Professor What
Registered User
According to hockey-reference, Durnan was only the captain for the 1947-48 season, and the Leafs won the Cup that year. So Durnan didn't do it.
HOH Top 60 Goaltenders of All Time (2024 Edition) - Preliminary Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Dr John Carlson
- Start date
jigglysquishy
Registered User
I think Sawchuk is the most vulnerable of the 3 O6 goalies. For all the high praise in the 80s and 90s I can't find any in the 55-65 timeframe. You see praise during the Cup run, then a whole lot of so so praise until way after his retirement.
I don't know when his untouchable reputation starts, but I can't find anything pre 1985.
I don't know when his untouchable reputation starts, but I can't find anything pre 1985.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
Short, fun video of LA vs California from '73. Good exhibition of:
a) Vachon vs Meloche and the obvious differences between them.
b) A game with no white jersey
c) music fit for some films that require ID to rent or purchase
d) what a hot dump the quality of the game looks like, I know these are original expansion clubs, but the third and fourth waves of expansion are really rough sometimes. Like, the Canadiens vs Blues Cups aren't bad. Clearly Montreal is better, but it's not a stealth bomber versus some archers and pikemen. This game is just both teams........bad. Boo.
Is @SealsFan still around? It'd be cool to hear what he thinks of Meloche and, if it springs to mind, Meloche vs. the rest of the circuit. Because, I got news friends...I'm not sure Meloche isn't better than Vachon. Vachon is more mobile and fun. But....hmmm...
a) Vachon vs Meloche and the obvious differences between them.
b) A game with no white jersey
c) music fit for some films that require ID to rent or purchase
d) what a hot dump the quality of the game looks like, I know these are original expansion clubs, but the third and fourth waves of expansion are really rough sometimes. Like, the Canadiens vs Blues Cups aren't bad. Clearly Montreal is better, but it's not a stealth bomber versus some archers and pikemen. This game is just both teams........bad. Boo.
Is @SealsFan still around? It'd be cool to hear what he thinks of Meloche and, if it springs to mind, Meloche vs. the rest of the circuit. Because, I got news friends...I'm not sure Meloche isn't better than Vachon. Vachon is more mobile and fun. But....hmmm...
Yes, that's correct! As far as I'm aware, Gardiner is the only goalie to captain a Stanley Cup winning team.
Agreed he's the most vulnerable of the 3 O6 goalies. But to anyone that actually physically saw Sawchuk play from 1950 to 1955, he's the GOAT, which carries some weight.
Obviously he didn't sustain that peak throughout his career, but his 1967 cup run was nothing short of heroic, in addition to being the first goalie to reach 100 shutouts.
I agree ranking Irbe or Králík (and any other goalie) depends on what a voter is looking for in a goalie. I definitely prefer goalies with a staying power, longevity, with consistent performances through multiple eras.. goalies who maintain their level in high leverage games..
So I should clarify why I even included Králík on my list. Although his case rests on 3 great seasons, I don't want to create a picture where he was a bush league goalie through all of his other years.
There are some positive indications of his talent from late 60s till mid 70s but Králík truly became relevant in 1977. He led the league in SV% (over Holeček, Dzurilla, Crha..) and received decent Golden Stick support in spite of not playing anything international yet.
Králík was Holeček's backup in the National team during the 1978 season but at the last minute before the Championship, coaches went back to Jiří Crha whom they took as a 2nd goalie. (Crha would later emigrate and play 2 seasons for Toronto).
In 1979, Králík's recorded the single-season best SV% in the Czechoslovak league. His 0.9379 % exceeded the best individual seasons' SV% of Holeček, Dzurilla and other 60s-70s goalies as well as Hašek's later in the 80s. No other Czechoslovak goalie in the league brought forth the SV% as high as '79 Králík..
Which brings me to my point. How to rate this season? I'm afraid a lot of people would look at Králík's premiere at the '79 WHC and scratch that season off as "zero value". You correctly point out Králík didn't play well at the Championship (and played even worse a year later at Lake Placid) but he also displayed one of the best goaltending on a domestic level comparable to Holeček or Hašek's top performances.
Králík's play at the league level was good enough to secure him 4th place in the Golden Stick voting for both 1979 and 1980 in spite of disappointing or just outright terrible play at the Championship and Olympics.
