HOH Top 40 Goaltenders of All Time

[Killion]

A goalie corsi would sure be interesting. Especially since the shots Brodeur prevents never show up in stats the way people's eyes think they should.

Yes it really is an interesting phenomena. That since the pretty much full on conversion to the Butterfly the way the positions Coached & now played, roaming & playing the puck, being aggressive in skating out of your crease & breaking up plays before they even get a chance to get started (inhibited further with the introduction of the Trapezoid) all but a lost art. Actually discouraged. Pity. Several colors taken off the palette, no longer available, applied to the canvas. Skating & stickhandling skills amongst the past 2 generations of goaltenders abysmal. Only a few of them (Mike Smith in Phoenix for eg) capable & practiced at it.

 

[Brick City]

A goalie corsi would sure be interesting. Especially since the shots Brodeur prevents never show up in stats the way people's eyes think they should.

I looked up this thread to ask a question related to Brodeur's puckhandling and it turns out there are 5 pages of recent posts. So here goes:

Did Brodeur's extremely high quality puckhandling and shot prevention mentioned above factor into the voting discussions? I followed it at the time but it would be quite the undertaking to dig through them again.

I am not coming in here to challenge the integrity of the rankings but I can see the validity of the notion that Brodeur may be a bit underrated on HoH if he is measured primarily by stats/dominance during era/peak during era/etc. metrics used in the voting discussions.

 

[Ofuzz]

I love the work that went into this list. I wish I was a more frequent visitor to have participated in it. Just a couple of opinions on the lower end of the 40....
I was happy to see Rogie Vachon recognized. I think Cujo may be a bit high but not by a lot. And finally, maybe I missed it but I looked at the top 60 and couldn't find Gerry Cheevers. I always felt he was overrated but I thought he'd be good enough for top 60. (But like I said, maybe I was staring right at it and missed it).

Anyways, good work by all that participated.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I love the work that went into this list. I wish I was a more frequent visitor to have participated in it. Just a couple of opinions on the lower end of the 40....
I was happy to see Rogie Vachon recognized. I think Cujo may be a bit high but not by a lot. And finally, maybe I missed it but I looked at the top 60 and couldn't find Gerry Cheevers. I always felt he was overrated but I thought he'd be good enough for top 60. (But like I said, maybe I was staring right at it and missed it).

Anyways, good work by all that participated.

Cheevers finished 5th in the last round of voting, and we were adding 4 per round. So you could consider him an unofficial 41st: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1275915

I looked up this thread to ask a question related to Brodeur's puckhandling and it turns out there are 5 pages of recent posts. So here goes:

Did Brodeur's extremely high quality puckhandling and shot prevention mentioned above factor into the voting discussions? I followed it at the time but it would be quite the undertaking to dig through them again.

I am not coming in here to challenge the integrity of the rankings but I can see the validity of the notion that Brodeur may be a bit underrated on HoH if he is measured primarily by stats/dominance during era/peak during era/etc. metrics used in the voting discussions.

It was mentioned. It may or may not have been part of the reason why Brodeur almost beat Sawchuk, something that would have been unheard of on this board a few years ago.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Cheevers finished 5th in the last round of voting, and we were adding 4 per round. So you could consider him an unofficial 41st: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1275915

He was eligible for vote for a long time. We call that getting Alec Connelled.

 

[seekritdude]

You have your opinions, I have mine. No problem.

And this is exactly why stats monkeys are tough to have arguments with. SV% comes bounding in.

Jon Casey battling his way through the playoffs with the NoStars a couple of years later put on a better goaltending display than Hrudey did in all of his years with the Islanders and Kings. That's why I'd choose him - that said, it's not like Arturs Irbe should be in the top 60..

I'll agree with the 80-90 placement.

I can almost agree with McLean, but Moog, I think, was a very good goaltender.

