Round 2 Voting Results (HOH Top Goaltenders)

[Stansfield*]

I really don't think a 7th place vote for Hasek should be assumed to be political. Goalies are hard to evaluate. There were seven great goaltenders up for voting. And Hasek has some negatives and question marks that other candidates don't.

You'd think somebody ranked Wayne Gretzky seventh.

I find the 7th pretty ridiculous, but you have a point. Without seeing the entire ballot it's hard to draw conclusions.

If they ranked the goalies something like:
1-Hall
2-Brodeur
3-Roy
4-Plante
5-Sawchuk
6-Dryden
7-Hasek
Then at least they were consistent with their voting even if I don't agree with it.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

I find the 7th pretty ridiculous, but you have a point. Without seeing the entire ballot it's hard to draw conclusions.

If they ranked the goalies something like:
1-Hall
2-Brodeur
3-Roy
4-Plante
5-Sawchuk
6-Dryden
7-Hasek
Then at least they were consistent with their voting even if I don't agree with it.

Quite true, I suppose.

 

[overpass]

I think it's also fair to say that he has a pretty incredible list of positives and exclamation marks that other candidates don't, but hey.



You know what? I really don't see the difference there. People have varying "Big 4" lists, and what is everyone's impression if Gretzky doesn't appear in someone's?

I submit that this is actually quite similar, and that the burden of proof/explanation is on the outliers in both cases. Bottom line is that I wish I had submitted a list so I could have voted, but the season is just starting to allow me the time to compile one I feel confident defending.

Of course Hasek has a lot of positives. That's why he received the most first place votes. Doesn't mean he doesn't have negatives. Like I said, it may depend on how risk-averse one is about goalie performance. Some might prefer the sure thing.

I think Hasek at 7th among goalies is more Gretzky at 4th overall than Gretzky 7th among centres.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

I think Hasek at 7th among goalies is more Gretzky at 4th overall than Gretzky 7th among centres.

I certainly don't, but that's just, like, my opinion, man.

I think Hasek being ranked outside of the top 4 goalies is totally like ranking Gretzky outside of the "Big 4", given the respective echelon's we're talking here. Just think for a second about who you'd be comparing Gretzky to if you made a list of the top 7 centres. Based on past HOH lists, that would peg him at Bobby Clarke/Mark Messier level, which is pretty hard to defend, imo.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I've said this before, but one of the best aspects of this project is transparency and accountability. A few weeks from now, all the ballots will be released and everyone will have a civil opportunity to discuss/defend their votes. At that point it will be plain to see whether any given vote was "political" and to adjust our view of the final tally accordingly.

For now, I think it's in everyone's best interest to assume that we're all voting in good faith. It's not a crime to have an unorthodox opinion.

 

[FofH]

I've said this before, but one of the best aspects of this project is transparency and accountability. A few weeks from now, all the ballots will be released and everyone will have a civil opportunity to discuss/defend their votes. At that point it will be plain to see whether any given vote was "political" and to adjust our view of the final tally accordingly.

For now, I think it's in everyone's best interest to assume that we're all voting in good faith. It's not a crime to have an unorthodox opinion.

Everyone is entitled for their opinion. Of course. The 7th just jumps from there. Good work nevertheless, that single vote does not take the result away that roy and hasek are very very close.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

Not surprised to see the 7th place vote for Hasek, and am sure a certain poster would have voted him even lower if given the chance. Remember it happening during the Top Players of all-time lists.

Sort of sours the whole thing for me, but all-in-all a good start.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Just for the record, it wasn't me lol
I wasn't even a voter, as Devil pointed in the main thread.

If I had of voted, it would of been exactly as it ended up except Brodeur and Hall would of been swapped on my list.

Roy and Hasek finishing neck and neck is for the best and the way it should be IMO. It mirrors my own feelings on the two over the last 4-5 years.
I think it would of left a bad taste in my mouth if either had of been noticeably ahead of the other.
That 7th place vote does seem out of place though but, as was mentioned, for all of Hasek's positives, he is also the goalie with the most negatives on the list.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Seventh for Hasek is defensible (although I had him #2) - it just depends upon which factors one finds valuable.

And these are seven great goalies - it's not necessarily an insult to say that one of them is seventh-best.

 

[tombombadil]

I've been keeping an eye on this, too. And I agree with those who say that that 7th place vote has tainted, if not ruined, this whole operation.

