Are Short Goalies Underrated?
- Thread starter NVious
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Czechboy
Náš f*cken barák!
- Apr 15, 2018
- 29,924
- 27,399
Saros is declining last 2 years. I agree he's amazing but he's not top of the league right now. Wolf is an amazing rookie who has yet to play a full season.
Do you have a 3rd, 4th and 5th example of a goalie under 6 feet doing well in the NHL in 2024/25? Because I can probably list several tall goalies that are doing very well.
Here are the top 5 by save percentage (happy to use a different stat)
They are all 6'4 or 6'5
BertCorbeau
F*ck cancer - RIP Fugu and Buffaloed
I wouldn’t sell them short, that’s for sure
Community
44 is Rielly good
Put it this way.
If Saros or Wolf were 6'4", then they'd be even better. That doesn't mean that short goalies can't be elite, but it's a disadvantage when you naturally take up less of the net.
It's not the most important thing, but it definitely makes a difference.
If Saros or Wolf were 6'4", then they'd be even better. That doesn't mean that short goalies can't be elite, but it's a disadvantage when you naturally take up less of the net.
It's not the most important thing, but it definitely makes a difference.
frightenedinmatenum2
Registered User
They should allow shorter goalies to use nets that are in proportion with their height. The size of the net should be in direct scale with the goalie. Imagine how much better the game would be if we could have a 4'11" goalie with a shinny net behind them.
Romang67
BitterSwede
nhlfan9191
Registered User
- Aug 4, 2010
- 20,173
- 18,564
The game has changed a lot. There’s nobody really left under 6’2. You can count them all on one hand.
Obviously if you scaled up everything the exact same, but that's not how it works. It also doesn't explain all the 6'4+ goalies who have been total sieves if size were such a massive difference.
To succeed as a shorter goalie is a massive psychological advantage because the cards are always stacked against you.
My point was that shorter goalies don't even get looks, I'm not even sure if 5 5'10 and under goalies have played in the NHL the last 10 years, whereas anyone can probably name 5+ atrocious 6'4+ goalies off the top of their head.
Point being that height isn't as big of a factor as made out to be if shorter goalies can still have success and extremely tall goalies can be awful.
Its an interesting question, I don't know if it has an answer. Shorter goalies cover less of the net, but they are also generally quicker. And very tall (6" 5' or greater) goalies seem to have bigger holes in their stances and also tend to lack the extreme agility slightly shorter goalies have (Mikko Koskinen comes to mind). I think a sweet spot exists from 6"2' to 6"4' where a goalie is still big enough to cover most of the net and is also capable of reacting quickly to take away angles.
hangman005
Have I told you I miss Logan Thompson
StrangeVision
Wear a mask.
- Apr 1, 2007
- 25,971
- 12,033
Being short doesn't make you a bad goalie, being tall doesn't make you a good goalie. Being tall is absolutely an advantage, though.
Being tall gives you more margin for error if your technique is off. When was the last time a shorter goalie had a deep PO run? Where teams break down video and target what they perceive as your weakness (likely going high on the goalie).
Maybe back to 2008/2009 with Osgood at 5'10? Quick was 6'1.
Figgy44
A toast of purple gato for the memories
- Dec 15, 2014
- 14,404
- 9,832
To an extent yes, but how much is the question. If short goalies can still succeed is the advantage overstated? Especially considering the number of 6'4+ goalies outnumber 5'10 and below goalies some ridiculous number probably 30:1 or even beyond.
Shorter goalies tend to be faster and closer to the ice, the height thing is immediately seen as a massive advantage where I wonder if that's even the case considering how many tall goalies have failed vs how many short goalies have succeeded and we don't even really get that many for the sample to tell us anything.
Maybe on a scale of 1-10, 10 being a goalie that is 6' tall and 6' wide (covering the whole net), height is a much much smaller (if at all) advantage than previously thought of if shorter goalies can still succeed.
Iggys Dome
Not allowed to say the “R-Word” (rebuild)
I love Wolf and think he can be a franchise goalie like Saaros, but I want to hold off on the hype because we’ve seen many a rookie goalie come in and steal the show then get figured out later on.
Obviously because the attitude is height is some massive advantage and there is insane bias at every level. Wolf was barely drafted after having an amazing junior career.
Look at the 2nd goalie drafted in his draft year 37th overall Mads Soogard:
909 in the NAHL
921 in the WHL
908 in the WHL
Oh but he's 6'7 so that makes him good
Meanwhile Wolf went:
928/935/936 in the WHL
Oh but he's short so he sucks
For some reason I always have this magazine cover burned in my memory (even though Chase Daniel topped out as a well-regarded NFL backup). I forget the context, but I remember a quote going something like "the taller player will have to prove he can't play but the smaller player will have to prove that he can."
It can be tough drafting goalies at 18-21 years old since they're generally still so raw. With the development curve of goalies usually taking several years and the constant turnover of scouts/GMs, it's probably just safer to take a taller athletic guy and try to mold him.
We've seen other undersized goalies who didn't pan out as well. I remember walking by Michael DiPietro at the draft who was listed at 6'0 but he was my height (5'9, 5'10 on a good day) and he dropped a little on draft (#64). Bob McKenzie's survey had him #41 and a more prototypical sized Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen was ranked #48. UPL went a few picks (#54) before DiPietro.
We've seen some undersized guys (Strauss Mann, Dryden McKay) put up sterling numbers in college but they had their struggles as pros.
Dingo
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2018
- 2,107
- 2,128
yep, what you are saying just about for sure plays a role. Coaches (people) often get caught into the groupthink of the day.
That said, people also want to win. If you think back to all the thousands of coaches and players and parents and goalie trainers at PeeWee, Bantam, Midget, etc. they will mostly be playing the kid they think gives them the best chance to win. These kids arent even done growing at this point, so its a crapshoot for height and its going to come down to who does the job best on each individual team each year.
Being 6'4 or over puts you into 1% of men.
I think the cream rises to the top, even if I agree that there is discrimination. There would be guys under 6' winning, or being finalists, for Vezina's. Tim Thomas, Sauros.... these guys are badly outnumbered by a population that is a minority.
I get it. Eveyone used to rave about Rick Nash and ignore Marty St. Louis, year after year, no matter how many times Marty was better. It takes awhile for mindsets to change. And maybe you will be proven correct. Maybe scouting will shift, and overall perception.
I think the league would be flooded with guys under 6', though, if it werent a big disadvantage. Drafted or not, the Marty St. Louis' of the world will get picked up and developed by someone... there's just too much to gain to not take a shot on a guy who is proving himself regardless of sports cultural mindsets.
I think, probably, where i 100% agree with you, is that a ton of tall guys who arent actually quite NHL calibre, are probably being given the benefit of the doubt, a wing and a prayer, a "well, maybe he can develop.... he is the right height for the job" but i would think those guys would fizzle out and be given up on before too long, replaced by more like them, for sure, but also replaced by anyone that proves themselves. The fact is that there have been a TON of very succesful, TALL goalies since the stacker goalie pads and modern style became a thing. Not just 'making the league' succesful, but also Vezina/save %/ Stanley Cup successful.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
To Advance Newcastle United vs Arsenal - Newcastle United leads 2-0Wagers: 9Staked: $1,795.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
-