HOH Top 60 Goaltenders of All Time (2024 Edition) - Round 2, Vote 11

[Doctor No]

This is the Montreal Star the day after the Rangers eliminated the Canadiens in 1972 - you'd think if the Montreal fans were afraid of Giacomin, John Robertson could have fit at least one mention of that fact in here:

 

[jigglysquishy]

Since the merger in 1926 we have only inducted two non-NHLers (Tretiak and Holocek). Dzurilla is our next foray. I'm bringing some research into this from the 2012 project as I think he's worthy of discussion.

Vladimir Dzurilla

I don't have all the information I woud like to have, but from what I was able to gather on Dzurilla (*2nd August 1942):

-Starting goaltender for Slovan Bratisava, one of the top teams in the Czechoslovak elite league, from 1960-1961 on when he was 18 years old.
- Backup goaltender for the National Team in the 1963 and 1964 World Championships behind veterans Josef Mikoláš (63) and Vladimir Nadrchal (64).
- Shares the starting duties with Nadrchal at the 1965 WC, has an impressive tournament and is voted Best Goaltender and All-Star Goaltender.
- At 23 he is starting goalie for the National Team in 65-66. Holeček, who is 20 months younger than Dzurilla, enters the picture as backup.
- Misses most of the 66-67 season and doesn't play for the National Team. Injured?
- Back to health, he is the starter again from 1968-1970. All-Star Goaltender in the 1969 WC.
- From the same time on we finally have awards and votings from Czechoslovakia available. 68-69: Dzurilla 5th in Golden Stick (Zlata Hokejka) voting behind Suchý, Jiřík and the Holík brothers. All-Star Goaltender. 69-70: 4th in Zlata Hokejka voting behind Suchý, Černý and Nedomanský. All-Star Goaltender.
- In 70-71 he doesn't play as much as before and misses the WC - possibly an injury in spring 1971? He drops to #11 in Zlata Hokejka voting. Holeček is 5th, voted All-Star Goaltender and becomes starter for the National Team with Dzurilla's backup at Bratislava, Marcel Sakáč, as backup.
- In 71-72 Dzurilla (29) bounces back to a 3rd place in Zlata Hokejka voting (behind Pospíšil and Ja.Holík), but Holeček is close behind (5th) and is voted All-Star goaltender. They share starting duties at the National Team with Dzurilla having the edge in the Olympics and Holeček in the WCs. Both were obviously considered to be more or less on par.
- Misses most of the 72-73 season. No Zlata Hokejka votes, doesn't play for the National Team. Injured? Outplayed at Bratislava by Marcel Sakač?
- In 1973 he leaves Bratislava and joins Brno. #31 in Zlata Hokejka voting in 73-74, not recalled to National Team. Same in 74-75.
- In 75-76 Dzurilla (33) bounces back. 9th in Zlata Hokejka voting, recalled to the National Team to play backup for Holeček at the 1976 WCs.
- In 76-77 he plays for Czechoslovakia at the Canada Cup and at the World Championships, overtaking Holeček in both tournaments. 6th in Zlata Hokejka voting (Holeček 8th), All-Star Goaltender, voted best goal tender by Tip Magazine.
- In 77-78 voted 15th for the Zlata Hokejka. Loses spot on the National Team.
- In 1978 he leaves Brno and Czechoslovakia (veteran players were allowed to go abroad by the Czechoslovak hockey federation) to play in West Germany. One season for Augsburg, three for Riessersee. Retirement in 1982.

This data suggests that Dzurilla was considered the best Czechoslovak Goaltender from 1965-1970 (minus the 66-67 injury season). In 64-65 he shared the best Czechoslovak Goaltender perception with Nadrchal and in 71-72 with Holeček. Then his stock dropped considerably until he had an impressive bounceback 75-77. But how much is the best Czechoslovak Goaltender during that time worth in an international comparison? Consider World Championship decorations:

1963: Seth Martin (best goaltender), Kjell Svensson (all-star)
1964: Seth Martin (both)
1965: Vladimir Dzurilla (both) - Seth Martin not there!
1966: Seth Martin (both)
1967: Carl Wetzel (both)
1968: Ken Broderick (both)
1969: Leif Holmqvist (best goaltender), Vladimir Dzurilla (all-star)
1970: Urpo Ylönen (best goaltender), Viktor Konovalenko (all-star) - Canada and the USA not there!

Is there a case for Dzurilla in the Top 40? I don't know, but Seth Martin is the dominant guy here and I don't see why Dzurilla should rank higher than him. A better comparison would be Ken Broderick: Dzurilla was considered better than Broderick in 1965, Broderick better than Dzurilla in 1968. Even if we take the level Tretiak demonstrated from 1972 on as an indication that European Goaltending took a considerable step forward between 1968 and 1972, I don't think that's enough to put Dzurilla ahead, especially since he didn't win any WC accolade in 1970.

International and European Domestic Accomplishments
CSSR

Vladimir Dzurilla
•CSSR Golden Stick 1st Among Goalies (1969, 1970, 1972, 1977)
•World Chanpionships Best Goalie (1965)
•World Championships All Star (1965, 1969)
•Three Gold Medals - starter in 1969, two behind Holecek

The Calgary Herald · ‎Sep 14, 1976

Vladimir ran out of miracles last night - he was merely a human being, with minor but obvious imperfections.

None of these words are intended to disparage Dzurilla who, last Thursday and throughout the round-robin phase of this tournament, provided that he is one of hockey's great goaltenders.

I think we can all be in agreement that he's behind Tretiak and Holocek (by quite a bit), but is he the next best non-NHL goalie post-1926? I like Seth Martin and the more I read the more I think I've underrated him. But I do think Dzurilla is ahead of Lindmark, Kralik, and Konovalenko.

I don't think he'll make my top half, but I do see myself ranking him.

He's a hard goalie to read, even discounting the non-NHL aspect. He's elite in the 60s in his early 20s as the clear best Czechoslovakian goalie, but then loses his starting position to Holocek. However, Holocek never firmly holds onto the job. Dzurilla and Holocek split starts at the 1976 Canada Cup, and Dzurilla generally outperformed him. He's a goalie of high and lows in a round where that's to be expected.

 

[blogofmike]

Middle of the pack isn't great... but I'll also go ahead and state again that goaltender stats aren't great. By your own links, Les Brinkley had a better SV% against the Habs in that time frame than Glen Hall, Jacques Plante, Gerry Cheevers, Roger Crozier, and Terry Sawchuk. Brinkley also had a better GAA than Sawchuk, Esposito, Crozier, and Vachon. I don't think we are feeling ready for Brinkley just yet, so perhaps we should take these stats with a large grain of salt.

