Tim Thomas' HoF chances

[vadim sharifijanov]

Some of you guys are discriminating against people with short careers and I don't think that's logical.

You say "Guy A could have 3 Vezinas, but since he had only played X years, he's not as good as Guy B. He had 3 Vezinas and played for 20 years!"

I really disagree with that. The Hall of Fame should be for people with amazing accomplishments. Playing empty years without accomplishing anything shouldn't help your case for being in the Hall. If you're good enough to win 3 Vezinas in your first 6 seasons, then conventional wisdom says you haven't played long enough to deserve a spot. But then say that guy stays around for 12 more seasons, while floundering in mediocrity. Now he's got it all, 3 trophies and a high number of games. But.. in those final 12 seasons, did he really add anything to his career to make himself a better goalie?

i'll tweak this a bit: i don't think the issue should be that thomas has a short career, but that for a HHOF candidate he is short on accomplishments. assuming that he wins a second vezina this year, that gives him two vezinas, and one other good but non-elite season. even if he had, say, an five to eight year prime with the same peak accomplishments, he's still not a hall of famer. hell, add a third vezina next year (assuming that he doesn't post hasek-esque numbers again) and i'm still not convinced he's any higher than, say, mike liut. let us not forget that even though this season may go down in history for thomas, as recently as this summer, the consensus on this very HOH board was that thomas' first vezina was a weaker one, as vezina seasons go.

look at giguere. the conn smythe run and the cup run at least equal to thomas' two vezinas. he also has the above-average prime years to "fill out" his resume. and i haven't heard too much fuss about him as a potential HHOF candidate.

another benchmark: would johnny bower be a hall of famer if he'd retired in '62, after his first cup, with one vezina/1st team all-star and two losses to the habs in the finals on his resume?

or: bernie parent had a shorter career, high peak, and made the HHOF. but there is a world of difference between what parent did and what thomas has done, or realistically could yet do.

in the end, the benchmark is not as abstract as, say, three vezinas, or two vezinas and a cup. the benchmark is ed belfour. not counting dynasty goalies (which would open up a whole other can of worms), belfour and his two vezinas + cup is the worst HHOF goalie of the last 30 years. and to be mentioned in the same breath as belfour, it doesn't just take three vezinas, it takes a solid decade of being considered one of the best five goaltenders in the world (i.e., not "floundering in mediocrity"), multiple deep playoff runs, year-in year-out consistency, etc.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

in the end, the benchmark is not as abstract as, say, three vezinas, or two vezinas and a cup. the benchmark is ed belfour. not counting dynasty goalies (which would open up a whole other can of worms), belfour and his two vezinas + cup is the worst HHOF goalie of the last 30 years. and to be mentioned in the same breath as belfour, it doesn't just take three vezinas, it takes a solid decade of being considered one of the best five goaltenders in the world (i.e., not "floundering in mediocrity"), multiple deep playoff runs, year-in year-out consistency, etc.

Highly disagree. Maybe if you are just counting trophies (Cups and Vezinas), but if you look at consistent greatness (and things like Vezina record, save %, winning games in both the playoffs and regular season, etc), I don't see how Belfour can be ranked behind Billy Smith or Grant Fuhr. I really don't see a huge difference between Ed Belfour and Martin Brodeur, to be quite honest. Sure, Brodeur had a better career, but I don't think it was all that much better.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I guess he meant Smith and Fuhr when he said "dynasty goalies"?

Belfour vs. Brodeur is an interesting comparison.

 

[NewEnglandSportsFan*]

That's correct. If you have a short NHL career, you need to do more.

I'm sorry that I'm not considering someone with a seven-year NHL prime and two Vezinas. It doesn't say "Hall of Fame" to me.

With respect as an Admin... it's a very good thing you aren't a voter. Man... no one would get in haha.

That said, Tim Thomas needs to keep up his elite play for another 2-3 seasons in all likely-hood and win a Cup to get consideration.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I guess he meant Smith and Fuhr when he said "dynasty goalies"?

Belfour vs. Brodeur is an interesting comparison.

