Are Short Goalies Underrated?

[NVious]

Quick is listed at 6'1. If you want him to be sub 6', you're going to have to subtract a couple of inches from every goalie out there.

The vast majority of men are shorter than 6'. If there were no impediment to being short, why aren't most NHL goalies through history shorter than 6'?

No, that doesn't prove there is a misunderstanding in the role of height. It means that being shorter doesn't necessarily disqualify you from being a good goalie. But it sure seems like being shorter is a negative, given that only one goalie listed at shorter than 6'1, which puts you in the top 7% of American men, has managed to finish top 3 in Vezina voting.

I also don't know why you think Johnny Quick has one of the highest peaks in NHL history. He doesn't.

Tofolli at 6' next to 6'1 Quick lmao.

Because height is seen as a great advantage and nobody wants to draft a dud 5'7, 5'8, 5'9, 5'10 goalie, it's better if we get the new crop of 850, 860, 870, 880 save percentage 6'3+ sieves every year which again begs the question as to how they fail if a 5'9, 5'10 Saros can not only survive, but thrive?

It really does though because if even one goalie that is clearly under 6' (like Saros) can thrive (since we will ignore Thomas/Quick) and goalies over 6'3 can be worse than 5'5 Darren Pang, why not more shorter goalies? Again because there is massive bias against them and the conventional wisdom states height matters. Teams and scouts would rather be wrong about 6'7 876 sv% Fedotov than a bad shorter goalie, despite the result being the same.

In terms of goalies he literally does, for 20+ games played in the playoffs he is tied with Giggy in terms of NHL record when it comes to save percentage:

Goaltender Records - Playoffs | NHL Records

Discover comprehensive NHL goaltender records from the Stanley Cup Playoffs, including achievements by career, year, series and game.

records.nhl.com

Guys like saros and wolf are the exception. Short Goalies in today's game definitely at a disadvantage. Maybe 30 years ago it wasn't as big of a deal but players too good now and games moves too fast. Alot less margin for error if you're small

To the same extent that taller goalies will be more injury prone, slower, not have as big of a heart except height is always seen as a positive and the quicker nature of shorter goalies, closeness to the ice, being able to beat odds is seen as meaningless.

 

[Romang67]

That's fair but also important to mention few if any all-timers were over 6'3".

While people in the general population over 6'3 are few and far between, they are frequently selected and pushed along in the athlete pool in a wide array of sports, from track and field to American football, basketball, volleyball, et al.

In other words, it's not uncommon to see people of tall height in sports; but knowing that, even though hockey is a large team sport with good professional level pay but niche audience/talent pool... where are the GOAT skyscraper goalies? I'd think that there would be evidence of a handful by now in the NHL. Anecdotally, I don't even think I've heard of skyscraper goalies dominating lower leagues for the ones who fall out of the NHL.

There are optimal height/weights in all sports, it's why we don't see 6'7" sprinters or 5'8" shooting guards at the highest levels. My take on it is the general optimal goalie size is roughly 6'1-6'2", where if all other mental attributes are realistically equal, it allows the best combination of athleticism, reaction speed and gap control.

TL;DR big isn't always better.

The position has changed a lot with equipment though. The reason why the all-timers didn't play more similarly to how they play now isn't because angles and blocking the net didn't matter. It's because you couldn't do it when your pads weighed 20lbs because they had soaked all the water off the ice 5 minutes into the game.

There is definitely a sweet spot. Few goalies over 6'1 are fast enough to actually be good (which i suspect is the OP's actual quandary -- that teams are placing 6'8 behemoths out there because of the perception that being big is good enough), and near enough no goalies over 6'4 is going to be anything more than placed correctly on the ice.

But given that, among the elite goalies in the NHL since the rule changes and equipment changes, almost all of them are in the 6'1-6'4 range, I don't know how anyone can say that height isn't anything advantage when that is so much taller than the average male person.

Here's a tale for the kiddos out there about never giving up on your dreams.

When I played ACHA hockey in grad school, I was listed at 6'2" and 200 pounds. No one ever asked me about it. I was probably 6'2" in skates.

However...

After many years of perseverance and dedication, I can proudly tell you all that I am now 200 pounds.

I'm also the only guy who brings his two-pad stacks to beer league hockey.