If Les Binkley played that way against everybody he might make the list. A strong .915 save percentage against the Habs is offset by posting an .880 against the first two expansion years of the Buffalo Sabres.

Another case against goalie stats (or for, depending on your POV)- Mike Richter against the Detroit Red Wings. Using the same criteria (link):

Richter is 58th in save percentage and 61st in GAA.

So, to compare Giacomin against the Habs and Richter against the Red Wings:

Name	Save Percentage Rank	GAA Rank
Giacomin	18th	14th
Richter	58th	61st

If the Habs ate Giacomin's lunch, I think we can say Richter was similarly victimized by Detroit.

Or we can get away from how players fared against one team and look more at overall performances.

Here's the 1990s: NHL Stats

Hey look, Hasek, Brodeur and Roy on top.

Richter's .905 is solid, and comparable to Vanbiesbrouck (.906) and Belfour (.906). Also Kolzig shows up here with a .904, but given the timing of their games, I'd say Richter's numbers are a tad better at first glance.

Or put another way, over the 1990s, he has a GA-% of 91. That's a solid 10-year average, considering Giacomin only has 2 individual seasons better than that.

Yeah, Giacomin did not perform well in the playoffs. Nobody is arguing otherwise.

There are 10 guys listed here who did better, and deserve votes more than him.

Yes, Giacomin played poorly in the playoffs. That should (has, and does) count against him. However, he has the best remaining post-season all star record. That should (has, and does) count in his favor.

The All-Star record is his entire case. That's a questionable stat once you dig in and see it's basically a GP trophy (for Giacomin).

Fast Eddie gets a 1st AS nomination as the only 30-win goalie win a league where splitting the schedule is becoming normalized.

Does that make 1967 Giacomin more valuable than Mike Richter in 1994? 4th in All star votes and 6th in Vezina votes. Here are the Vezina vote getters:

EDIT here is a link: 1993-94 NHL Awards Voting | Hockey-Reference.com

I apologize to anyone who saw this when it was a table...

Richter also leads the NHL in wins, but by golly, that's competition that's miles ahead of a half season of Dennis DeJordy (0 1st-half votes) and half-season of Charlie Hodge (0 2nd-half votes), the goalies who finished 2nd in each half.

THEN you combine that with Giacomin having a rough time in the playoffs (understandable given his team strength, but it did feed into his reputation as a choker), and Mike Richter being 1994 Mike Richter (Looks like 18 Quality Starts in 23 games, 16.7 GSAA in 23 games, plenty of good press quotes if you want to look).

I don't know how you look at that and conclude that Eddie Giacomin was anywhere close to Mike Richter in terms of quality, even if he gets the 1st Team All-Star nod.

Couple that with Richter being the reason for Vanbiesbrouck having virtually no international goaltending experience after 1987, because Richter was getting praised as the guy leading Team USA to their best finishes ever. Look at the highlights of 1996. For all the big names on the blue line, they left their boy on an island a lot - and he delivered (as the equivalent of a 1st team All Star in 1996 and 2002 if that's what floats your boat).



Yeah there's a reason that guy is one of the best penalty shot stoppers of all-time.

 

[rmartin65]

If Les Binkley played that way against everybody he might make the list. A strong .915 save percentage against the Habs is offset by posting an .880 against the first two expansion years of the Buffalo Sabres.

Like I've said, it wasn't my stat- and I was showing why it isn't a good stat.

Or we can get away from how players fared against one team and look more at overall performances.

The issue is still that we are looking at very basic goalie stats, but it's better than looking at vs a single opponent I guess-

Here's the 1990s: NHL Stats

Hey look, Hasek, Brodeur and Roy on top.

Richter's .905 is solid, and comparable to Vanbiesbrouck (.906) and Belfour (.906). Also Kolzig shows up here with a .904, but given the timing of their games, I'd say Richter's numbers are a tad better at first glance.

Or put another way, over the 1990s, he has a GA-% of 91. That's a solid 10-year average, considering Giacomin only has 2 individual seasons better than that.

Richter's .905 is 13th; in addition to the big names you mentioned, he's also behind Guy Hebert (.911), Chris Osgood (.909), Byron Dafoe (.908), and Nikolai Khabibulin (.908).

Since you like GAA- Richter's 2.85 is 18th, behind some big names but also Chris Osgood again (2.35), Damian Rhodes (2.58), Jim Carey (2.58), Olaf Kolzig (2.58), Byron Dafoe again (2.68), Trevor Kidd (2.69), Jamie McLennan (2.73), Tommy Salo (2.74), Nikolai Khabibulin again (2.75), Jocelyn Thibault (2.77), Garth Snow (2.81), and Guy Hebert again (2.82).

Not exactly a killer's row there.

Richter looks like a middle-of-the-pack goalie statistically.

Richter looks like an above average goalie when looking at post-season all star, Vezina, and Hart records.

He had a couple big playoffs and/or international tournaments, but we can say that about several guys. I mean, just in the list of names I mentioned above, I'm not seeing that much separation between Richter and Khabibulin.

Both have a best on best international tournament win. Both have a Stanley Cup win. Neither have an impressive all-star, Vezina, or Hart record.

There are 10 guys listed here who did better, and deserve votes more than him.

Only if we are looking at this project as a playoff performers project. I'd likely agree.

The All-Star record is his entire case. That's a questionable stat once you dig in and see it's basically a GP trophy (for Giacomin).

I know people keep saying this, but correlation does not equal causation. There are real quotes out there calling Giacomin the best or one of the best goaltenders in the league. Why are we discounting those quotes and just saying that it is merely a GP trophy? It's probably a little of column A and a little of column B. He was almost certainly not as good as his voting record suggests- and that is why he is still up for discussion. That doesn't mean that he wasn't one of the best goalies playing, though.

Fast Eddie gets a 1st AS nomination as the only 30-win goalie win a league where splitting the schedule is becoming normalized.

Does that make 1967 Giacomin more valuable than Mike Richter in 1994? 4th in All star votes and 6th in Vezina votes. Here are the Vezina vote getters:

EDIT here is a link: 1993-94 NHL Awards Voting | Hockey-Reference.com

Maybe voters were looking at more than wins? It feels weird that we are using Giacomin's wins against him here. But yes, Giacomin was the only goalie to hit 30 wins, and secured AS-1. AS-2 did not go to the goalie who came second in wins though- it went to Hall with 19 wins, which was fourth in the league. Hall finished 6th in GP, so it doesn't really look like the voters were prioritizing wins and GP all that much that season.

I apologize to anyone who saw this when it was a table...

Yeah, the tables are a problem. Hopefully there is a fix incoming. A current workaround is building the tables within the reply box, but it means you have to manually copy everything over, which is annoying.