LOL, you're right. Poor reading comp by me right there... Helps to read the whole sentence and not just the bolded part... heh.

Anyway, I basically see peak Belfour as equal to peak Brodeur. Brodeur was slightly better at puck handling (which was a huge asset for goaltenders in the era where the trap killed offense off the rush), and Belfour appeared just a tiny fraction of a hair better at stopping the puck (Brodeur could be vulnerable to weird angle low shots, while Belfour might be the best I've ever seen at stopping low shots to the corners). But Brodeur was consistently great for 15 straight seasons, while Belfour had a few more off years and off playoffs in there. But I do think the gap from Brodeur to Belfour is much smaller than the gap from Belfour to the 3rd best goalie of the era (likely Cujo).

 

[SidGenoMario]

Nothing would make me happier than seeing Thomas make it. You guys don't think he's a hall of famer, that's okay, but what would he have to accomplish before he retires to secure himself a spot?

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Nothing would make me happier than seeing Thomas make it. You guys don't think he's a hall of famer, that's okay, but what would he have to accomplish before he retires to secure himself a spot?

That's basically what we've been discussing for the entirety of the thread.

 

[dafoomie]

A Hart trophy this year might help... Not saying he'll win it, but it would help his cause.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Tim Thomas is definitely up there with strangest careers and difficult players to evaluate.

Yes and he won't make it in IMO

You'd start to consider him after 1 Hart and 5 Vezinas? I think those levels (presumably accompanied by a half dozen post-season All-Star selections) would clearly put him in the area of serious-but-not-a-lock consideration. That definitely puts him in Tony Esposito territory, albeit with less longevity in the NHL.

I say 3 Vezinas, multiple post-season all star selections, possibly a Hart, and (here's the key) a serious run into June with an Smythe-worthy performance is where we're looking to knock on the door of HOF consideration. He also must never again have an off-season like last year. Some sustained success as a top-5 goalie for the next 5-6 years is necessary.

PS: Dr. No, have you stopped updating the bios on your website? I notice no stats beyond 06-07.

I agree here with this post Dr. No might be asking too much of an late starter IMO but his views would be the same as the HHOF committee for the most part.

Thomas isn't getting in as the Bruins are not going to win the 3 Cups it would take IMO.

I highly doubt that he is going to win a Hart either, it's not like Task pulls them down when he plays.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

PS: Dr. No, have you stopped updating the bios on your website? I notice no stats beyond 06-07.

Without taking us too far away from Thomas...

The main reason things have slowed down on the site is work - currently, I'm putting 80 or so hours per week into my job, and when you take out girlfriend time and (playing) hockey time, there's not much left.

I do still update the game logs (if you go to the bottom of a goaltender's page, you'll see those) - I figured that those were the hardest things to find on other sites, so I made that a priority.

I have very good news, though - a major project I've been working on over the past few years. The biggest problem with TGHP is that, when I started it in 1994, the technology wasn't very good, and consequently, everything on the page is hard-coded numbers - there's no database which backs the data. This makes it very hard to update, very hard to reconcile, and very hard to do anything interesting with the numbers.

Over the past few years, I've been spending all of my extra time putting all of the site's data into Access, and I've taught myself how to use the Access database to create webpage results. I'm hoping to roll out version 2.0 of the page by mid-summer at the latest, and since I've been devoting most of my efforts there, it will have all of the updated season statistics, game logs, all of the other good stuff, plus newer metrics and ways to compare goalies. Hopefully you'll like it!

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Is this actually happening? A HOF debate involving Tim Freaking Thomas?!

The OP suggest that Thomas should cruise to another Vezina this year. Unfortunately, this is probably correct. Voters these days tend to look at the stats sheet and nothing further. Actually watching hockley games reveals Thomas to be less of a goalie that what the numbers lead people to believe.

In any case, I have very strong doubts that, stats or not, any goaltender who has won one career playoff series (as a #1 seed) at age 36 is ever going to get one iota of HOF consideration.

I watch every Bruins game.

Up to this point, I have not seen any better goaltending before.

His GA is 1.83. Closest to him is 2.09.

