HOH Top 60 Goaltenders of All Time (2024 Edition) - Round 2, Vote 1

[Dennis Bonvie]

Why does it always seem like being in position and not having to make a great save is somehow not good goaltending?

Right.

He makes it look easy because of his great positioning.

Heard that a million times. I'm not buying it. Especially in this case.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Right.

He makes it look easy because of his great positioning.

Heard that a million times. I'm not buying it. Especially in this case.

So, very likely the smartest goalie with maybe the best anticipation of all time...was generally out of position? Or, at least, not great at positioning.

Let's go to the tape, I've cut it down so that it's only shot attempts, so no one can complain about having to watch games...



Let's break it down, where are the positioning issues...?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

So, very likely the smartest goalie with maybe the best anticipation of all time...was generally out of position? Or, at least, not great at positioning.

Let's go to the tape, I've cut it down so that it's only shot attempts, so no one can complain about having to watch games...



Let's break it down, where are the positioning issues...?

You misinterpreted my response. Or I wasn't clear.

Didn't say his positioning was bad. Just saying he didn't make a lot of great saves for the Devils because he didn't have to. It wasn't because he made it look easy with his positioning.

 

[Michael Farkas]

You misinterpreted my response. Or I wasn't clear.

Didn't say his positioning was bad. Just saying he didn't make a lot of great saves for the Devils because he didn't have to. It wasn't because he made it look easy with his positioning.

Ok, fair enough. But for his whole career - which spans multiple distinct eras - does he have a significantly greater "advantage" in terms of team tactics over everyone else?

And if so, how large is that advantage?

If Brodeur is a 10 in terms of tactical advantage...what is Plante? Dryden? Roy? Roughly...obviously, this is no exact science. That is, of course, assuming that Brodeur is at the top of this advantage. He shouldn't be, but it sounds like he is...

 

[Staniowski]

I flipped through the Game by Dryden to see if there was anything relevant.

"For me, the greatest goalies must always be Hall, Sawchuk, Plante, and Bower."

I know Dryden grew up in the Toronto area, but it's interesting that Bower is included in the former group.

LOL....

Dryden isn't saying he believes Hall, Sawchuk, Plante, and Bower are the greatest goalies. He's saying they are his four goaltending heroes, and he forever looks at them through the eyes of his childhood. And therefore he will always see them as the best.

He is being critical of his perspective, and similarly the perspectives of most people.

He's implying that he knows his childhood heroes are not actually the greatest; that hockey has improved, that goaltenders have improved. And he realizes that the current young generations look at him the same way he looked at his goaltending heroes.

 

[jigglysquishy]

LOL....

Dryden isn't saying he believes Hall, Sawchuk, Plante, and Bower are the greatest goalies. He's saying they are his four goaltending heroes, and he forever looks at them through the eyes of his childhood. And therefore he will always see them as the best.

He is being critical of his perspective, and similarly the perspectives of most people.

He's implying that he knows his childhood heroes are not actually the greatest; that hockey has improved, that goaltenders have improved. And he realizes that the current young generations look at him the same way he looked at his goaltending heroes.

You'd get a lot more traction if you weren't [mod edit: condescending]

If your point is that the "perspectives of most people" are wrong and that the old goalies are "not actually the greatest," then maybe this discussion isn't for you.

 

[Michael Farkas]

He's implying that he knows his childhood heroes are not actually the greatest; that hockey has improved, that goaltenders have improved

Not a loaded question, you think the position of goaltender was better in the 70s than the 60s...?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Ok, so bad goals do matter even if you're clearly an elite puck stopper by the stats, right? Because sometimes that doesn't matter, or so I've read.

Brodeur is top 10 all time in GAA. And that's the name of the game, right? Not allowing goals.

Also, it's a common misconception that Brodeur always played for a defensive juggernaut. Even in the DPE.

Yes, the Lemaire Devils were a very conservative bunch. But any more of a "defensive juggernaut" than Pat Burns with Patrick Roy? Or Toe Blake with Jacques Plante? Or...

The Robbie Ftorek Devils were much different. They were more aggressive. Just a sampling can be gleaned here, because I don't think anyone wants to sit through a complete tactical breakdown because I'm not gonna break buzzword-led stereotypes in this post...



I mean, look at this mess from NJ. There isn't five guys on a screen, sometimes there's only two. There's guys diving all over the floor, not a staple of Devils hockey, odd-man rushes. These Devils teams were 2-men up. They attacked defenders at the breakout level as opposed to sitting back and attacking forwards at the center and defensive blue.

As a result, they lost to a more defensive Penguins team in 1999 to save their franchise...ironically enough.

Obviously, Brodeur transitioned out of the DPE into a wide open lockout era where he couldn't necessarily have had a "defensive juggernaut". He proceeds to win multiple Vezinas, finish near the top for others, was a prime candidate in the Hart discussion, etc. Oh and MOST IMPORTANTLY (sonk) .920 save percentages! Hooray!