Richter also leads the NHL in wins, but by golly, that's competition that's miles ahead of a half season of Dennis DeJordy (0 1st-half votes) and half-season of Charlie Hodge (0 2nd-half votes), the goalies who finished 2nd in each half.

So it's a strike against Giacomin that he was able to get votes in both halves? That actually sounds like a positive for Giacomin.

THEN you combine that with Giacomin having a rough time in the playoffs (understandable given his team strength, but it did feed into his reputation as a choker), and Mike Richter being 1994 Mike Richter (Looks like 18 Quality Starts in 23 games, 16.7 GSAA in 23 games, plenty of good press quotes if you want to look).

Richter did better in the 1994 playoffs than Giacomin did in the 1967 playoffs. You won't hear me argue that.

I don't know how you look at that and conclude that Eddie Giacomin was anywhere close to Mike Richter in terms of quality, even if he gets the 1st Team All-Star nod.

I get there by looking at more than just playoffs stats. Giacomin seems to have been held in higher regard than Richter was.

Couple that with Richter being the reason for Vanbiesbrouck having virtually no international goaltending experience after 1987, because Richter was getting praised as the guy leading Team USA to their best finishes ever. Look at the highlights of 1996. For all the big names on the blue line, they left their boy on an island a lot - and he delivered (as the equivalent of a 1st team All Star in 1996 and 2002 if that's what floats your boat).

International hockey has a lot of goalies popping up.

The all-star team goalies from the best-on-best Olympics:

2014: Henrik Lundqvist
2010: Ryan Miller
2006: Antero Niitymaki (also won MVP)
2002: Mike Richter (media), Nikolai Khabibulin (IIHF Directorate) - look at that, another similarity Richter and Khabibulin share
1998: Dominik Hasek

Before that there was the World Cup of Hockey
1996: Mike Richter (also won MVP)- I'd point out that Hasek didn't play

And the Canada Cups
1991: Bill Ranford (also MVP)
1987: Grant Fuhr
1984: Vladimir Myshkin
1981: Vladislav Tretiak
1976: Rogie Vachon

Definitely some big names there, so it is a good mark for Richter to be on this list. It's also good for Ryan Miller, Antero Niitymaki, Nikolai Khabibulin, Bill Ranford, and Vladimir Myshkin, who are all on the outside looking in when it comes to our list.

Yeah there's a reason that guy is one of the best penalty shot stoppers of all-time.

I don't have the penalty shot data available, but the NHL has records of shootouts (which I'd argue is a pretty good substitute)

The top 10 in terms of shootout save percentage (minimum 40 shots against) are

Marc Denis
Mikko Koskinen
Thatcher Demko
Linus Ullmark
Eddie Lack
Andrei Vasilevskiy
Petr Mrazek
Anton Khudobin
Logan Thompson

I don't think this is a stat that reflects goaltender greatness.

 

[jigglysquishy]

There are 40 male goalies in the HHOF. We have inducted all of them except

Riley Hern (1963)
Bouse Hutton (1963)
Gerry Cheevers (1985)
Ed Giacomin (1987)
Mike Vernon (2023)

All, but one is up for discussion. We will likely induct 2+ this week. I think it's unlikely at this point that Hutton gets inducted, but it's plausible the other four will get included this round or next.

 

[rmartin65]

There are 40 male goalies in the HHOF. We have inducted all of them except

Riley Hern (1963)
Bouse Hutton (1963)
Gerry Cheevers (1985)
Ed Giacomin (1987)
Mike Vernon (2023)

All, but one is up for discussion. We will likely induct 2+ this week. I think it's unlikely at this point that Hutton gets inducted, but it's plausible the other four will get included this round or next.

Hutton has some "strikes" against him that I think were always going to make it a long-shot for him to make this list-

He played a long time ago
He had a short career
He played on a dynasty- and the goalies that followed him didn't seem to hurt team success that much

 

[blogofmike]

Like I've said, it wasn't my stat- and I was showing why it isn't a good stat.


The issue is still that we are looking at very basic goalie stats, but it's better than looking at vs a single opponent I guess-

Richter's .905 is 13th; in addition to the big names you mentioned, he's also behind Guy Hebert (.911), Chris Osgood (.909), Byron Dafoe (.908), and Nikolai Khabibulin (.908).

Since you like GAA- Richter's 2.85 is 18th, behind some big names but also Chris Osgood again (2.35), Damian Rhodes (2.58), Jim Carey (2.58), Olaf Kolzig (2.58), Byron Dafoe again (2.68), Trevor Kidd (2.69), Jamie McLennan (2.73), Tommy Salo (2.74), Nikolai Khabibulin again (2.75), Jocelyn Thibault (2.77), Garth Snow (2.81), and Guy Hebert again (2.82).

Your dedication to showing it to be a bad stat is impressive. While most people look at it and see that good numbers typically indicate good play, you seem to think someone is saying #4 is better than #5 because of stats with a difference of .001.

We can look at things in context and say Richter did pretty good considering he played more games in the early 90s compared to Hebert, Osgood, Dafoe, and Khabibulin. He was a Vezina finalist with Belfour and Roy in a year where he posted a .903.

Not exactly a killer's row there.

Richter looks like a middle-of-the-pack goalie statistically.

Richter looks like an above average goalie when looking at post-season all star, Vezina, and Hart records.

He had a couple big playoffs and/or international tournaments, but we can say that about several guys. I mean, just in the list of names I mentioned above, I'm not seeing that much separation between Richter and Khabibulin.

If you can say those things about several guys, say them.

And regardless of Richter finishing 4th/6th in AS/Vezina voting in 1994, his overall season is at a level Giacomin never touched.

Both have a best on best international tournament win. Both have a Stanley Cup win. Neither have an impressive all-star, Vezina, or Hart record.

I'd say both are more likely to keep you in a close series than Fast Eddie.

Only if we are looking at this project as a playoff performers project. I'd likely agree.

I know people keep saying this, but correlation does not equal causation. There are real quotes out there calling Giacomin the best or one of the best goaltenders in the league. Why are we discounting those quotes and just saying that it is merely a GP trophy? It's probably a little of column A and a little of column B. He was almost certainly not as good as his voting record suggests- and that is why he is still up for discussion. That doesn't mean that he wasn't one of the best goalies playing, though.

Do we ever hear someone say Team Canada really could have used Giacomin in 1972?

Giacomin was also 2nd in Hart voting - but no one cares, because it's pretty clear journalists were huge on the last iron man in the age of tandem goalies.