Btw - I really hope 'brodeurisafraud' weblog guy decides to revisit his numbers this year, based upon the fact that there is likely to be a 50-50 split in starts between Schneider and Brodeur - and that Schneider has always had a higher save percentage.

I'm not saying that because I think behind the same defense Marty will post a better save % than Cory, but I want to see the Shots Against differential.

I would say that Brodeur's puck handling saves him at least 5 shots per game - and in that a game against the Rangers last week, Cory would have faced 45 shots instead of the 35 that Marty faced.

If Marty's puck handling caused him to face just one less shot per game, the holy stat of lifetime SV% which is held up as a knock against him would go up to .916.

If he faced 5 less per game, his lifetime SV% would be .927.

And that's not like having a defense that blocks shots for you - it's the goaltender making the difference.

My point is that someone like Hextall might be criminally undervalued based on his SV% alone.

why do I feel like when ever anyone talks about irbe they use him in a negative manner like he sucked or something.. Do people forget he played for literally some some of the worst teams in the history of the game. 0_o

 

[Doctor No]

why do I feel like when ever anyone talks about irbe they use him in a negative manner like he sucked or something.. Do people forget he played for literally some some of the worst teams in the history of the game. 0_o

Irbe's always been one of my favorites, although you do seem to be overstating the length of time that Irbe's Sharks teams were God-awful.

http://www.hockeygoalies.org/bio/irbe.html

One thing I noted with Irbe is that his game-to-game consistency definitely improved as he aged. With the Sharks and Canucks, he was consistently less consistant (now there's a tongue twister) than the average NHL goaltender. With Carolina, he was consistently more consistent (using the "VAR" statistic in the link above).

How much of that is a function of the teams involved, I haven't studied.

Overall, just looking at save percentage, Irbe equates to a slightly below-average goaltender over his career (but a few hundred goals better than replacement level due to his longevity). His actual performance was probably better than that, since I can't imagine those Sharks teams were sound defensively. Having said that, if you look at the Sharks' goaltenders in those early years:

http://www.hockeygoalies.org/bio/nhl/sanjose.html

Irbe looks to have been deliberately sheltered by the coaching staff in San Jose.

In 1991-92, it looks like no goaltender really got favorable treatment (probably a function of the entire team being a mess).

In 1992-93, Brian Hayward played only 18 games, but his average opponent was 0.47 goals better than average. Both Irbe (-0.10) and Jeff Hackett (-0.11) played a below average opponent (on average). This is consistent with a team protecting younger goaltenders. Here's where it starts to get strange...

In 1993-94, Jimmy Waite faced above-average (0.11) competition, with Irbe facing below-average (-0.08). This is particularly odd since Irbe played the vast majority of the games.

In 1994-95, Wade Flaherty faced above-average (0.30) competition, with Irbe facing below average (-0.16).

In 1995-96, Irbe's strength of competition (0.04) was sandwiched between Chris Terreri (-0.13) and Flaherty (0.18).

It's very peculiar in my mind. Some of this is explained by backups typically playing tougher competition than starters (since backups are more likely to relieve starters against tough opponents), but the gap is wider than that.

 

[thom]

Why is Rogy Vachon not in Hall of Fame.I believe he should have been 20 yrs ago.His stats are good his gaa is 2.99.In 1976 had a 1.33 gaa in Canada Cup.I know his playoff record is not great but he does have a ring.With La Kings was in play offs but could not do much.

 

[Doctor No]

Why is Rogy Vachon not in Hall of Fame.I believe he should have been 20 yrs ago.His stats are good his gaa is 2.99.In 1976 had a 1.33 gaa in Canada Cup.I know his playoff record is not great but he does have a ring.With La Kings was in play offs but could not do much.

Man, Rogie struggled when he left Los Angeles. His last four years were essentially at replacement level (but for big bucks):

http://www.hockeygoalies.org/bio/vachon.html

I'd put him in, though. I think that goaltenders are underrepresented in the HHOF in general.