Just to avoid misunderstanding, I'm not saying you, or anybody else in this thread, is stating this binary view I've just described. I only used your response to add more nuance to Králík's career.
And to defend me ranking Králík above Irbe despite the latter being an NHL calibre goalie for longer._______________________
I'm glad you're bringing Irbe's international play. Irbe had very good 1990 WHC for Soviets and always played great for Latvia for a decade. I'm all for counting international tournaments post-1990. Some goalies made a great name for themselves thanks to multiple international achievements. Quality of those tournaments varied but the mental pressure put on goalies by the local fans was large. Off the top of my head goalies who performed well on this level were Pekka Rinne, Tommy Salo, Tomas Vokoun, Henrik Lundqvist, Niklas Backstrom, Vasilevskiy.. From North America, Price, Luongo, Brodeur, Ranford had a few great tournaments.. I'm sure I forgot some more..
Last edited:
Mrb1p
PRICERSTOPDAPUCK
Dr John Carlson
Registered User
Maybe, or maybe not. You have the power to sway opinion by submitting a list of 80, or making a case for him when he's up for voting!
MadArcand
Whaletarded
Try to watch him as a Whaler or Coyote, he was at his best there and much more consistent compared to his Devils years. Seems to have changed his style a lot between those two stops as well, which is something you might find interesting.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
Indeed I do. I noted such here: HOH Top 60 Goaltenders of All Time (2024 Edition) - Preliminary Discussion Thread
jigglysquishy
Registered User
Well he's a lock guarantee for top 59 so we won't have to worry about that.
He'll end up top 30, maybe even top 20. At least one person will have him top 10.
Hopefully 2
I've been working on a list - haven't had a chance to finish yet, been very busy past few weeks. I was hoping to have more time to work on this than I have.
The Macho King
Back* to Back** World Champion
- Jun 22, 2011
- 49,079
- 30,013
I'm going to try and get a list together but I just started a new job so.... yeah.
VanIslander
20 years of All-Time Drafts on HfBoards
Rinne > Rask in terms of contemporary Finn goalies, if you factor in/out team accomplishments and individual greatness.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
That's a tough one, I don't think that's right. What Rask lacks in skating, he more than makes up for in his tracking and his incredible pad speed. Despite that pad speed, he had the thoughtfulness to do right by his heel extensions to mute rebounds pretty well - certainly much better than Rinne in that regard...Rinne is a rebound machine.
I think Rask is technically better in a lot of ways. Rinne can move laterally better, no question. Rinne's got the glove (not that I found Rask's to be bad by any stretch). They were both in choice situations for most of their respective careers, so I don't really need to mentally adjust for that.
Technically, I'd say that Rask is probably a good 1.5 or 2 tiers above Rinne. If you really, really value skating, maybe it's just 1 tier. That's fair, but you have to apply that down the line too...so that would hurt guys like Hasek, Thomas, Worsley, etc.
overpass
Registered User
It should certainly count. So that's 2 selections for Moran.
It's fair to say that most of the all-time teams were from voters who hadn't seen the real old-timers. Really, more analysis is needed for cross-era conclusions from these all-time teams. Many of the observers could not or did not consider all eras for one reason or another.
VanIslander
20 years of All-Time Drafts on HfBoards
Rask has benefited a lot from being in Boston;
Rinne has been a hero more on a lesser Nashville.
Rinne has been a hero more on a lesser Nashville.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
That's surface-level at best in my opinion. Rask does benefit a lot from being in Boston, but again, it's really important to separate who is being propped up by a situation or set of situations vs who is augmenting a situation for the better. That's where proper talent evaluation comes in to save the day.
Rinne had the benefit of a wonderful defense, a steady, long-term defensive coach in Barry Trotz, one of the great goalie coaches in history with Mitch Korn - where goaltending success follows, almost no matter what.
I don't think Nashville gets quite enough credit for being a goalie haven. It's pretty wild how consistently similar everyone there has been (if they've started more than 25 games)...
The difference in talent between some of these goalies (not to mention scoring environments) is vast (Lankinen to Saros; Lindback to Rinne, Hutton to Vokoun, etc.) but everyone is surprisingly tight there. Those numbers don't really mean a ton, of course...but it's mildly interesting. Regardless, Nashville is sort of underrated in terms of its on-ice product for most of its history.