Maybe voters were looking at more than wins? It feels weird that we are using Giacomin's wins against him here. But yes, Giacomin was the only goalie to hit 30 wins, and secured AS-1. AS-2 did not go to the goalie who came second in wins though- it went to Hall with 19 wins, which was fourth in the league. Hall finished 6th in GP, so it doesn't really look like the voters were prioritizing wins and GP all that much that season.

19 Wins when 2nd place has 22 isn't a sign that wins don't count. It was a 1st half 2nd half award, and with 19 wins, Hall was only 3 back of 2nd. Hall finished behind Hodge (tied with Hall with 8 wins, 1 back of 2nd place if 1st half means Dec 31. Do we know what 1st half means?) and DeJordy (2nd in wins at season's end) in each half.

Yeah, the tables are a problem. Hopefully there is a fix incoming. A current workaround is building the tables within the reply box, but it means you have to manually copy everything over, which is annoying.


So it's a strike against Giacomin that he was able to get votes in both halves? That actually sounds like a positive for Giacomin.

And it's also not a strike against Al Rollins winning the Hart Trophy in this system.

Richter did better in the 1994 playoffs than Giacomin did in the 1967 playoffs. You won't hear me argue that.


I get there by looking at more than just playoffs stats. Giacomin seems to have been held in higher regard than Richter was.

Giacomin had a reputation as a playoff choker. He's Mike Vernon without the good years.

I posted a quote earlier that said Giacomin should win the Conn Smythe in 1972 because no one helped the Bruins more than him. What high esteem.

International hockey has a lot of goalies popping up.

The all-star team goalies from the best-on-best Olympics:

2014: Henrik Lundqvist
2010: Ryan Miller
2006: Antero Niitymaki (also won MVP)
2002: Mike Richter (media), Nikolai Khabibulin (IIHF Directorate) - look at that, another similarity Richter and Khabibulin share
1998: Dominik Hasek

Before that there was the World Cup of Hockey
1996: Mike Richter (also won MVP)- I'd point out that Hasek didn't play

And the Canada Cups
1991: Bill Ranford (also MVP)
1987: Grant Fuhr
1984: Vladimir Myshkin
1981: Vladislav Tretiak
1976: Rogie Vachon

Definitely some big names there, so it is a good mark for Richter to be on this list. It's also good for Ryan Miller, Antero Niitymaki, Nikolai Khabibulin, Bill Ranford, and Vladimir Myshkin, who are all on the outside looking in when it comes to our list.

Take that everyone who voted for Ryan Miller...

And a comparison to Khabibulin isn't a huge insult compared to Giacomin who is Jim Carey on repeat. That shiny 1st AS election is nice, but when the chips are down you hope Olaf Kolzig or Gilles Villemure will save the day.

Or if you want the inescapable comparison, he's Gilles Villemure with a penchant for choking. Villemure ain't on our list.

That's not at all the same as a guy who took John Vanbiesbrouck's job, both with New York and in multiple Team USA appearances.

Also Richter is the only guy who shows up twice. How isn't that good? Your list indicates the guy has a better international record than Dominik Hasek.

I don't have the penalty shot data available, but the NHL has records of shootouts (which I'd argue is a pretty good substitute)

The top 10 in terms of shootout save percentage (minimum 40 shots against) are

Marc Denis
Mikko Koskinen
Thatcher Demko
Linus Ullmark
Eddie Lack
Andrei Vasilevskiy
Petr Mrazek
Anton Khudobin
Logan Thompson

I don't think this is a stat that reflects goaltender greatness.

I agree it doesn't reflect greatness (Patrick Roy was 4 for 11. Sawchuk was 0 for 4, and 0 for 1 in the playoffs), but Richter was still great at them.

We've seen the coaches polls and one of them did ask which goalie do you want to stop a penalty shot in Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals? (I'd also argue the shootout is a little more intense since you don't get multiple tries.)

 

[blogofmike]

Now I'm not one to advocate for Mike Vernon, but here's his playoffs stacked with Giacomin's sorted by GA%-

Season	Age	Team	GP	W	L	T/O	GA	Shots	SV	SV%	GAA	SO	GA%-	GSAA
Excellent
1996-97	33	DET	20	16	4	0	36	494	458	0.927	1.76	1	76	11.1
1988-89	25	CGY	22	16	5	0	52	549	497	0.905	2.26	3	78	14.4
1998-99	35	SJS	5	2	3	0	13	172	159	0.924	2.43	0	82	2.9
1985-86	22	CGY	21	12	9	0	60	581	521	0.897	2.94	0	82	13.1
Good
1990-91	27	CGY	7	3	4	0	21	204	183	0.897	2.95	0	90	2.3
1970-71	31	NYR	12	7	5	0	28	320	292	0.913	2.22	0	90	3
1999-00	36	FLA	4	0	4	0	12	136	124	0.912	3.04	0	92	1
1972-73	33	NYR	10	5	4	0	23	238	215	0.903	2.57	1	93	1.8
Average
1986-87	23	CGY	5	2	3	0	16	136	120	0.882	3.67	0	98	0.3
1967-68	28	NYR	6	2	4	0	18	202	184	0.911	3.02	0	98	0.3
1993-94	30	CGY	7	3	4	0	23	220	197	0.895	2.96	0	100	0.1
1971-72	32	NYR	10	6	4	0	27	276	249	0.902	2.72	0	100	-0.1
1973-74	34	NYR	13	7	6	0	37	351	314	0.895	2.83	0	101	-0.5
Below Average
1989-90	26	CGY	6	2	3	0	19	149	130	0.872	3.33	0	107	-1.2
1997-98	34	SJS	6	2	4	0	14	138	124	0.899	2.41	1	108	-1.1
1994-95	31	DET	18	12	6	0	41	370	329	0.889	2.31	1	111	-4.2
1966-67	27	NYR	4	0	4	0	14	134	120	0.896	3.43	0	112	-1.5
Bad
1974-75	35	NYR	2	0	2	0	4	30	26	0.867	2.82	0	122	-0.7
1995-96	32	DET	4	2	2	0	11	81	70	0.864	2.71	0	134	-2.8
1987-88	24	CGY	9	4	4	0	34	210	176	0.838	3.98	0	135	-8.8
Terrible
1968-69	29	NYR	3	0	3	0	10	68	58	0.853	3.35	0	160	-3.8
1992-93	29	CGY	4	1	1	0	15	81	66	0.815	6	0	161	-5.7
1969-70	30	NYR	5	2	3	0	19	134	115	0.858	4.15	0	161	-7.2

This isn't a precise metric, but it's close enough to put seasons in buckets, especially when the gaps between buckets seem clear.

If you downgrade Vernon for choking, go ahead. Just remember another guy this round has a very similar record WITHOUT the good years.