With Colin White's giant brain playing 22+ minutes on this "juggernaut", you know things are air tight haha

That's NJ...25 years of pure stalwart hockey...including the three-man aggressive forecheck and cycling game led by Ilya Kovalchuk and backed by #1 d-man Marek Zidlicky that got to the Final.

Ken Dryden...yeah, now, that's a guy that was really fighting it. 7 years with a roster three tiers better than everyone else, behind the guy that famously brought defensive cohesion everywhere he went, on a team with three #1 d-men, some of the best checkers of all time, in an unbalanced league...

Not Patrick Roy, on a team that carried on the legend of being a defensive team, with famously great checkers and defensive coaches...

Let's check out the 1986 Habs...you'll eventually see them on the screen against this Whaler breakout.



Look, I'm not saying that Brodeur didn't benefit from the trap (well, in a real sense...but in a faulty save pct.-led sense, probably not...his reputation seems irreparably damaged by something that he played behind for about five years of his 20 year career). I just never understand why it's applied so heavily to Brodeur and so lightly to every other goalie. As if everyone else was a disciple of the 1985 Oilers or something haha

These goalies are up here because they played for defensive teams for most of their careers. Otherwise, they wouldn't be recognized in the first place.

I'll be back to talk about the "bad goals theory"...

And Robbie Ftorek didn't finish his 2nd season with the Devils, he was fired.

With Ftorek at the helm Brodeur also had two of his worst seasons, while in his prime. Alo his worst playoff performance ever.

Seems to me the Ftorek example makes my point, not yours.

 

[Michael Farkas]

And Robbie Ftorek didn't finish his 2nd season with the Devils, he was fired.

With Ftorek at the helm Brodeur also had two of his worst seasons, while in his prime. Alo his worst playoff performance ever.

Seems to me the Ftorek example makes my point, not yours.

That's fine. I don't mind that at all. I'll argue both sides for a while because I just want to get going in the right direction overall. Those two top-5 Vezina seasons are notably two of the seasons where folks don't point to "look at his backup! Anyone could do it!"

So, we're basically at:
- It's the system! Look, even his backups do the same in the 9 minutes they play!
"Well, not always...what about these years in the DPE when they didn't really play like that? Even if we ignore the rest of his career for some reason..."
- See! It was the system!
"Well...now he's put distance between him and his backups statistically...which people love to take at face value.
- He had the worst playoffs of his career because the coach didn't play Lemaire's trap!
"That's probably not true. But even if it was, then that means we can put the 'constant defensive juggernaut' nonsense to bed, right?"
- ...

So, I have a whole bunch more post there that I think is more pertinent than this Abbott and...Abbott routine that I'm doing here...

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Arguing both sides is a good skill to develop - I'm pretty good at poking holes in my own arguments, especially about goaltenders.

 

[Michael Farkas]

It's something I used to do with one hockey friend group versus another just to keep myself sharp haha

But more to the point here, this is reason #1,001 that proper talent evaluation is so important because this whole thing, this whole argument is just flapping in the breeze right now...

It's the system.
He didn't play the system in the following seasons.
...see!

Is just not a principled path. Don't you think it sucks for me that Brodeur is great? I'm really keen about trying to pick off goalies that were propped by their defensive structure (categorically), this would be such an easy one...it's literally the thing that comes to mind in one's mental rolodex when you say "trap" or "defensive hockey" or whatever...it'd be the easiest thing in the world to go along with that...

Instead..........we really have to recognize what a great talent this player was.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

So, very likely the smartest goalie with maybe the best anticipation of all time...was generally out of position? Or, at least, not great at positioning.

Let's go to the tape, I've cut it down so that it's only shot attempts, so no one can complain about having to watch games...



Let's break it down, where are the positioning issues...?

Do you know if it's a common belief that Brodeur is "very likely the smartest goalie of all time"? Any cites/evidence on that one? Honestly curious, because I just finished reading a biography of Jacques Plante, and the entire hockey world was basically lining up at his doorstep for goaltending advice during the back half of his career, and it seems hard for me to even see a plausible case for ranking Brodeur ahead of Plante in that particular category. Not to mention a few other guys I might potentially bring up in that discussion as well.

Ok, fair enough. But for his whole career - which spans multiple distinct eras - does he have a significantly greater "advantage" in terms of team tactics over everyone else?

And if so, how large is that advantage?

If Brodeur is a 10 in terms of tactical advantage...what is Plante? Dryden? Roy? Roughly...obviously, this is no exact science. That is, of course, assuming that Brodeur is at the top of this advantage. He shouldn't be, but it sounds like he is...

I'm working on a more complete analysis of coaching impacts which I hope to post by the end of the day, in an attempt to answer your earlier question of if Brodeur is a 10, where do we rank Roy, Dryden, etc. Brodeur is definitely not at the top of team advantage, fully agree with you on that.

With respect to the recent discussion in this thread, I agree that "He played his whole career behind the trap!" is an oversimplified argument and can be easily shot down by pointing out the changes in New Jersey scheme, coaching staff, etc.. But that certainly doesn't mean that Brodeur didn't strongly benefit from his team environment for large portions of his career.

