top 90's goalies

[Hockey Outsider]

wow, i never thought Darren Puppa's name would appear in this thread, lol...

I was pretty surprised to see Puppa on the list too, but he had two huge seasons: 1990 (90.3 sv%, league average was 88.1%) and 1996 (91.8 sv%, 89.8%). Otherwise he was average.

how does your "Goals Saved" formula work?

Basically, Goals Saved looks at the number of goals a goalie saves his team, compared to an average goalie. To score well a goalie needs to 1) stop the shot effectively (measured by save percentage) and 2) play a lot (obviously a goalie contributes more by playing in more games). With that said, you do need to look at things like intangibles that can't be captured with stats. But GS is a way to start.

If you want to read about in (nauseating) detail, go here: http://www.geocities.com/thehockeyoutsider/Goalie1.pdf

 

[KOVALEV10*]

Belfour won a Vezina in '91 and '93 and a Cup in '99.

Oh yeah my bad, I confused Belfour with Kolzig.

 

[signalIInoise]

Belfour won a Vezina in '91 and '93 and a Cup in '99.

Yes, but his Cup gets the second most famous asterisk in sports.

*Still not a goal

Still, I think Vezinas are better measure of a goalie than Cups -- after all, Chris Osgood's name is on the Cup twice, and I don't see anyone arguing for his inclusion to this list.

 

[Porn*]

Yes, but his Cup gets the second most famous asterisk in sports.

*Still not a goal

Still, I think Vezinas are better measure of a goalie than Cups -- after all, Chris Osgood's name is on the Cup twice, and I don't see anyone arguing for his inclusion to this list.

indeed...

Potvin definately deserves some respect.

 

[arrbez]

Yes, but his Cup gets the second most famous asterisk in sports.

*Still not a goal

Still, I think Vezinas are better measure of a goalie than Cups -- after all, Chris Osgood's name is on the Cup twice, and I don't see anyone arguing for his inclusion to this list.

i think Dallas would have won anyways

I agree that winning the Stanley Cup is not the measure of a player, especially in the modern 30-team NHL, where there will be a ton of great players who never win one. Personally, I don't like how people treat Cujo like trash because he's never won a cup. He's had some phenominal playoff series with St. Louis, Edmonton, and Toronto, and in his prime was as good as anyone not named Hasek

 

[monkey_00*]

How does that also ran Cujo get credit with all these netminders who have actually won something???

Bring Back Bucky...........

I agree with you here.......and Im a Leafs fan who has seen Curtis Joseph "Choke" time-after-time.......he's never won a Stanley Cup, No Hart, No Conn Smythe, No Norris, No first team allstar selection.....he doesn't even deserve to be on the same list with those other goalies....he was over-rated for the simple reason he played hockey media crazy market like Toronto.

 

[wedge]

Hasek is in a league of his own.

 

[arrbez]

and Im a Leafs fan who has seen Curtis Joseph "Choke" time-after-time.......he's never won a Stanley Cup, No Hart, No Conn Smythe, No Norris, No first team allstar selection.....he doesn't even deserve to be on the same list with those other goalies....he was over-rated for the simple reason he played hockey media crazy market like Toronto.

i know you meant Vezina, but i still had a good laugh at that because at times it seemed like Cujo was the only guy on the team playing defense :lol

 

[GravityGrave]

Hasek and Roy were in a class of their own, though I would say Hasek wins out overall.

After that, I'd say:

Brodeur
Belfour
Richter
Joseph

Some others who had decent careers in the 90's:

Vanbiesbrouck
Barasso
Potvin
Khabibulin
Vernon
Irbe
Osgood
Kolzig
Fuhr
McLean
Burke
Hebert
Carrey

 

[David Puddy]

Take it for what it's worth, but my goalie ranking formula says:

How does your system award points? It sounds interesting. I like the idea of removing subjectivity as much as possible.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

How does your system award points? It sounds interesting. I like the idea of removing subjectivity as much as possible.

Basically I look at the number of goals a goalie saves, above and beyond what an average goalie would have saved. Example: a goalie faces 1,000 shots and has a save percentage of 91.0%. The league average that year is 90.0%. He made 910 saves while an average goalie would have made 900. So he saved his team 10 goals. If he had a 88.0 sv%, he only would have made 880 saves, and he would have saved his team -20 goals (ie: he hurt the team, he was below-average). This formula tries to combine save percentage with the goalie's workload.

That's the basic premise but I make some modifications to in, in order to make it as fair as possible (ie normalize it to an 82 game schedule, and make sure that goalies aren't rewarded or penalized for facing many/few shots).

The link is here (formula plus all-time results) if you're interested: http://www.geocities.com/thehockeyoutsider/Goalie1.pdf

Non-statistical things need to be taken into account too but obviously that can't be done with any formula.

Thanks for the question.