 

[jigglysquishy]

All Riley Hern Stanley Cup games

1907 Stanley Cup Games
Montreal Wanderers beat New Glasgow Cubs 10-3 and 7-2 in a two-game total-goal series (17-5). Hern is spelled Hearne.

The Montreal Gazette · ‎Dec 31, 1906

Hearne did good work in the last half, but has not yet been really tried out as a goal tend.

Montreal Wanderers lost to Kenora Thistles 4-2 and 8-6 in a two-game total-goal series (12-8)

The Daily Phoenix · ‎Jan 18, 1907

[Kenora goalie Giroux] has not much over Hern, however, who last night played a slick game.

Montreal Wanderers beat Kenora Thistles 7-2, then lost 6-5 in a two-game total-goal series. They won the series 12-8.

The Montreal Gazette · ‎Mar 25, 1907

Hern was always there with the goods.

Hern gave what may be correctly termed a perfect exhibition of goalkeeping.

The Montreal Gazette · ‎Mar 26, 1907

Hern made three stops in quick succession and Giroux also distinguished himself.

1908 Stanley Cup Games
Wanderers beat Ottawa Victorias 9-3 and 13-1 to win two-game total-goal series 22-4

The Montreal Gazette · ‎Jan 13, 1908

Hern saved time and again, while LeSueur had little to do.

Smith and Phillips rained shots at Hern.

It was all Ottawa and Hern saved some hot ones.

Hern played the finest game in goals that he has yet played since joining the team.

Wanderers beat Winnipeg Maple Leafs 11-5 and 9-3 to win two-game total-goal series 20-8

The Montreal Gazette · ‎Mar 11, 1908

Only one player of the fourteen escaped punishment at one time or another and that was Hern, the Wanderer goaler.

Hern at the other end had probably not a fifth of the shots to stop that Winchester had, so a comparison of the two goalers' work is difficult. Hern did what he had to do well.

Wanderers beat Toronto Pros 6-4 in a single-elimination game

The Pittsburgh Press · ‎Mar 15, 1908

Every person who has even seen a hockey game in Pittsburg will well remember Riley Hern, the old goal tender of the Keystone team. This player, since he left the Smoky City, has become a star and is today the king pin among the goal tenders of Canada.

1909 Stanley Cup games
Wanderers beat Edmonton HC 7-3 and then lose 7-6. They win the two-game total-goal series 13-10

Ottawa Citizen · ‎Dec 28, 1908

Hern was splendid In the nets

The Montreal Gazette · ‎Dec 31, 1908

Hern played brilliantly in goals and despite the scores against him, he was a better goal tend than Lindsay.

1910 Stanley Cup games
Wanderers beat Berlin Dutchman 7-3

Ottawa Citizen · ‎Mar 14, 1910

Hern was the only player between a Berlin man and a score

Overall, he's praised well, but I think there's an appreciable gap between him and Moran. Information is pretty sparse, so I'll let @rmartin65 to fill in the gaps. But the information I'm seeing he's getting enough praise to go this round.

 

[rmartin65]

Your dedication to showing it to be a bad stat is impressive.

Not really. I'm just clicking on the links you provide and writing down the names I see.

We can look at things in context and say Richter did pretty good considering he played more games in the early 90s compared to Hebert, Osgood, Dafoe, and Khabibulin.

You were the one that picked the 90s in general. But sure, looking at just the first half of the 90s (and keeping the 100 game minimum):

Richter looks better. Up to 8th in SV% (among guys not on our list, behind Felix Potvin and Guy Hebert) and 7th in GAA (among guys on our list, behind Felix Potvin and Andy Moog).

Osgood, Dafoe, and Khabibulin didn't play enough games to qualify.

Let's just focus on the second half of the 90s (again keeping your 100 games played filter):

Richter is 11th in SV% (among players not on our list, behind Jeff Hackett, Guy Hebert, Steve Shields, Roman Turek, Olaf Kolzig, and Chris Osgood). He is 22nd in GAA (among players not on our list, behind Roman Turek again, Chris Osgood again, Ron Tugnutt, Ron Hextall, Jeff Hackett again, Mike Vernon, Olaf Kolzig again, Andy Moog, Steve Shields again, Trevor Kidd, Tommy Salo, Arturs Irbe, Guy Hebert again, Daren Puppa, Jim Carey, and Nikolai Khabibulin).

In context, statistically, Richter looks like an an above average goalie in the early 90s and an average goalie in the late 90s.

Based on Vezina and all star voting, Richter again looks like an above average goalie in the 90s and an average goalie in the late 90s.

He was a Vezina finalist with Belfour and Roy in a year where he posted a .903.

And Jim Carey won the Vezina in 1996 in a year where he had a .906 (Hasek had a .920). It happens.

And regardless of Richter finishing 4th/6th in AS/Vezina voting in 1994, his overall season is at a level Giacomin never touched.

If you say so. But looking at Giacomin's 1966-67 season-

Giacomin had a better AS, Vezina, and Hart voting.

Giacomin finished 4th in SV% and 4th in GAA (among goalies with at least 25 games played). Richter in 1994 was 8th in SV% and 5th in GAA (among goalies with at least 25 games played). Both led the league in wins, which could explain their awards support.

In 1967-68 Giacomin was 6th in SV% and 5th in GAA. Both better or tied with Richter's 1994.

I'd say both are more likely to keep you in a close series than Fast Eddie.

Once more, I agree that Giacomin was not a strong performer in the playoffs.

Do we ever hear someone say Team Canada really could have used Giacomin in 1972?

Why on Earth would anyone choose Giacomin (or Richter, for that matter) over 1972 Ken Dryden?

Giacomin had a reputation as a playoff choker. He's Mike Vernon without the good years.

Yep, Giacomin struggled in the playoffs.

I posted a quote earlier that said Giacomin should win the Conn Smythe in 1972 because no one helped the Bruins more than him. What high esteem.

Yep, Giacomin struggled in the playoffs.

Take that everyone who voted for Ryan Miller...

What is this? I think the voters are aware, considering Miller didn't make the cut last round.

Also Richter is the only guy who shows up twice. How isn't that good? Your list indicates the guy has a better international record than Dominik Hasek.

It is good for Richter. I just don't think it is as good as impressive as you seem to think it is.

 

[rmartin65]

Moving on from the Giacomin and Richter talk... what are people's thoughts on Vladimir Dzurilla?

He was eligible in the last goalie project and was talked about a bit in the preliminary discussion thread for that project and in Round 2 here. He was also discussed in the non-NHL European project here.

I am generally skeptical of goalies who made their name (on a historical scale) on the strength of a game, season, or tournament, and I worry that Dzurilla may fall into that category... would he even be discussed in these projects if not for the 1-0 win over Canada in the 1976 Canada Cup?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Not really. I'm just clicking on the links you provide and writing down the names I see.