 

[seventieslord]

I've been keeping an eye on this, too. And I agree with those who say that that 7th place vote has tainted, if not ruined, this whole operation.

everyone needs to chill. No one wants to get raked over the coals for having an opinion if it's honestly held. There's no evidence that this vote was in any way political.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

It's too late now, but it might not be a bad idea to think about throwing out the one highest and one lowest vote for each player in future projects.

We had a discussion about this in the defenseman project and IIRC, overpass and a couple others were fairly strongly against throwing out the lowest votes for each player. The reasoning was that voters are already screened and that minority opinions should be valued.

I find the 7th pretty ridiculous, but you have a point. Without seeing the entire ballot it's hard to draw conclusions.

If they ranked the goalies something like:
1-Hall
2-Brodeur
3-Roy
4-Plante
5-Sawchuk
6-Dryden
7-Hasek
Then at least they were consistent with their voting even if I don't agree with it.

Since this is being released later anyways and has no effect on the project now if I post it, I'll post it. This is exactly what happened. The guy who voted Hasek 7th had him exactly 7th on his Round 1 list. So disagree with him all you want, but he's been consistent in his views. This was clearly not a strategic vote.

Anyway, everything will be out in the open at the end, including the identities of voters.

Of course Hasek has a lot of positives. That's why he received the most first place votes. Doesn't mean he doesn't have negatives. Like I said, it may depend on how risk-averse one is about goalie performance. Some might prefer the sure thing.

I think Hasek at 7th among goalies is more Gretzky at 4th overall than Gretzky 7th among centres.

Great analogy. Outside the bounds of hfboards, I think you'll find people ranking these 7 goalies in any order. Hey, I remember when I first came here 4-5 years ago, a lot of well-informed posters on this board thought you could argue for any of them as #1, depending on what criteria you use.

I remember back on the 2008 list, Hasek had one of the largest spreads of any players. Since then opinion has seemed to converge.

None of this is to say I agree with Hasek in 7th, but I wouldnt' agree with Gretzky in 4th either.

 

[vecens24]

I mean if someone places a HIGH, HIGH premium on elite level playoff performances, I guess a Hasek vote at 6-7 makes a little more sense. I also voted him 2nd, but I don't think it's absolutely the most ridiculous thing ever.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

We had a discussion about this in the defenseman project and IIRC, overpass and a couple others were fairly strongly against throwing out the lowest votes for each player. The reasoning was that voters are already screened and that minority opinions should be valued.

I agree with this. I'm not sure I can even conceive of a reasonable argument for Dryden over Hasek, and I imagine I may have a few things to say in the threads when the final voting results get revealed, but I remain in favour of including votes for anybody whose list got accepted.

It looks worse now because there is more consensus atop the list, but that consensus is going to rapidly disappear. Just as an example, I think there's a very good chance that I rated one of the goalies in the next group 5-6 spots or so ahead of his average ranking on all the other lists. That ranking may change after the next discussion, but if I'm still higher on him than everyone else I absolutely would not my vote thrown out because it was assumed that I was wrong because of divergent opinion.

The only thing that is perhaps a bit frustrating is that a negative vote can have a big impact on the rankings while on the other hand I can't give any bonus points to a guy that I rate as clearly #1 ahead of the rest of the group, but all scoring systems have their positives and negatives.

 

[kmad]

It's telling that whoever voted Hasek 7th isn't speaking up.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I don't think that any voter should be unnecessarily criticised for having an unconventional opinion. This project should encourage independent thought and challenging groupthink.

Anybody ranking Hasek last likely places a very high emphasis on longevity (at the NHL level only) and long playoff runs, while placing an extremely low emphasis on a goalie's peak performance (whether you're looking as short as 1 season or as long as 9 seasons), awards, save percentage and non-NHL career. That's not how I evaluate goalies, but people are free to have their own interpretations as to what makes a goaltender great.

The voting records will be public at the end of the project, and I don't see any reason to question any voter's integrity unless there are clear contradictions in his voting record.

(For the record, this is coming from someone who would have ranked Hasek first).

 

[Stansfield*]

Since this is being released later anyways and has no effect on the project now if I post it, I'll post it. This is exactly what happened. The guy who voted Hasek 7th had him exactly 7th on his Round 1 list. So disagree with him all you want, but he's been consistent in his views. This was clearly not a strategic vote.

I already have a pretty good idea who it was but I'm glad it wasn't political. In any case, one odd vote/ballot in no way, shape, or form invalidates the time and effort put into creating this list.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Let's not worry about who it is. It's a defensible opinion (and if we all agreed on everything, there wouldn't be a point to this exercise, anyhow).