 

[thom]

I did forget his last 4 seasons but glad you think he deserves to be in hall.Sometimes people look at your last few seasons and forget how good you were.

 

[Killion]

Why is Rogy Vachon not in Hall of Fame.I believe he should have been 20 yrs ago.His stats are good his gaa is 2.99.In 1976 had a 1.33 gaa in Canada Cup.I know his playoff record is not great but he does have a ring.With La Kings was in play offs but could not do much.

Yes I agree, he should be in the HHOF. Remember him well in the Habs losing effort to Toronto in 1967, then going on to win a Vezina with Worsley, 2 Stanley Cups in Montreal in 68 & 69. Was a terrific netminder who unfortunately combined with Montreals' exit from the Playoff's in 1970 and Drydens' arrival in 1971 (and he wasnt about to play Back-Up so he demanded a trade) made him expendable. Was really quite brilliant in LA, team success fleeting, and if you were based in the Northeast missed much of his career after his departure to California. One of my All Time Favorites.

 

[Ofuzz]

If there had been 24 hour sports channels back then, Rogie would be in. By playing on the west coast the Kings boxscore wouldn't even be in the eastern papers until 2 days later so the eastern media basically didn't realize how good he was playing at times. Out of place out of mind.
It wasn't until Hockey Night in Canada's "Showdown" and then the '76 Canada Cup that eastern fans finally got a good look at him at that stage of his career.

One question if anyone knows, how cme when the Habs hold any of their reunions or such Rogie is never included? His choice or theirs?

 

[Killion]

One question if anyone knows, how cme when the Habs hold any of their reunions or such Rogie is never included? His choice or theirs?

I guess because he was so closely associated with LA after leaving Montreal, sinking roots in the community, having his number retired by the team then going on to work in the organization for many years thereafter. You think "Rogie Vachon" you think Los Angeles. He didnt move back to Quebec, wound down his career with Detroit & Boston, returning to LA thereafter. I dont follow the goings on of the Habs & their Alumni activities but as he's basically a King for life, not hard to understand. Not sure, rather moot point I suppose.

 

[JFA87-66-99]

I'm late getting to this party but was wondering why Tom Paton didn't get more consideration. I see he made the aggregate list, and I know he's old-school but still think he deserves to be possible a top 40 goalie of all-time especially if all era's are represented. Did you guys talk about him at all or do any research on him? If so I'd be curious to read this?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I'm late getting to this party but was wondering why Tom Paton didn't get more consideration. I see he made the aggregate list, and I know he's old-school but still think he deserves to be possible a top 40 goalie of all-time especially if all era's are represented. Did you guys talk about him at all or do any research on him? If so I'd be curious to read this?

I know a couple of people considered him, but not enough for him to come up for vote. My take: Hockey wasn't yet a competitive enough sport when Paton played for him to be considered.

29 years old during the first Montreal Winter Carnival of 1883, generally considered the first competitive ice hockey tournament ever, so we know he didn't grow up playing competitive hockey, since it didn't exist yet. 39 years old when the Stanley Cup was first awarded in 1893. Retired 12 years before Percy LeSueur even began his professional career, and the quality of hockey and the talent pool improved dramatically over those 12 years. Can you even name a forward who was shooting on Tom Paton? I can recognize some of the names as old hockey players if I see them, but can't name one off the top of my head.

Basically, a big fish in an extremely small pond, in my opinion.

Not to mention that the "goals" Paton defended were composed of two upright bars with no crossbar and it was up to referee's discretion whether the puck (was it even a puck yet or was it still a ball?) was too high to count as a goal. Nets featuring crossbars were invented in 1899, 6 years after Paton retired: http://www.hockeyshome.ns.ca/time.htm

 

[VanIslander]

I'm late getting to this party but was wondering why Tom Paton didn't get more consideration. I see he made the aggregate list, and I know he's old-school but still think he deserves to be possible a top 40 goalie of all-time especially if all era's are represented. Did you guys talk about him at all or do any research on him? If so I'd be curious to read this?