MXD
Partying Hard
- Oct 27, 2005
- 51,743
- 17,655
That's surface-level at best in my opinion. Rask does benefit a lot from being in Boston, but again, it's really important to separate who is being propped up by a situation or set of situations vs who is augmenting a situation for the better. That's where proper talent evaluation comes in to save the day.
Rinne had the benefit of a wonderful defense, a steady, long-term defensive coach in Barry Trotz, one of the great goalie coaches in history with Mitch Korn - where goaltending success follows, almost no matter what.
I don't think Nashville gets quite enough credit for being a goalie haven. It's pretty wild how consistently similar everyone there has been (if they've started more than 25 games)...
The difference in talent between some of these goalies (not to mention scoring environments) is vast (Lankinen to Saros; Lindback to Rinne, Hutton to Vokoun, etc.) but everyone is surprisingly tight there. Those numbers don't really mean a ton, of course...but it's mildly interesting. Regardless, Nashville is sort of underrated in terms of its on-ice product for most of its history.
There's a Tim Thomas-sized elephant in that room.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
Precisely. That's an instance of a very bad goalie being propped up by a situation. It was graphically shown too with Roman Cechmanek - which, collectively, we still don't have an answer for. How many 2x save pct. leaders are missing from your list?
Probably two, right? Brian Elliott under Hitchcock and Rollie Melanson under Al Arbour.
It's a broken record at this point, but it's a very interesting situation that's unfolding...where it seems that on-ice talent is being at least partially rejected because it's [insert boogeyman words here], and in it's place is actually, in part, narrative. Again, we go back to the Cechmanek vs Thomas. Folks trip all over themselves to try to remake the story of Tim Thomas (it was the GMs faults, he was good in the EZAC, he was good in the Iraq League in 1998 or whatever) but with Cechmanek, who does all the same stuff, just without the heroic scoring feat one time, it's completely and universally dismissed.
It's like the folks that go, "remember that one time Ari Ahonen had a better save pct. in the 12 minutes that he played over Martin Brodeur? SYSTEM!" It just fails to account for...damn near everything that the game has to offer. And in place, is much more subjective (vs. talent evaluation) narrative.
I like a good story as much as the next guy, but the narrative route and the canonized route aren't an intimidating pair to me...it's a literal paper tiger haha
overpass
Registered User
There was some discussion early about how old-time goalies were rarely criticized for poor performance in the newspapers. I thought I would share an example where a newspaper columnist teed off on a goalie.
Paul Rochon's column in the April 17, 1949 La Patrie took direct aim at Bill Durnan. It was written in French, here's a rough translation.
Take it as you will. It's hard to tell just how far his tongue is in his cheek, but he does bring some numbers to the table. The constant harping on Durnan's "placid" demeanor reads like francophone anti-Anglo bias, much like the early criticism for Doug Harvey's cool manner.
The great Bill
by Paul Rochon
Tribute to the great Bill "le placide" Durnan! Thanks to his remarkable performance in the Canadiens' nets, we have been spared a new torture. We do not have to bet on the Canadiens' chances in a playoff series against Toronto. We, the Canadiens' supporters, have just saved our shirts. We would have bet, and we would have lost. Let us sing the praises of Bill "le placide" Durnan, who skillfully let those big simpletons from Detroit score, and who thus left them with the task of shooting the rubber at Turk Broda, of the Toronto club. Thank you, O great Bill, O extraordinarily placid goalie, O prodigious and prestigious Durnan!
Bill "le placide" Durnan is, in fact, of all the past, present, and future goalies of the Canadiens, the one whose ability to let the opponent score has been the most astonishing, but the least recognized. While some goaltenders had heaps and heaps of shots at their disposal to manufacture goals for the opposing club, Bill "le placide" had the very great disadvantage of almost always having fewer shots than his opponents on his nets, but he still managed to get more goals than anyone else.
The remarkable and always very placid Durnan always had a team working against him and doing everything in its power to give him fewer shots than the opposing goalie. The forwards worked hard to carry the puck into enemy territory and leave it there as long as possible, while the defenses did their best to prevent the puck from entering the Canadiens' territory. Dick "the fox" Irvin tried to remedy the situation with a few lucky changes, providing a few good scorers to the opposing teams so that they could bombard Bill "le placide" Durnan more frequently, but it didn't change much. Poor Durnan has even fewer shots of his own than the opposing goalies.
