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

[MXD]

More time as best in the world.

We have lots of goalies that burned bright for a short time. Tretiak burning bright from 1972-1984 is a big plus when Dryden did from 1972-1980. Especially with Tretiak arguably being ahead already before Dryden retired.

Something like the 1981 CC is a plus for me.

I mean, here, being the best in the world would just mean being the best of the exact same pool, minus the prior best (Dryden). Same fish, slightly smaller pond.

(I do agree this doesn't quite take into account the blossoming of whoever between that period, but we also know that nobody who did blossom at that time was better than peak Dryden, unless someone really wants to make an argument in that regards for Liut and Smith)

The same question applies to Frank Brimsek by the way. He almost certainly was the best in the world, despite all the caveats, from 39 to 42. But we're really just saying he was better than Dave Kerr.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Billy Smith would certainly be in that conversation...

 

[VanIslander]

Certainly we haven’t resorted to counting cups, right?

Just to make sure based on this post, you voted for Roy over Hasek last round?

Not in any universe i had any agency in.

1. Hasek
1b. Roy

...my submitted vote was exactly that.

There are two 1's then some 3rd. I put Hasek over Roy but i "get" the reverse. I was in high school in 1986 when that young Roy shocked the world. But i have never seen a better puck stopper (can't say goalie because he is a fool in addition to being a genius) than Hasek.

As for my respect for Broda (i ain't no Leaf fan),... he seems to have a greater role in his dynasty's success than Plante in his. In Toronto Turk was top 3 most nights; Plante was 4th, 5th in Montreal, sometimes less than that.

Patrick Roy in 1986 had a great defensive team in front of him but he was clearly the star.

Don't count cups. Look at a player's role in a team's success if they have it. How much did the guy contribute to how well they did?

 

[Michael Farkas]

Any chance I can submit a ballot with just 1 name...or just 3 names? haha

I'm definitely not ready for Benedict or Vezina.

Broda would be a lot easier to dismiss if he didn't have success after the '48 and '49 area. His skating is horrible. His second-shot compete is not good. He got to play for a defensive team. But as the pace of the game picked up towards the end of his career, he still hangs in there. A couple of 3-AS finishes, a couple of Cups...I have him pretty far down my initial list, but maybe that was too tough.

It just seems like a lot of people from back then like him and like him a lot. I don't know it's because of his personality or the sheer number of publicity shots that he has eating pancakes in the crease...but he certainly has a contemporary following.

I wish Belfour was more consistent. He probably gets a lot of defensive coaching help. He's very interesting because he really battled but he's more of a stand-up goalie than people give him credit for, especially at the beginning of his career. Then he brought in a lot more of a hybrid look, a lot of paddle down stuff...I think that gave him more success near his posts.

Belfour couldn't quite deliver Tretiak better than Tretiak could...but he's not so far away from him.

I'm a big fan of Brimsek in this area. He's one of the calmest goalies I've seen. Really great on his angles. He has hands, he has feet. But his angle game is just a little more advanced than some in terms of taking away net from shooters. He's not just standing on his goalline all day. Yeah, Boston wasn't the toughest spot to jump in to...but a lot of talk at the time was him replacing yet-another-claim-for-greatest-ever Tiny Thompson. And to come in with 10 blank jobs as a rookie and all that, sure there's team in there too, but this is a really good goalie and it's tough to take over for a legend sometimes...