Some bio info:

Tom Paton, the first great goaltender in hockey history, winning the first ever Stanley Cup in 1893, nine years after he had won hockey's first award, medals in 1885 when he backstopped the winning team in the Montreal Winter Carnival, posting three shutouts in four games, including one in the final. He again won the carnival championship two years later, then the championship of the Amateur Hockey Association of Canada (AHAC) in 1888, 1889, 1890, 1891, 1892 and 1893. While it was common for hockey players to retire early - Mike Grant at age 28 and Graham Drinkwater at 24 as two examples of many - Paton actually began goaltending at age 30 and had a successful nine-year career (six years with the lowest goals against average in all of organized hockey), ending with a 7-1 record and the Stanley Cup in 1893. Ultimate Hockey says Paton deserved the Vezina in 1888, 1889, 1890, 1891 and 1893 (they didn't cover pre-1887) and that he deserved the Hart in 1889 as the best player in all of hockey.

At the start the puck was carried down to the Montreal end of the ice and shot after shot was made at the goal, but Paton stopped them with his hands, stick or feet. He seemed to be in every part of the goals at once, and every time the puck was shot in it was as speedily returned, and finally Cameron scooped it up to the other end of the rink.

Paton was a wizard, Allan Cameron says, at stopping shots.

Thomas Laird Paton (1854 – February 10, 1909),.. played the position of Goaltender for the Montreal HC (Montreal AAA) and was a member of the first Stanley Cup Winning Team in 1893 - Tom was a pioneer goaltender in organized Hockey.. a founding member of the Montreal Amateur Athletic Association Hockey team (Montreal HC).. regarded in many history texts as being undefeated in 1890 and 1891..

“He was a stellar goalkeeper, putting together solid efforts from 1887 through the 1894 season. The short time he did spend playing for the AAA was well spent indeed. He was, simply put, a gem.

In the 1889 final match, the AAA bashed the Montreal Victorias 6-1, thanks in large part to his work between the pipes. According to records, he singlehandedly kept the AAA in the game long enough to ensure the victory.”

“After losing its first match to Ottawa, the AAA swept its remaining seven games to finish ahead of the Amateur Hockey Association of Canada pack. He was rock-solid between the pipes, or "flags," leading all net-men with a 2.25 goals-against average”

“The 1888 schedule culminated in an exciting one-game playoff between the Montreal AAA and Montreal Victorias. The former took the title, winning 2-1 on the strength of some fine goaltending by him.”

... Paton was on the alerts and sent it down only to be returned to him to defend his charge which he did well.. Paton was keeping a sharp lookout it was sent up again where another spell of open play occurred...

Hockey's first recorded award, medals to the champion goaltender of the 1885 Montreal Winter Carnival:

The first Stanley Cup championship ring of Tom Paton's from 1893:

 

[JFA87-66-99]

I know a couple of people considered him, but not enough for him to come up for vote. My take: Hockey wasn't yet a competitive enough sport when Paton played for him to be considered.

29 years old during the first Montreal Winter Carnival of 1883, generally considered the first competitive ice hockey tournament ever, so we know he didn't grow up playing competitive hockey, since it didn't exist yet. 39 years old when the Stanley Cup was first awarded in 1893. Retired 12 years before Percy LeSueur even began his professional career, and the quality of hockey and the talent pool improved dramatically over those 12 years. Can you even name a forward who was shooting on Tom Paton? I can recognize some of the names as old hockey players if I see them, but can't name one off the top of my head.

Basically, a big fish in an extremely small pond, in my opinion.

Not to mention that the "goals" Paton defended were composed of two upright bars with no crossbar and it was up to referee's discretion whether the puck (was it even a puck yet or was it still a ball?) was too high to count as a goal. IIRC, nets featuring crossbars were invented sometime between Paton's retirement and the beginning of first generation of Hall of Fame goaltenders.