For example, in the seven games of the comforting Detroit-Canadiens semi-final, Bill "the neglected" Durnan had, in all, only 151 shots on his net. While Harry "can't hold up" Lumley, more favored, was served a total of 197 shots by the Canadiens. Despite everything, Bill placidly allowed a total of 17 goals to score, while Lumley ("He won't hold up! prophesied the sports writers) was able to allow only 14 goals to score, in all.
The sports writers were right to say that Durnan was too strong for Lumley. From the first game, moreover, Bill "le placide" Durnan displayed his superiority with remarkable composure. While Lumley, having 41 shots against him, managed to let only one score, Durnan, with only 25 shots fired at him by the Detroit players, managed to let the puck slip behind him twice. Durnan's glory is so authentic that it shines through the accumulated statistics of the Detroit-Canadiens series. Thus, in the small table below, which you will not see anywhere else but in this column, you can, at a glance, judge the astonishing and diabolical skill of Bill, rightly nicknamed "le placide" Durnan.
This modest table shows, in the first column, the date of the game, in the second column, the shots directed against Lumley (goals recorded in parentheses), and the third colum, the shots that Bill "the great neglected" Durnan received (with, again, goals against in parentheses).
Some of Bill "the slanderer" Durnan's opponents maintain that his ability to score so many goals is not entirely due to his skill. They claim that the players crowded in front of the net (even if they are 30 feet away) frequently block the view of the great Bill, and that many shots turn into goals without Bill "the doorman" opening the door of the goal. The curious thing is that never (or at most once a season) does this happen to the other goalies in the league. It is only poor Bill who gets the pucks that he hasn't seen, that have deflected off a skate, a stick, or that hit him in the back and rebounded into the net.
Enough slander! Bill "the unequalled" Durnan is unique, and it's why he will probably die of old age in the Canadiens' nets. And long live Dick Irvin!
Paul Rochon's column in the April 17, 1949 La Patrie took direct aim at Bill Durnan. It was written in French, here's a rough translation.
Take it as you will. It's hard to tell just how far his tongue is in his cheek, but he does bring some numbers to the table. The constant harping on Durnan's "placid" demeanor reads like francophone anti-Anglo bias, much like the early criticism for Doug Harvey's cool manner.
The great Bill
by Paul Rochon
Tribute to the great Bill "le placide" Durnan! Thanks to his remarkable performance in the Canadiens' nets, we have been spared a new torture. We do not have to bet on the Canadiens' chances in a playoff series against Toronto. We, the Canadiens' supporters, have just saved our shirts. We would have bet, and we would have lost. Let us sing the praises of Bill "le placide" Durnan, who skillfully let those big simpletons from Detroit score, and who thus left them with the task of shooting the rubber at Turk Broda, of the Toronto club. Thank you, O great Bill, O extraordinarily placid goalie, O prodigious and prestigious Durnan!
Bill "le placide" Durnan is, in fact, of all the past, present, and future goalies of the Canadiens, the one whose ability to let the opponent score has been the most astonishing, but the least recognized. While some goaltenders had heaps and heaps of shots at their disposal to manufacture goals for the opposing club, Bill "le placide" had the very great disadvantage of almost always having fewer shots than his opponents on his nets, but he still managed to get more goals than anyone else.
The remarkable and always very placid Durnan always had a team working against him and doing everything in its power to give him fewer shots than the opposing goalie. The forwards worked hard to carry the puck into enemy territory and leave it there as long as possible, while the defenses did their best to prevent the puck from entering the Canadiens' territory. Dick "the fox" Irvin tried to remedy the situation with a few lucky changes, providing a few good scorers to the opposing teams so that they could bombard Bill "le placide" Durnan more frequently, but it didn't change much. Poor Durnan has even fewer shots of his own than the opposing goalies.
For example, in the seven games of the comforting Detroit-Canadiens semi-final, Bill "the neglected" Durnan had, in all, only 151 shots on his net. While Harry "can't hold up" Lumley, more favored, was served a total of 197 shots by the Canadiens. Despite everything, Bill placidly allowed a total of 17 goals to score, while Lumley ("He won't hold up! prophesied the sports writers) was able to allow only 14 goals to score, in all.