His SP is .945. Closest to him is .930.

His record is 22-4-6. His backup's record is 4-10-1, with a 2.67 GA and SP of .923.

He's stolen countless games this season, including one where his team was outshot 26-1 in the third period.

If you don't like his style, fine. But if you have actually watched him up to this point, you can't possible say he hasn't been as good as his numbers show him to be.

And by the way, I can't imagine him continuing at this level for the rest of the season.

 

[seventieslord]

Nope.

should have said "God, no".

Wilson and Boughner were solid in the Sabres system. Hard rugged defensemen. I wouldnt call Galley and McKee no-names.

Not to mention Sarich, Warrener, Campbell, Shannon and Patrick

Wilson? Boughner? Sarich? Shannon? Come on.

Campbell and Galley were more offensive specialists.

McKee and Warrener were both very solid. Neither is selected yet in the Beer league draft as we approach pick #1700.

Patrick was a solid player but his status as an ATD player is based very little on those seasons.

This was a very anonymous defense relative to other teams that made the playoffs regularly.

Highly disagree. Maybe if you are just counting trophies (Cups and Vezinas), but if you look at consistent greatness (and things like Vezina record, save %, winning games in both the playoffs and regular season, etc), I don't see how Belfour can be ranked behind Billy Smith or Grant Fuhr. I really don't see a huge difference between Ed Belfour and Martin Brodeur, to be quite honest. Sure, Brodeur had a better career, but I don't think it was all that much better.

Same here. I plan to adjust my rankings going forward, and it involves more of lowering Brodeur than it does bumping Belfour.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I guess I should clarify, no I don't think Rask should be a Vezina candidate. Clearly he hasn't played enough games. I don't think his actual performance has been below Thomas' though. Claude Julien is going to play whoever is winning him games. So far, that's been Thomas, but I attribute most of that to the bizarre disparity in goal support the Bruins provide their netminders. Rask basically needs a shutout, or he's not going to win. Thomas can usually afford to give up a couple. Mentally, one of those situations is much more favorable to a goaltender.

Oh, and to answer the original question: I'd probably vote for Carey Price for Vezina at this point.

Are you serious?

Come on, you know better than that.

You start out saying you actually have to watch the guy, then tell us Rask has performed just as well as Thomas this season?

I think the only Bruins game you have seen was the Montreal game.

 

[jkrx]

should have said "God, no".



Wilson? Boughner? Sarich? Shannon? Come on.

Campbell and Galley were more offensive specialists.

McKee and Warrener were both very solid. Neither is selected yet in the Beer league draft as we approach pick #1700.

Patrick was a solid player but his status as an ATD player is based very little on those seasons.

This was a very anonymous defense relative to other teams that made the playoffs regularly.



Same here. I plan to adjust my rankings going forward, and it involves more of lowering Brodeur than it does bumping Belfour.

My point was that they werent no-names, not that they were gods gift to defense. Boughner and Wilson were solid however for there first seasons in Buffalo but they werent remarkable in any way and after 4 seasons (I think) both were pretty much done.

 

[Hardyvan123]

I watch every Bruins game.

Up to this point, I have not seen any better goaltending before.

His GA is 1.83. Closest to him is 2.09.

His SP is .945. Closest to him is .930.

His record is 22-4-6. His backup's record is 4-10-1, with a 2.67 GA and SP of .923.

He's stolen countless games this season, including one where his team was outshot 26-1 in the third period.

If you don't like his style, fine. But if you have actually watched him up to this point, you can't possible say he hasn't been as good as his numbers show him to be.

And by the way, I can't imagine him continuing at this level for the rest of the season.

Rask's numbers (wins ect..) as per his performance are out of wack a bit , as they are with Thomas, these things tend to even out in a year.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Even so, if he makes 2 saves he has no business making and then lets in two clunkers, hasn't he still done his job?

IMO, no he hasn't. Weak goals are almost always more detrimental to a team than great saves are positive. In theory, a goalie who stops every shot he should and lets in two breakaway goals is no different than one who stops the two breakways and lets in a couple floaters. But go ask any coach or player who they'd rather have playing behind them.

