upper reaches of historical fame, but his entire resume crumbles into the sea if Andrei Kostitsyn scored a goal on him in a first round series" - it's just hard to find on the list and harder to justify. That's the worry that I have when you put a goalie with such a weak resume on the board: you have to put other goalies with weak resumes on the board too or else it lends itself to inconsistency. The "what if" game is Resch over Smith, or the Rangers keeping Vanbiesbrouck over Richter or something like that...I mean, at a microlevel, maybe if that controversial goal from the '04 Finals counted and Kiprusoff won the Cup, he probably gets more than a passing glance. Personally, I'd put him on the list ahead of Thomas, but that's probably not a surprise to many. But with Kipper, there's no single shot that takes him from 36th to 86th...or where ever it drops him...
Marcel Dionne is #50 on the HoH Top-70 players of all time list...is there a single goal or assist that you can take away from Dionne that would drop him out of the top 70? Forsberg at #65...if he doesn't score that shootout goal in '94, does he drop out of the top 70? Any other goal of his?
Again, it's not the "what if" part that I'm interested in...it's the "look at how filmsy of a resume we have way up there, but it's inconsistent with previous lists and this list" part that is concerning to me...
@C1958 - Even with the Smith/Resch example, let's say Smith gets moved and Resch wins the Cups with the Isles...there's nothing certain about what Smith could do outside of Al Arbour. What if he's the missing piece in Washington or Minnesota...what if he gets to Calgary in the early 80's before Vernon surfaces...that doesn't preclude him from the list, like a single shot would do to Thomas...though your point is well taken.
I think Tretiak probably still gets similar love here, I mean, Holecek made top-20, Tretiak with or without '72 is getting recognized I have to believe.
Bower and Worsley are interesting, especially Bower.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Lumley / Rayner
My point about Tretiak focused on the minor positional adjustment he made in game 1 after Canada had taken a 2 - 0 lead. No adjustment and the game/series play differently.
See your swing goal point. In this project the best example would be Harry Lumley at #27, Chuck Rayner at #28. 1950 SC Final game 7 in OT. Pete Babando scores on Rayner. If the Rangers score in OT on Lumley then Rayner shoots ahead 3-5 slots while Lumley drops 5 or more slots.
My point about Tretiak focused on the minor positional adjustment he made in game 1 after Canada had taken a 2 - 0 lead. No adjustment and the game/series play differently.
See your swing goal point. In this project the best example would be Harry Lumley at #27, Chuck Rayner at #28. 1950 SC Final game 7 in OT. Pete Babando scores on Rayner. If the Rangers score in OT on Lumley then Rayner shoots ahead 3-5 slots while Lumley drops 5 or more slots.
Last edited:
Rob Scuderi
Registered User
- Sep 3, 2009
- 3,378
- 2
The answer to me, which may be unsatisfying, is what Cs58 said about pandering to eras. We wanted to give Lundqvist credit for being consistent in an era of hyper parody among goalies. Thomas's peak coming in the same era has to be given the same credit. Is being a two-time 1st teamer in that period more impressive than doing the same thing in the late 30s/early 40s? I voted Thomas ahead of Kerr so obviously my answer was yes.
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
How about the gap between Thomas and two-season wonder Bernie Parent? That's a big gap, no?
So how does Mr. Flimsy Resume get on all 27 voters lists?
quoipourquoi
Goaltender
Here's my problem with your argument: the nature of the goaltending position places a higher emphasis on ONE shot than any other position. Marcel Dionne doesn't get a black mark on his statline every time he takes a shot that doesn't go in; goaltenders get one every time they miss. And saying that it's only one shot is bogus, Mike. He had three rounds of hockey that followed that save. You're taking 620 shots away from Tim Thomas in your hypothetical if-Thomas-was-a-worse-goalie-we-would-rate-him-lower scenario. 620 shots of Conn Smythe hockey. Taking away those 620 shots (of which Thomas stopped 94% - because he's a Top-40 goaltender) would knock him off the list because he's at the bottom of the list. That's not to say that one shot going the other way wouldn't make a difference for a lot of the goaltenders we've discussed.
Patrick Roy was one overtime goal away from losing in the second round of 1986 and having his run go down in history with the Braden Holtbys and Theo Fleurys of the four-round era instead of the Wayne Gretzkys and Mario Lemieuxs.
Dominik Hasek was one overtime goal away from dropping four-straight games to the Colorado Avalanche and never winning the Stanley Cup. He was also one overtime goal away from playing Finland in the Bronze Medal Game in 1998.
Ken Dryden was one goal away from giving Chicago a 3-0 lead in Game 7 and never winning the Conn Smythe.
Martin Brodeur was one overtime goal away from losing to Florida last year and having a decade of underwhelming playoff runs since Scott Stevens' left.
But like Tim Thomas, they made these saves, and they earned the trophies and reputation boosts that followed them. As for Miikka Kiprusoff, he was in a similar situation in Round 1 of 2004. One goal away from being the 36-year-old goalie from the four-round era with only 13 playoff wins and not a single series victory to hang his hat on.
No one commented on the "flimsy" resumes at the end of the project as much as you, Mike, so I don't see why it would come as a shock to you to find that towards the very bottom, every playoff round for these guys counts for something. Take away his Stanley Cup, Conn Smythe, and turn his all-time great playoff into a first-round knockout? Yeah, even a two-time Vezina winner with a short NHL career is going to feel that one. But he made the save, the resume didn't crumble, and he earned his place on our list.
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
These examples are fun to read. Those single shots could have made a difference in the careers of these goalies. They might have even lost a spot or two on the list.
But Mike has a point when he says that Thomas was one shot away from not having a chance at this list. It's absolutely true.
But Mike has a point when he says that Thomas was one shot away from not having a chance at this list. It's absolutely true.
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
Conversely Luongo was one more good game, or one more good game from his team away from stealing that thunder.
MadArcand
Whaletarded
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
I also severely questioned Parent for the record, I held him down for a while in my voting as I recall. I remember saying something like, "I look at the rest of his resume besides 1974 and 1975 and keep wondering, 'what else?'"
I'll admit, I did make one somewhat political play in this whole thing. I included Thomas at the bottom of my list for fear of it being rejected otherwise. That was my only move that was disingenuous in the project. Even so, he gets on 26 of 27 top-60 lists, and again, he just had his 15 minutes of fame in the last hour...he's fresh in everyone's head. Not many Dave Kerr stories floating around the press these days...
qpq- That's fair. And while I don't have time to properly respond at the moment. I'll say that those goalies would not be precluded from things in such a fashion like Thomas would have been...I mean, maybe Roy goes from 1 to 3 or something...2...but Thomas wouldn't have gotten into the top-50 I wouldn't think...
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
BET ON ONLY ONE HORSE Sheepshead Bay Stakes (Gr. 2) BELMONT (AQUEDUCT) RACE 3Wagers: 2Staked: $159.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