 

[Czech Your Math]

I don't think that any voter should be unnecessarily criticised for having an unconventional opinion. This project should encourage independent thought and challenging groupthink.

Anybody ranking Hasek last likely places a very high emphasis on longevity (at the NHL level only) and long playoff runs, while placing an extremely low emphasis on a goalie's peak performance (whether you're looking as short as 1 season or as long as 9 seasons), awards, save percentage and non-NHL career. That's not how I evaluate goalies, but people are free to have their own interpretations as to what makes a goaltender great.

The voting records will be public at the end of the project, and I don't see any reason to question any voter's integrity unless there are clear contradictions in his voting record.

(For the record, this is coming from someone who would have ranked Hasek first).

I definitely agree. Independent, diverse opinions, should not be discouraged, no matter how much they may disagree with the standard, traditional opinions. If there's a flaw, it is not the inclusion of such unusual opinions in the results, rather it may be the use of a voting system that allows such opinions to affect the results disproportionately. IOW, if someone has Roy 1st and Hasek 7th... that can negate many people having Hasek 1st and Roy 2nd. That's why I favor a preferential voting system for rankings, so that a player who is higher in rank equates to the majority of voters preferring that player to players of lower rank on the list.

I'm not participating in this project, but just something to consider for similar projects in the future.

 

[tony d]

Onto another thing, surprised Sawchuk ranked so low. While I didn't expect him to be #1 I figured he'd be in the top 3-5 goalies, not #6.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I don't think that any voter should be unnecessarily criticised for having an unconventional opinion. This project should encourage independent thought and challenging groupthink.

Anybody ranking Hasek last likely places a very high emphasis on longevity (at the NHL level only) and long playoff runs, while placing an extremely low emphasis on a goalie's peak performance (whether you're looking as short as 1 season or as long as 9 seasons), awards, save percentage and non-NHL career. That's not how I evaluate goalies, but people are free to have their own interpretations as to what makes a goaltender great.

The voting records will be public at the end of the project, and I don't see any reason to question any voter's integrity unless there are clear contradictions in his voting record.

(For the record, this is coming from someone who would have ranked Hasek first).

Yet the original lists are reviewed and some are rejected.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Onto another thing, surprised Sawchuk ranked so low. While I didn't expect him to be #1 I figured he'd be in the top 3-5 goalies, not #6.

Sawchuk dropped a lot (in my mind) during the discussion portion - there's a good case for him even being #7 in there.

 

[Theokritos]

I think Hasek at 7th among goalies is more Gretzky at 4th overall than Gretzky 7th among centres.

To me Roy at 4th among goalies is Gretzky at 4th overall while Hašek at 7th among goalies is Gretzky at 7th among centres. Whoever voted Hašek 7th really has something to explain IMO. But:

A few weeks from now, all the ballots will be released and everyone will have a civil opportunity to discuss/defend their votes. At that point it will be plain to see whether any given vote was "political" and to adjust our view of the final tally accordingly.

For now, I think it's in everyone's best interest to assume that we're all voting in good faith. It's not a crime to have an unorthodox opinion.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I definitely agree. Independent, diverse opinions, should not be discouraged, no matter how much they may disagree with the standard, traditional opinions. If there's a flaw, it is not the inclusion of such unusual opinions in the results, rather it may be the use of a voting system that allows such opinions to affect the results disproportionately. IOW, if someone has Roy 1st and Hasek 7th... that can negate many people having Hasek 1st and Roy 2nd. That's why I favor a preferential voting system for rankings, so that a player who is higher in rank equates to the majority of voters preferring that player to players of lower rank on the list.

I'm not participating in this project, but just something to consider for similar projects in the future.

A preferential voting system would throw away the opinions of anyone who didn't rank Hasek or Roy 1-2. If a voter thinks one, but not the other is top 2 worthy, that's not exactly a fringe opinion that should be tossed in the garbage.

 

[MXD]

To me Roy at 4th among goalies is Gretzky at 4th overall while Hašek at 7th among goalies is Gretzky at 7th among centres. Whoever voted Hašek 7th really has something to explain IMO. But:

Voting Roy 4th is like having Gretzky as 4th amongst Centers.

Not overall.

By what you said, Roy would NECESSARILY be 2nd to Hasek in the list. He wasn't.

Take out the outliers (Roy's 4th, Hasek 7th) and both players are equals. Hasek wasn't robbed of the 1st here. He was certainly robbed of a tie, though. I had Hasek 3rd and COMPLETELY stand by my opinion.