Goals that are scored off great scoring chances mean that several mistakes already happened, can be evaluated, and preventative measures can be put in place. The other five guys on the ice can in theory enable a shutout every game by reducing opposition scoring chances to nil, if they have a goaltender who will always stop "stoppable" shots. If the goaltender is prone to giving up laughers, there's really nothing the team in front of him can do. The other team can take a shoot from anywhere approach and not waste possessions looking for the perfect set-up. They know they aren't going to need it if they just keep getting pucks on net.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Rask's numbers (wins ect..) as per his performance are out of wack a bit , as they are with Thomas, these things tend to even out in a year.

Rask's are, because he's played well.

Thomas' are not, because he has played unreal.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

IMO, no he hasn't. Weak goals are almost always more detrimental to a team than great saves are positive. In theory, a goalie who stops every shot he should and lets in two breakaway goals is no different than one who stops the two breakways and lets in a couple floaters. But go ask any coach or player who they'd rather have playing behind them.

Goals that are scored off great scoring chances mean that several mistakes already happened, can be evaluated, and preventative measures can be put in place. The other five guys on the ice can in theory enable a shutout every game by reducing opposition scoring chances to nil, if they have a goaltender who will always stop "stoppable" shots. If the goaltender is prone to giving up laughers, there's really nothing the team in front of him can do. The other team can take a shoot from anywhere approach and not waste possessions looking for the perfect set-up. They know they aren't going to need it if they just keep getting pucks on net.

So you're saying that Thomas has given up a lot of bad goals this year?

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

LOL, you're right. Poor reading comp by me right there... Helps to read the whole sentence and not just the bolded part... heh.

Anyway, I basically see peak Belfour as equal to peak Brodeur. Brodeur was slightly better at puck handling (which was a huge asset for goaltenders in the era where the trap killed offense off the rush), and Belfour appeared just a tiny fraction of a hair better at stopping the puck (Brodeur could be vulnerable to weird angle low shots, while Belfour might be the best I've ever seen at stopping low shots to the corners). But Brodeur was consistently great for 15 straight seasons, while Belfour had a few more off years and off playoffs in there. But I do think the gap from Brodeur to Belfour is much smaller than the gap from Belfour to the 3rd best goalie of the era (likely Cujo).

i think roy, hasek, and belfour were all born within a year of one another. brodeur is significantly younger. so if we count those guys as a generation, i absolutely agree that the distance between the belfour and brodeur is much closer than the big drop off between belfour and the next tier of guys (joseph, barrasso, vernon, beezer, or whomever).

point being, i guess, that the benchmark for a HHOF goalie has been set extremely high. but then i wonder whether any goalie of the next generation (thomas, luongo, kipper, giguere, nabby... turco, theodore) can live up to that standard. and if it seems like we have an entire generation of richters and kolzigs, is it conceivable that none of them make the hall of fame?

 

[Sensfanman]

If he played like 65-70 games at this rate, he'd have the single most dominating season of all time.

His .945 Sv% compared to the .912 average amongst goalies with 5 GP or more this year means 55 goals on 1000 shots vs 88 goals on 1000 shots, which translates to about 1 less goal against per game than the average (factoring number of shots per game)

Compare to Hasek's 98-99 where he posted .936 to the league average of .908 means 64 goals against compared to 92 on 1000 shots which is 28 less goals. Given how the number of shots taken was lower (about 40 games to 1000 shots vs 35 today) that's .7 goals per game less than average.


So, assuming Thomas wins the Vezina this year, maybe a Cup and/or Conn Smythe and he ends up with a reasonable amount of GP; he'd have one of the best, if not the best goaltending performance of all time, along with at least two Vezinas. I'd say he's got a shot.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

I agree somewhat, the year Thomas won the Vezina he lead the league quiet comfortably in sv% but was well down the leader board in shutouts. This illustrates the point you were making is possible.

However, Thomas is tied for first in the NHL in shutouts this season with 7, so I am not really sure what is humanly possible for him left to do? It seems more likely that it isn't the case this season.