The sports writers were right to say that Durnan was too strong for Lumley. From the first game, moreover, Bill "le placide" Durnan displayed his superiority with remarkable composure. While Lumley, having 41 shots against him, managed to let only one score, Durnan, with only 25 shots fired at him by the Detroit players, managed to let the puck slip behind him twice. Durnan's glory is so authentic that it shines through the accumulated statistics of the Detroit-Canadiens series. Thus, in the small table below, which you will not see anywhere else but in this column, you can, at a glance, judge the astonishing and diabolical skill of Bill, rightly nicknamed "le placide" Durnan.
This modest table shows, in the first column, the date of the game, in the second column, the shots directed against Lumley (goals recorded in parentheses), and the third colum, the shots that Bill "the great neglected" Durnan received (with, again, goals against in parentheses).
| Date | Lumley | Durnan |
| 1949-03-22 | 41 (1) | 28 (2) |
| 1949-03-24 | 25 (4) | 21 (3) |
| 1949-03-26 | 26 (3) | 22 (2) |
| 1949-03-29 | 27 (1) | 24 (3) |
| 1949-03-31 | 19 (1) | 17 (3) |
| 1949-04-02 | 32 (3) | 20 (1) |
| 1949-04-05 | 27 (1) | 19 (3) |
Some of Bill "the slanderer" Durnan's opponents maintain that his ability to score so many goals is not entirely due to his skill. They claim that the players crowded in front of the net (even if they are 30 feet away) frequently block the view of the great Bill, and that many shots turn into goals without Bill "the doorman" opening the door of the goal. The curious thing is that never (or at most once a season) does this happen to the other goalies in the league. It is only poor Bill who gets the pucks that he hasn't seen, that have deflected off a skate, a stick, or that hit him in the back and rebounded into the net.
Enough slander! Bill "the unequalled" Durnan is unique, and it's why he will probably die of old age in the Canadiens' nets. And long live Dick Irvin!
MXD
Partying Hard
- Oct 27, 2005
- 51,743
- 17,655
This is a Tuukka Rask point.
There's a sample size difference between them, but Rask was worse than Thomas at stopping pucks as a Bruin.
overpass
Registered User
And, to go along with the table in the article above, I have compiled shots against from newspaper articles for some Broda, Brimsek, and Durnan playoff games. Some game recaps gave shot totals and others didn't.
Numbers in the table below are only for those playoff games where I could find shot totals.
Durnan pretty clearly faced fewer shots per game than the others. Of course this doesn't tell us anything about the shot quality they faced. I wouldn't be surprised if Broda's Leafs allowed lower quality shots, especially in the dynasty of the late 40s.
Numbers in the table below are only for those playoff games where I could find shot totals.
| Goalie | W | L | GAA | SV% | SA/60 | TOI | GA | SA | SV |
| Frank Brimsek | 6 | 14 | 2.89 | 0.904 | 30.3 | 1327 | 64 | 670 | 606 |
| Turk Broda | 16 | 12 | 2.24 | 0.918 | 27.4 | 1846 | 69 | 842 | 773 |
| Bill Durnan | 12 | 10 | 2.10 | 0.906 | 22.3 | 1431 | 50 | 532 | 482 |
| Harry Lumley | 4 | 6 | 2.41 | 0.905 | 25.3 | 648 | 26 | 273 | 247 |
| Johnny Mowers | 4 | 3 | 2.16 | 0.919 | 26.5 | 500 | 18 | 221 | 203 |
Durnan pretty clearly faced fewer shots per game than the others. Of course this doesn't tell us anything about the shot quality they faced. I wouldn't be surprised if Broda's Leafs allowed lower quality shots, especially in the dynasty of the late 40s.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
Ignoring the ice, this is not true either.
Thomas 2.48 GAA as a Bruin; Rask 2.28 GAA
That said, if we go about things this way, we're going to really need to puff up Alec Connell - we can start by getting his name consistently right in the paper (Alex vs Alec) haha
MXD
Partying Hard
- Oct 27, 2005
- 51,743
- 17,655
- Scoring levels.
- That would also hint at the fact that the Bruins team got even tighter as years went by.