You were the one that picked the 90s in general. But sure, looking at just the first half of the 90s (and keeping the 100 game minimum):

Richter looks better. Up to 8th in SV% (among guys not on our list, behind Felix Potvin and Guy Hebert) and 7th in GAA (among guys on our list, behind Felix Potvin and Andy Moog).

Osgood, Dafoe, and Khabibulin didn't play enough games to qualify.

Let's just focus on the second half of the 90s (again keeping your 100 games played filter):

Richter is 11th in SV% (among players not on our list, behind Jeff Hackett, Guy Hebert, Steve Shields, Roman Turek, Olaf Kolzig, and Chris Osgood). He is 22nd in GAA (among players not on our list, behind Roman Turek again, Chris Osgood again, Ron Tugnutt, Ron Hextall, Jeff Hackett again, Mike Vernon, Olaf Kolzig again, Andy Moog, Steve Shields again, Trevor Kidd, Tommy Salo, Arturs Irbe, Guy Hebert again, Daren Puppa, Jim Carey, and Nikolai Khabibulin).

In context, statistically, Richter looks like an an above average goalie in the early 90s and an average goalie in the late 90s.

Based on Vezina and all star voting, Richter again looks like an above average goalie in the 90s and an average goalie in the late 90s.


And Jim Carey won the Vezina in 1996 in a year where he had a .906 (Hasek had a .920). It happens.


If you say so. But looking at Giacomin's 1966-67 season-

Giacomin had a better AS, Vezina, and Hart voting.

Giacomin finished 4th in SV% and 4th in GAA (among goalies with at least 25 games played). Richter in 1994 was 8th in SV% and 5th in GAA (among goalies with at least 25 games played). Both led the league in wins, which could explain their awards support.

In 1967-68 Giacomin was 6th in SV% and 5th in GAA. Both better or tied with Richter's 1994.




Once more, I agree that Giacomin was not a strong performer in the playoffs.


Why on Earth would anyone choose Giacomin (or Richter, for that matter) over 1972 Ken Dryden?


Yep, Giacomin struggled in the playoffs.


Yep, Giacomin struggled in the playoffs.


What is this? I think the voters are aware, considering Miller didn't make the cut last round.


It is good for Richter. I just don't think it is as good as impressive as you seem to think it is.

How was Giacomin in the playoffs?

 

[rmartin65]

I had Holtby in the late 40ies, right between Ryan Miller and Connor Hellebuyck (which I already called a mistake). I may have been a bit too lenient, because he was really young when his game cratered, which isn't a great sign. It's crazy to think that he's the same age as Drew Doughty and Jamie Benn, but stopped being relevant about 7 years ago. I'm very comfortable calling him the 2nd best netminder in the world during the mid 2010ies, after Carey Price. He was better than Rinne, better than Lundqvist, better than Varlamov. But that is VERY young for having such a drop off, and it's not like he has the justifications Carey Price had for an apparent drop-off (injuries + very sharp drop in team quality).

Come to think of it, his career trajectory is quite similar to PK Subban. Came out looking great in 2010-11, become star in 2013, become nearly interchangeable in 2018 and retired in 2022. Meanwhile, his former teammate Varlamov, who is also similar-aged, SHOULD have won the Vezina in 2021, and posted a very fine season as a backup in 23-24.

I was really convinced Holtby is a better netminder than Varlamov 4 months ago. Now I'm not so sure. e.

I think this post sums up my feelings on Holtby pretty well- a heck of a peak, but not much outside of that. Kind of like Thomas, right (?), except Thomas had his peak in his mid 30s (and played in a more favorable situation). I think I like Holtby more after thinking about it and doing some more reading during this round (which would be a change from my preliminary list), but I'm interested in reading some more thoughts from the rest of the group.

@Michael Farkas , do you have any thoughts on what happened with Holtby? Did something change in his technique, did an injury impact his game, etc? Because it is weird that he just kind of fell off at 30 and was done at 32 (though I seem to remember an injury played into this?).

 

[Michael Farkas]

He was run into the ground and suffered a number of injuries in his later days. Including taking Cam Atkinson's stick in his eye, which I think ended up taking a bite out of his vision. I plan to have some Holtby material soon.

 

[rmartin65]

There are 40 male goalies in the HHOF. We have inducted all of them except

Riley Hern (1963)
Bouse Hutton (1963)
Gerry Cheevers (1985)
Ed Giacomin (1987)
Mike Vernon (2023)

All, but one is up for discussion. We will likely induct 2+ this week. I think it's unlikely at this point that Hutton gets inducted, but it's plausible the other four will get included this round or next.

Speaking of the HoF, for the goalies available this round:

Lorne Chabot: Not in the HoF. Retired in 1937, but the Hall didn't admit still-living players until 1947. So he has been "eligible" since 1947- a 77 year wait.

Gerry Cheevers: 5 years between retirement and induction.

Roger Crozier: Not in the HoF. Retired in 1977, so 47 years have passed without being inducted.

Vladimir Dzurilla: Not in the HoF. Retired in 1982, so 42 years have passed without induction.

Ed Giacomin: 9 years after retirement.

Riley Hern: Retired in 1911, died in 1929, so he was eligible for the inaugural 1945 HoF class. He wasn't inducted until 1963, so he waited for 18 years.

Braden Holtby: Effectively retired as of 2022. This is his first year eligible.

Olaf Kolzig: Not in the HoF. Retired in 2009, so 15 years and counting.

Ryan Miller: Not in the HoF. Retired in 2021, so he has only been eligible for 1 year.

Evgeni Nabokov: Not in the HoF. Retired in 2015, so 9 years and counting post-retirement.

Chico Resch: Not in the HoF. Retired in 1987, so 37-plus years post-retirement.

Mike Richter: Not in the HoF. Retired in 2003, so 21 years and counting since retirement.

Al Rollins: Not in the HoF. Retired in 1962, so 62 years and counting since retirement.

Juuse Saros: Still playing.

Tim Thomas: Not in the HoF. Retired in 2014, so 10 years and counting since retirement.

Mike Vernon. Retired in 2002, made the HoF in 2023, so 21 years post-retirement.

Standard disclaimer: I'm not saying the HoF is perfect. This is just a data point for everyone to use as much/little as they wish.

All Riley Hern Stanley Cup games


Overall, he's praised well, but I think there's an appreciable gap between him and Moran. Information is pretty sparse, so I'll let @rmartin65 to fill in the gaps. But the information I'm seeing he's getting enough praise to go this round.