Thanks for your response, I'm aware of all that you stated and this is what i figured. I'm just a big fan of hockey in the 1890's. You guys did a great job on the list though

 

[seekritdude]

Irbe's always been one of my favorites, although you do seem to be overstating the length of time that Irbe's Sharks teams were God-awful.

http://www.hockeygoalies.org/bio/irbe.html

One thing I noted with Irbe is that his game-to-game consistency definitely improved as he aged. With the Sharks and Canucks, he was consistently less consistant (now there's a tongue twister) than the average NHL goaltender. With Carolina, he was consistently more consistent (using the "VAR" statistic in the link above).

How much of that is a function of the teams involved, I haven't studied.

Overall, just looking at save percentage, Irbe equates to a slightly below-average goaltender over his career (but a few hundred goals better than replacement level due to his longevity). His actual performance was probably better than that, since I can't imagine those Sharks teams were sound defensively. Having said that, if you look at the Sharks' goaltenders in those early years:

http://www.hockeygoalies.org/bio/nhl/sanjose.html

Irbe looks to have been deliberately sheltered by the coaching staff in San Jose.

In 1991-92, it looks like no goaltender really got favorable treatment (probably a function of the entire team being a mess).

In 1992-93, Brian Hayward played only 18 games, but his average opponent was 0.47 goals better than average. Both Irbe (-0.10) and Jeff Hackett (-0.11) played a below average opponent (on average). This is consistent with a team protecting younger goaltenders. Here's where it starts to get strange...

In 1993-94, Jimmy Waite faced above-average (0.11) competition, with Irbe facing below-average (-0.08). This is particularly odd since Irbe played the vast majority of the games.

In 1994-95, Wade Flaherty faced above-average (0.30) competition, with Irbe facing below average (-0.16).

In 1995-96, Irbe's strength of competition (0.04) was sandwiched between Chris Terreri (-0.13) and Flaherty (0.18).

It's very peculiar in my mind. Some of this is explained by backups typically playing tougher competition than starters (since backups are more likely to relieve starters against tough opponents), but the gap is wider than that.

Since you mentioned the canucks irbe was actually the best goalie for them. If they had played irbe possibly could have made the playoffs, he actually played pretty well for them considering what everyone else did on the team. But keanen didnt want to play him he said straight out that I recall even though he was the only one winning games.

Its been so long since ive been in a hockey mind set im iffy on a lot of stats but... I belive in 92-93 irbe actually had the best stats in the league at the first third of the season but then got injured and it was all down hill from there.

And for sharks im specifically speaking of the first 2 years, the 4th year(4th year ive gone into more detail in other posts there was a lot of turmoil that year and he was dealing with injuries), and the 5th. Those first 2 years and the 5th specifically were terrible teams. Some of those carolina teams were that great either, nor were the canucks. Irbe never really got a chance to play for a lot of great teams like other goalies. Some of those san jose teams that I recall were average 38 shots against per 60 mins those first couple years just awful.

I also think people forget that imo irbe was the best goalie in the league in 98-99 I believe it was. And if not for those last 2 weeks of the season where the whole team stunk it up leading to the playoffs he had the best stats that year. Which is also funny because that I recall he had no vesina votes that year, yea in other years like 94-95 he actually had a few. When he was injured an their whole team was inconsistent and a cluster**** at best.

 

[Copmuter*]

If Hasek had been born in North America, I think he wins this poll rather easily

 

[Michael Farkas]

If Hasek had been born in North America, I think he wins this poll rather easily

But he also wouldn't have played like he did, right?

Not exactly the point, I know, but if ifs and buts were candy and nuts...how's the rest of that go...?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

But he also wouldn't have played like he did, right?

Not exactly the point, I know, but if ifs and buts were candy and nuts...how's the rest of that go...?

Or, he did play like that and never got a look because of it.

Or, he does get a chance playing like that and has a longer NHL career at the front.