I walked on to my college team when I returned to school 8 years or so after I quit hockey. My return to hockey was incredibly inconsequential, other than the fact that eliteprospects changed my official listed height from 5'11 to 5'7. I'm not sure where they got that number from, but I thought it was rude.

I've always maintained that my <6' height was among the primary reasons why I never made it to the NHL. I think that was a bigger detriment than my laziness, injuries, and slow reflexes.

 

[Romang67]

Tofolli at 6' next to 6'1 Quick lmao.

Because height is seen as a great advantage and nobody wants to draft a dud 5'7, 5'8, 5'9, 5'10 goalie, it's better if we get the new crop of 850, 860, 870, 880 save percentage 6'3+ sieves every year which again begs the question as to how they fail if a 5'9, 5'10 Saros can not only survive, but thrive?

It really does though because if even one goalie that is clearly under 6' (like Saros) can thrive (since we will ignore Thomas/Quick) and goalies over 6'3 can be worse than 5'5 Darren Pang, why not more shorter goalies? Again because there is massive bias against them and the conventional wisdom states height matters. Teams and scouts would rather be wrong about 6'7 876 sv% Fedotov than a bad shorter goalie, despite the result being the same.

In terms of goalies he literally does, for 20+ games played in the playoffs he is tied with Giggy in terms of NHL record when it comes to save percentage:

Goaltender Records - Playoffs | NHL Records

Discover comprehensive NHL goaltender records from the Stanley Cup Playoffs, including achievements by career, year, series and game.

records.nhl.com

To the same extent that taller goalies will be more injury prone, slower, not have as big of a heart except height is always seen as a positive and the quicker nature of shorter goalies, closeness to the ice, being able to beat odds is seen as meaningless.

If your claim is that NHL players list their height as taller than they are, you are probably right, but then why are you complaining about <6' goalies not getting a chance when so many goalies in the NHL are listed as the same height as Quick?

Back to my original question: where are all the great undrafted short goaltenders? If the problem is that short goalies don't get drafted, that should sort itself out, where they outperform the tall goalies after being drafted.

If Saros is the best of the best of shorter goalies since Thomas, and he has one single top 3 finish in the Vezina race in his career, what does that tell you?

 

[1989]

If your claim is that NHL players list their height as taller than they are, you are probably right, but then why are you complaining about <6' goalies not getting a chance when so many goalies in the NHL are listed as the same height as Quick?

Back to my original question: where are all the great undrafted short goaltenders? If the problem is that short goalies don't get drafted, that should sort itself out, where they outperform the tall goalies after being drafted.

If Saros is the best of the best of shorter goalies since Thomas, and he has one single top 3 finish in the Vezina race in his career, what does that tell you?

It seems with my observations and your question, the answer really is just "be good at being 6'1, idiot."

 

[Romang67]

It seems with my observations and your question, the answer really is just "be good at being 6'1, idiot."

It does seem to be the secret both for becoming an all-time NHL goalie and for being moderately successful at dating apps, so I don't know why more people don't do it.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

I walked on to my college team when I returned to school 8 years or so after I quit hockey. My return to hockey was incredibly inconsequential, other than the fact that eliteprospects changed my official listed height from 5'11 to 5'7. I'm not sure where they got that number from, but I thought it was rude.

I've always maintained that my <6' height was among the primary reasons why I never made it to the NHL. I think that was a bigger detriment than my laziness, injuries, and slow reflexes.

A four-inch drop seems like a capricious affront.

 

[1989]

A four-inch drop seems like a capricious affront.

 

[theVladiator]

I think it's not unreasonable to entertain the idea that lack of short goalies at the NHL level is a result of some sort of self fulfilling prophecy, based on discriminatory prejudice. Basically, imagine a situation where the developing goalies are discarded when they are perceived as short, given up on too early, and so never get a chance to develop far enough along.

But, I think it's a fantasy that would fall apart if one ever looks at the number of shorter goalies in junior/college. I haven't done the work myself, but I think I have seen way more short goalies there than the NHL, and I think it blows that conspiracy theory out of the water.

Thinking a little bit further, shorter goalies probably have a bit of an advantage at younger age. It's quite typical for people to be less coordinated after a growth spurt. Come to think of it, it could be that opposite is true. That there are more taller guys that suck eggs after a growth spurt, get discouraged or discarded, or both, than there are shorter guys that are rejected because they are somehow "too short" for their junior or college team.