Yeah, I think he is certainly worth a look this round. I think a more historically accurate representation of the era would have a larger gap between Moran/LeSueur and Hern, but that is more because I think the group underrated those two as opposed to Hern not being deserving of consideration at this point.

I really wish I was able to to the library in Michigan before this project started, because I think having some more quotes on the goalies of the IPHL would really help us to figure out where Hern belongs. Is he really the third best of his era? Or did he just latch on to good teams and that is why he is remembered the way he is? His time in the WPHL gives credence to the idea that he could succeed on bad teams- but that was in a league that wasn't that great top-to-bottom.

Other goalies in his age cohort received similar levels of praise in the post game summaries, but either played before hockey became truly professionalized (Frank Stocking), retired early to maintain amateur status (Dutchy Morrison), had short careers for reasons I don't know yet (Eddie Geroux, Charlie Quinn), or died young (Jack Winchester). Morrison, Geroux, Quinn, and Winchester also spent most (if not all, in some of their cases) of their careers West of the hockey capitals, so their legacies may have been forgotten a little quicker.

Long story short- I just don't know with Hern. Based on what we know right now (or think we know, haha), I think he fits. But there is a lot more uncertainty than with Moran and LeSueur.

 

[rmartin65]

He was run into the ground

I remembered him being a workhorse in his prime, but I am a little surprised to see that he led the league in GP from 2014/15-2017-2018 with 256. That's more than I had expected.

and suffered a number of injuries in his later days. Including taking Cam Atkinson's stick in his eye, which I think ended up taking a bite out of his vision.

Ah, that's right, I forgot about that incident. I wasn't aware that there were long-term effects.

I plan to have some Holtby material soon.

Nice, thanks!

 

[Michael Farkas]

I'll take this invitation to talk about Braden Holtby, not because I necessarily adore him, but more because it will keep me from responding to the Giacomin "horse hockey" haha

From when he stepped foot into the league, until his eye injury, Holtby is right there among the league's elites (even with a down 2018 regular season) [min 150 starts]...

Wins
1. Fleury 280
2. Rinne 264
3. Lundqivst 261
4. Holtby 242
5. Price 226

GAA:
1. Quick 2.25
2. Rask 2.29
3. Bishop 2.34
...
13. Luongo 2.42
14. Lundqvist 2.43
15. Holtby 2.45
16. Bobrovsky 2.48

Save Pct.
1. Gibson .923
2. Rask .921
3. Luongo/Price/Lundqvist/Rinne .920
7. Bishop/Schneider/Bobrovsky/Holtby .919

Shutouts.
1. Quick 42
2. Rinne 39
3. Fleury/Lundqvist 38
5. Price 37
6. Rask 36
7. Holtby 34

Even if the pure placements don't read elite, we're not talking about him being far from elite here. It's tight. If I was fishing for favor, you could take his 5-year peak (2013 to 2017 inclusive) and he comes away: 1st, 11th, 6th, and 1st in those categories, respectively.

Now, he's got Barry Trotz for a chunk of that time - so that's a big plus, so is goalie coach Mitch Korn. Adam Oates - a super technician - isn't exactly a defensive guru. And then on top of that, the best player on the team is famously uninterested defensively AND the two #1 d-men (Mike Green, giving way to John Carlson) aren't far behind that.

So, in some respects, he had some help. In some respects, quite the opposite...

Anyway, let's get to the stuff that matters...the "how" and "why"...and I'll take it from a game I was at...



Holtby's very smart and tracks extremely well. His eyes do a lot of his pre-work and he likes to identify his spot and then bring his feet there. He's almost aggressively patient or patiently aggressive. I'm not sure which. There are shreds of Carey Price's process in here. Not the skill.

You watch in that sequence, a puck works all the way across the formation (albeit strangely). It's a nice finish from Holtby there. Point of attack - bang. Tight butterfly. And he's just going to steer this thing into the corner, no big deal.

A little later in the very same sequence, we sort of watch the inverse...


This sequence starts low, works high, and then crosses the net line and gets super dangerous. One of the key points here is - unfortunately going to get lost in the shuffle a little bit because the LHS shooting that gets the cross pass (Cullen) doesn't shoot when he's "supposed" to - the aggressive push, aggressive depth, but the quiet feet at the top of the route. A lot of goalies would struggle to get where he got to (period), they'd struggle to get squaredness, they'd struggle with the mental aspects of this (the confidence of knowing they're in the right spot, so you'd probably see some happy feet or...), they'd drop right into the butterfly and give up their leverage here...

And I think this is what 71 year veteran Matt Cullen is thinking...remember, we're just leaving a really poor era for goaltending as a whole at this point...guys just sliding around aimlessly because they could. So, Cullen is probably expecting a flying butterfly. So that's why he's gonna hold this, go around the goalie, and tuck it in on the near side post.

Holtby gives him no quarter at all and the play fizzles. He might not even get a legit shot on goal there at all...but if he does, it's certainly not the chance you'd think.

He's all movement and smarts. I mean, take a second and look at his best highlights...



Highlights are inherently biased to the fantastic and desperate, so it's not really a good indicator of much, but even Holtby's highlights are lateral movement masterpieces. It's the lower body drive, it's the skating, and then it's the control.

What isn't it? Honestly, the glove and blocker. His glove motion doesn't move the needle for me.



It felt like Kessel shot a lot of pucks by him in 2016 and 2017. This one only hits the crossbar, but still that glove doesn't fill with me with a lot of warm feelings. Does that leave me with some adaptability concerns if he had hung on? Yeah, a little...but we also saw him stay on his feet in a lot of situations. He played smart, so I think he would have figured it out. But you got guys shooting high at low angles, you got guys shooting 13 inches over the pad, and you have guys ahead of the game shooting at hips...those trends wouldn't serve Holtby all that well, to be fair.

He's stuck in a box, with basically three top-3 Vezina years in a row, then I had him #2 for the Smythe in the 2018 playoffs (Kuznetsov). I don't know where it landed, but it was a Smythe-worthy run. He was considered a top 5 goalie in a GM/goalie coach/scouts poll in 2018. He hung on to be in "Tier 2" in 2019 after the wheels had started to fall off. I see a 3rd place in 2016 and 2017. So he was highly thought of around the league. I have a good amount of time for him (he was top 40 in my prelim).

There's, what, one or two players available to us right now that's probably better than him?

Cheevers, Giacomin, Rollins, and Thomas aren't in his galaxy. Dzurilla is too sloppy and unreliable to be in this particular discussion. I think the comparison is too tough with guys that played less like him like Richter and Vernon and even Saros to some degree. There's some fun to be had with the Kolzig comparison...I think Miller and Nabokov are right there, it's hard to figure out what the process is to separate them from really any perspective though. I don't know if we could find a way to bundle them and vote for them as a unit, but I'd support that haha

 

[MXD]

Oh I had forgotten about the Atkinson stick incident in my first post.