Or ............yeah, ifs and buts.

 

[Killion]

If Hasek had been born in North America, I think he wins this poll rather easily

... ya, a little unfair to be tarring the Membership here with North American biases particularly as they relate to quite specifically the position of goaltending & goaltenders. Fortunately we did get to see a lot of Hasek in steady North American & NHL regular season & playoff game play so making comparisons to not only his contemporaries like Roy & Brodeur but so too greats of the past like Plante & Durnan fairly easily accomplished. With a guy like Tretiak or Holecek all we have to go on are their International resume's against each other & in Internationals against NHL/WHA players. Tournament hockey. Summit, Canada Cups, Olympic & Exhibition. We can project/speculate but we dont have hard facts, performance over 76 or 82 game seasons followed by Playoffs to base that on so rating them against NHL'rs becomes highly problematical. Absolutely nothing to do with bias let alone xenophobia of anykind, everything to do with actual hard evidence as neither of them nor others and at any position were able to immigrate, live & play in the US or Canada. Hardly their faults and in fact if anything very often here at hf the benefit of the doubt awarded, many ranked above North Americans who had stellar & lengthy careers in the NHL, HHOF members...

 

[Brick City]

There was a NBCSN half hour special about the Top 10 goalies in NHL history on my DVR for awhile and finally got around to watching it. After searching and not seeing any mention of it on HoH, figured I would post their rankings:

1. Dominik Hasek
2. Jacques Plante
3. Patrick Roy
4. Terry Sawchuck
5. Martin Brodeur
6. Glenn Hall
7. Ken Dryden
8. Eddie Belfour
9. Bernie Parent
10. Grant Fuhr

Honorable Mentions

Vladislav Tretiak
Tony Esposito
Ron Hextall


NBCSN's top 7 matches the HoH top 7 (the #1-3 and #4-6 sets are also the same goalies but in different order with #7 being Dryden in both). Their #8-9 are in the HoH mid-teens and #10 Fuhr is the only one on the list further afield with a #25 ranking by HoH. The first two honorable mentions are also ranked highly by HoH; Hextall on the other hand did not make this board's list at all.

I have to say, for a TV special that likely did not have the same level of analysis done by this board (although their interviews were diverse with a variety of coaches, commentators/writers and veterans), their top 9 goalies are fairly consistent with HoH's rankings. With the exception of Tretiak, all of the goalies that NBCSN bypassed on their way to making HOH's 15th and 17th ranked goalies the 8th and 9th on their list respectively had retired by 1951.

If they indeed did not consider goalies that retired by 1951 (and most of the ones ranked highly by HoH were done at least a decade earlier), their Top 10 plus honorable mentions is very consistent with the HoH rankings with the notable exceptions of Fuhr and Hextall. So good work all around by this board and our hockey friendly media partner.

 

[Doctor No]

Hextall is...an interesting choice.

This coming from a goaltender who still wears #27 in his games today.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Yes it really is an interesting phenomena. That since the pretty much full on conversion to the Butterfly the way the positions Coached & now played, roaming & playing the puck, being aggressive in skating out of your crease & breaking up plays before they even get a chance to get started (inhibited further with the introduction of the Trapezoid) all but a lost art. Actually discouraged. Pity. Several colors taken off the palette, no longer available, applied to the canvas. Skating & stickhandling skills amongst the past 2 generations of goaltenders abysmal. Only a few of them (Mike Smith in Phoenix for eg) capable & practiced at it.

Steve Mason is also a good stickhandler; conversely, Bryzgalov is horrendous. It was amazing to see how much it helped take pressure of the D when Mason was in instead of Bryz.

Even now, Timonen will routinely pass back to Mason, treating him as a 6th man if he's pressured and thinks he might turn it over in a bad situation, letting Mason pass elsewhere or cover as needed. He tried it once with Bryz. Bryz shot it off Clarkson into his own net. Some night-and-day stuff.