Here's my best attempt to make that case as neatly and concisely as I can, using the metrics you're most likely to put the most weight on. You hate small sample size backups stats, you hate shot counting, fine. Let's take all that out of the equation (and as a bonus also neatly sidestep the ancillary debates on shot counting bias and shot prevention), and focus on goals, shall we?

Martin Brodeur playing for Jacques Lemaire, Pat Burns or Claude Julien (10 seasons*):

Rank in GAA: 1-2-2-3-3-4-4-5-10

Outside the top 10: 1 time in 10 seasons (age 38)

Martin Brodeur playing for every other coach in his career (10 seasons*):

Rank in GAA: 5-6-8-9-10

Outside the top 10: 5 times in 10 seasons (age 26, 28, 39, 40, 41)

(*-Only counting seasons where the player qualified for the GAA rankings as per Hockey Reference)

And it's not like the first sample is all of Brodeur's physical peak or anything:

Lemaire/Burns/Julien: Ages 21-25, 30-31, 34, 37-38
Every other Devils coach: Ages 26-29, 33, 35-36, 39-42

The second one skews a bit older, but not by much. Otherwise those are pretty much alternating segments throughout his career.

You can absolutely quibble with Hockey Reference cutoffs and make those rankings look a little better by kicking out a few of the relatively low GP guys, but it's straight-up impossible to argue that the two samples above are even close to the same thing. Was Marty just randomly better in those seasons? Was there some other external factor that I'm unaware of (i.e. better competiton, better teams, or whatever)? Again, we're talking goals here, nothing to do with subjective shot counting or the relationship between save percentage and shots faced or any of those things. Why did the pucks go in much more often relative to the other top goalies when he didn't have an elite defensive coach behind the bench?

At the end of the day, are we absolutely convinced that the non-Lemaire/Burns/Julien sample reflects a top-6 all-time goalie? In a hypothetical universe where those guys decided to coach other teams instead, and Brodeur's career was just the second one x 2 with GAA ranks of 5-5-6-6-8-8-9-9-10-10, are we still talking about him here? Maybe we are, but I think we should at least consider that scenario.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Do you know if it's a common belief that Brodeur is "very likely the smartest goalie of all time"? Any cites/evidence on that one? Honestly curious, because I just finished reading a biography of Jacques Plante, and the entire hockey world was basically lining up at his doorstep for goaltending advice during the back half of his career, and it seems hard for me to even see a plausible case for ranking Brodeur ahead of Plante in that particular category. Not to mention a few other guys I might potentially bring up in that discussion as well.

Plante is the only all-timer that would give me pause about that statement. And if you give "advent" points, then it's Plante.

It's tough when you're talking about something like hockey sense AND the entire history of hockey and trying to build a list haha - but I'm really struggling to think of who else could really displace Brodeur in the top 2.

Re: sources, I really think the tape speaks for itself in this regard. It's why you see him stay on his skates so much. He'd just stay up and intercept passes cleanly because he's so far ahead of the game. Staying on his skates is probably why folks like @Dennis Bonvie say, "he gives up bad goals". Are they bad? Or are they just different looking than the goals you're used to seeing a goalie give up?

The thing has been for the last several decades where if a goalie gets beat up high, it's like "ah, what can you do...he picked a corner..." and that may well be true. But did Brodeur give those up much less than his peers (Hasek, who was generally on the floor; Roy who was butterfly, etc.), but as a trade-off (because everyone gives up 2 somehow) did more pucks beat him low to the corners of the net? Probably. Those are goals that Sawchuk and Plante gave up too.

--

Anyhow, if you're looking for "sources"...

Coming from one of the best play-readers of his generation...

Plus, he had the Gretzky-like gift of otherworldly anticipation, and from a goalie's perspective, that meant being square to the shooter far more often than not. "He probably read and tracked the puck and he saw the game before it happened better than, I think, any goalie," said current Devils goalie Cory Schneider, who admired Brodeur first as an opponent and then a teammate. "I think he knew where the puck was going to be before any of the shooters did."

...
"I didn't mind making the first move if I could dictate the moment"

Martin Brodeur: 100 Greatest NHL Players | NHL.com

All-time leader in wins, saves, shutouts, games played led Devils to Stanley Cup three times

www.nhl.com

And there was Brodeur’s precision positioning, a trait he perfected with the help of longtime goalie coach and personal guru Jacques Caron. There is a difference between meticulous positioning and robotic goaltending, a fine line that can determine greatness.

“I knew him as the greatest goalie who has played the game, because of his fierce competitiveness, skill set, hockey sense and passion for the game.

I never saw a goalie better than Marty [Brodeur]...he's almost like the Gretzky of the position...

--

Re: Coaching. You'll never get an argument from me that coaching doesn't influence goaltending stats. He gave up fewer goals with defensive coaches because that's how it works haha

I'm just saying, how is it only Brodeur? (Which is rhetorical, as I see you mention this above and I'll await that analysis).