 

[overpass]

I'll take this invitation to talk about Braden Holtby, not because I necessarily adore him, but more because it will keep me from responding to the Giacomin "horse hockey" haha

I remember reading an article about Holtby deciding to completely overhaul his technique, so he would be technically better and not so reliant on his athleticism. I think it was InGoal Magazine around 2017 or 2018. The writer compared it to Nick Faldo re-building his golf swing in the mid-80s. Do you remember if there was anything to that? Or did it not really make much difference?

I really wish I was able to to the library in Michigan before this project started, because I think having some more quotes on the goalies of the IPHL would really help us to figure out where Hern belongs. Is he really the third best of his era? Or did he just latch on to good teams and that is why he is remembered the way he is? His time in the WPHL gives credence to the idea that he could succeed on bad teams- but that was in a league that wasn't that great top-to-bottom.

In "Without Fear", Johnny Bower's assessment of Hern was "He must have been good if the Wanderers brought him in to be their goalie." That's about how I see it. It's hard to get a direct rating of how good he was over 100 years later, but it's not likely he was just lucky to be a core member of a regular Stanley Cup winner.

From what I've read, after his career Hern was usually referenced among the stars of that great Wanderers team. Much as the Islanders dynasty might be remembered with Bossy, Trottier, Potvin, and Billy Smith, or the Oilers might be remembered by mentioning Gretzky, Messier, Kurri, Coffey, and Grant Fuhr.

For what it's worth, Hern retired at a young age by his choice, to go into business. He was only 30 or 32 when he retired, depending on whether 1878 or 1880 is accurate for his birthdate. In any case he launched a successful business selling men's clothing and sporting goods, and the Montreal papers of the 1910s and 1920s were filled with ads for his business up to his early death in 1929. During this time he continued to be involved in Montreal hockey by organizing leagues and refereeing. As far as I can tell, there's no reason Hern couldn't have continued to play pro hockey through the 1910s like his contemporaries Moran and Lesueur, if he wanted to.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Do you remember if there was anything to that? Or did it not really make much difference?

I'd like to try to find that and see what they're talking about exactly. I saw some shoulder differences and what not. But an entire overhaul in his prime? I'd have to see exactly what that means. I know a goalie coach that knew him well from the Dub, and he always told me that his process is very consistent. Now, that conversation could have occurred before the thing you're talking about, of course.

I never really pegged him as a guy who "relied on athleticism", so it'd be interesting to me if he considered himself that and why.

 

[overpass]

I'd like to try to find that and see what they're talking about exactly. I saw some shoulder differences and what not. But an entire overhaul in his prime? I'd have to see exactly what that means. I know a goalie coach that knew him well from the Dub, and he always told me that his process is very consistent. Now, that conversation could have occurred before the thing you're talking about, of course.

I never really pegged him as a guy who "relied on athleticism", so it'd be interesting to me if he considered himself that and why.

I found the article. The Faldo reference was a bit over the top, the writer acknowledges that Holtby's change wasn't that dramatic. And athleticism was the wrong word. It was about refining his glove action to be more efficient and less reliant on instinct and timing.

https://web.archive.org/web/20170803033808/https://ingoalmag.com/analysis/holtby-vs-holtby/

 

[Michael Farkas]

Ok that jives with what I have seen. And it makes sense because his glove was always very, ummm, amateur-ish (?) for lack of a better word...weirdly undeveloped for such a high caliber player.

I'll check out the article more in-depth soon. Thanks for unearthing it.

 

[jigglysquishy]

I did a list of post-1980 AS top 5 AS finishes last round so thought I'd throw it in here.

Player	First	Second	Third	Fourth	Fifth	Total	Weighted Total
Tim Thomas	2	0	0	0	0	2	10
Braden Holtby	1	1	0	1	0	3	8.5
Evgeni Nabokov	1	0	0	1	1	3	5.75
Olaf Kolzig	1	0	0	0	1	2	5.25
Ryan Miller	1	0	0	0	0	1	5
Mike Vernon	0	1	0	0	2	3	3.5
Juuse Saros	0	0	0	3	0	3	1.5
Mike Richter	0	0	0	1	1	2	0.75

Holtby looks really strong here. Obviously, Thomas's two Vezinas leave him on an island this round.

Miller and Richter stand out to me negatively. Miller has one big year and that's kind of it. He only has three top 10 AS finishes. Richter only has four, but I do think his much stronger playoff resume puts him ahead.

Saros has never finished top 3 in AS voting, but three times in a row he was voted in at 4. He won't go this round, but looks appropriate next round.

 

[seventieslord]

I did a list of post-1980 AS top 5 AS finishes last round so thought I'd throw it in here.

Player	First	Second	Third	Fourth	Fifth	Total	Weighted Total
Tim Thomas	2	0	0	0	0	2	10
Braden Holtby	1	1	0	1	0	3	8.5
Evgeni Nabokov	1	0	0	1	1	3	5.75
Olaf Kolzig	1	0	0	0	1	2	5.25
Ryan Miller	1	0	0	0	0	1	5
Mike Vernon	0	1	0	0	2	3	3.5
Juuse Saros	0	0	0	3	0	3	1.5
Mike Richter	0	0	0	1	1	2	0.75

Holtby looks really strong here. Obviously, Thomas's two Vezinas leave him on an island this round.

Miller and Richter stand out to me negatively. Miller has one big year and that's kind of it. He only has three top 10 AS finishes. Richter only has four, but I do think his much stronger playoff resume puts him ahead.

Saros has never finished top 3 in AS voting, but three times in a row he was voted in at 4. He won't go this round, but looks appropriate next round.

If we value 4th place AS finishes (and I'd suggest we do, in a point system that better reflects the relative value of these finishes than 5-3-1-0.5-0.25), Saros' three best seasons are approximately as good as anyone else's three best seasons on this list.

But he's played 386 NHL games. are his three best seasons any better than Holtby's? Cause they'd have to be.

Assuming we agree his peak was somewhat better than Nabokov, Kolzig, Miller, Vernon, and Richter... is it so much better that it eliminates the 310 GP gap that Nabokov earned, most of which was spent being a well above average starting goalie?

What about the 330 more games Kolzig spent helping NHL teams win games? Or the 280 more that Richter played?

Heck, Vernon and Miller both have literally over double the amount of career GP of Saros. Saros hasn't been a starter long enough to have lows. He's completed just three seasons in which he played workhorse starter minutes.

Good goalie. But he's not Shesterkin. He hasn't accomplished more in 3-5 seasons than these guys did in full careers. Let's pump the brakes here.