I'll back off my original implication that Thomas winning the Vezina this year would be a poor decision by the voters. I've thought Thomas was over-rated since he won the Vezina two seasons ago (I've cited that decision, and Mike Green nearly beating Chara for the Norris the same year as the point at which I stopped giving awards voting credibility), and I probably carried too much of that sentiment in here when I saw "Thomas for HOF" in the thread title. There's no doubt he has performed very well this season for the most part.

I do maintain that the numbers from the past three years oversell him, however. And this harkens back to my previous post about the timing and style of goals allowed ruining games that, statistically, he was very good in.

So you're saying that Thomas has given up a lot of bad goals this year?

I guess it depends how you'd classify a bad goal. Is getting caught way out of position or failing to corral a rebound that should have been swallowed considered a bad goal? That's open to interpretation. Is it considered a preventable goal? Definitely.

I don't want to appear as though I'm crapping on the guy to no end, but how many of Thomas' nine-bell saves are really fairly routine saves if the goaltender is positioned properly? How often does it appear the Bruins broke down defensively by allowing five shots and finally a goal in a sequence, yet that sequence began by Thomas misplaying the puck or not controlling a rebound?

I don't know, I don't keep a tally, but it seems to happen with regularity when I've watched Bruins games during the Thomas era.

 

[Hardyvan123]

His biggest problem in winning the Hart this year is that he is not head and shoulders better than the next 5 guys on the save % list as Rinne, Lundqvist, Palvelic and Hiller are all number 1 goalies on weaker teams that are also having great seasons.

I left Varlamov off the list because he hasn't played enough to be considered the lock number 1 goalie in Washington yet this season.

The bottom line is that Thomas is going to have some pretty serious competition for being the best goalie never mind the MVP this year.

 

[Bruins4Lifer]

His biggest problem in winning the Hart this year is that he is not head and shoulders better than the next 5 guys on the save % list as Rinne, Lundqvist, Palvelic and Hiller are all number 1 goalies on weaker teams that are also having great seasons.

I left Varlamov off the list because he hasn't played enough to be considered the lock number 1 goalie in Washington yet this season.

The bottom line is that Thomas is going to have some pretty serious competition for being the best goalie never mind the MVP this year.

I don't know if it's been mentioned already but the difference between Thomas and #2 on the sv% list is as big as the difference between #2 and #20. How is that not "head and shoulders" above the rest? At this point in the season, that's a huge lead.

 

[nik jr]

Is this actually happening? A HOF debate involving Tim Freaking Thomas?!

The OP suggest that Thomas should cruise to another Vezina this year. Unfortunately, this is probably correct. Voters these days tend to look at the stats sheet and nothing further. Actually watching hockey games reveals Thomas to be less of a goalie that what the numbers lead people to believe.

Well, I'm of the opinion that Thomas is only the second-best goaltender on his own team, so I guess we could start with Tuuka Rask.

this is basically completely opposite of what i see when i watch boston.

 

[Derick*]

If he played like 65-70 games at this rate, he'd have the single most dominating season of all time.

His .945 Sv% compared to the .912 average amongst goalies with 5 GP or more this year means 55 goals on 1000 shots vs 88 goals on 1000 shots, which translates to about 1 less goal against per game than the average (factoring number of shots per game)

Compare to Hasek's 98-99 where he posted .936 to the league average of .908 means 64 goals against compared to 92 on 1000 shots which is 28 less goals. Given how the number of shots taken was lower (about 40 games to 1000 shots vs 35 today) that's .7 goals per game less than average.


So, assuming Thomas wins the Vezina this year, maybe a Cup and/or Conn Smythe and he ends up with a reasonable amount of GP; he'd have one of the best, if not the best goaltending performance of all time, along with at least two Vezinas. I'd say he's got a shot.

But you also have to account for a) it's unlikely his save percentage won't go down a bit, b) it's unlikely he'll play that many games, c) there were fewer goals in general when Hasek was playing, so the goals:wins ratio was lower, d) backups and my eye suggest Boston lets in lower than average difficulty shots, while the Sabres allowed above average difficulty shots.