HOH Top 60 Goaltenders of All Time (2024 Edition) - Round 2, Vote 4

[mrhockey193195]

1.98

One of my holdups is that Vezina shares aren't equal across generations. It has become considerably harder to put together a Vezina record. I'm not exactly sure why, but voters are more likely to give Vezina votes to "one-offs" compared to years past.

Vezina shares by birth decade, all results over 0.50

1960s

Rank	Name	Birth Year	Vezina Shares
1	Dominik Hasek	1965	4.76
2	Patrick Roy	1965	4.63
3	Ed Belfour	1965	2.51
4	Tom Barasso	1965	1.98
5	Curtis Joseph	1967	1.02
6	Ron Hextall	1964	0.86
7	Mike Vernon	1963	0.84
8	Darren Puppa	1965	0.82
9	Kirk McLean	1966	0.75
10	Andy Moog	1960	0.56
Sum			18.73
Sum without Hasek/Roy			9.34

1970s

Rank	Name	Birth Year	Vezina Shares
1	Martin Brodeur	1972	5.40
2	Roberto Luongo	1979	1.66
3	Tim Thomas	1974	1.55
4	Miikka Kiprusoff	1976	1.44
5	Evgeni Nabokov	1975	1.23
6	Olaf Kozlig	1970	0.84
7	Marty Turco	1975	0.72
8	Jose Theodore	1976	0.70
9	Roman Turek	1970	0.56
10	Jim Carey	1974	0.52
Sum			14.62
Sum without Brodeur			9.22

1980s

Rank	Name	Birth Year	Vezina Shares
1	Pekka Rinne	1982	2.12
2	Sergei Bobrovsky	1988	1.97
3	Henrik Lundqvist	1982	1.93
4	Braden Holtby	1989	1.68
5	Tuukka Rask	1987	1.50
6	Carey Price	1987	1.40
7	Ryan Miller	1980	0.87
8	Jonathan Quick	1986	0.75
9	Semeyon Varlamov	1988	0.60
10	Ilya Bryzgalov	1980	0.59
Sum			13.41

1990s

Rank	Name	Birth Year	Vezina Shares
1	Connor Hellebucyk	1993	2.63
2	Andrei Vasilevsky	1994	2.05
3	Igor Shesterkin	1995	1.02
4	Linus Ullmark	1993	0.87
5	Ilya Sorokin	1995	0.54
Sum			7.11

The net result is that from 1960s era births through 1990s era births it has become systematically harder to consolidate Vezina votes. More goalies get votes, more goalies get throw away votes.

Barasso is a great example. He has the fourth highest Vezina share of goalies born in the 60s (Hasek, Roy, Belfour). Yet, only four goalies born 1965 have achieved a higher Vezina share than he did (Brodeur, Hellebucyk, Rinne, Vasilevskiy).

Maybe the 60s born goalies were just stacked to an unreal level. But it doesn't sit right with me that the fourth best goalie born in the 1960s would be ahead all but four goalies born 1966-1995.

I'm sure you could throw this into excel and make a relationship with Vezina vote consolidation, but I'm at a loss as to how to do it.

Obviously 1990s era goalies are still getting votes so it's incomplete.

I'm not saying we should be throwing out Vezina shares, but I think the changes in voting patterns makes direct era-comparisons particularly challenging.

Super interesting post. Is it a reasonable theory to say that the proliferation of more advanced stats in the 2000s (starting simply with more emphasis being put on vanilla SV%, but evolving to where we are today with much better tools to quantify goalie performance) is a big factor?

Previously, Wins and GAA were heavily weighted, and the result are high Vezina finishes that are largely supported by playing on a good team and reputation which in hindsight look a bit off (e.g., Belfour finishing 2nd in 95, Fuhr winning in 88, etc.).

EDIT: The other factor that I believe plays a bit part is that with technique and equipment becoming more or less homogenized, the variance in goaltending today is less than it has even been. It's very hard for the best goalies to stand out from league average, and it's much easier for a league average goalie having a career year to be towards the top of the Vezina voting.

 

[The Pale King]

Super interesting post. Is it a reasonable theory to say that the proliferation of more advanced stats in the 2000s (starting simply with more emphasis being put on vanilla SV%, but evolving to where we are today with much better tools to quantify goalie performance) is a big factor?

Previously, Wins and GAA were heavily weighted, and the result are high Vezina finishes that are largely supported by playing on a good team and reputation which in hindsight look a bit off (e.g., Belfour finishing 2nd in 95, Fuhr winning in 88, etc.).

EDIT: The other factor that I believe plays a bit part is that with technique and equipment becoming more or less homogenized, the variance in goaltending today is less than it has even been. It's very hard for the best goalies to stand out from league average, and it's much easier for a league average goalie having a career year to be towards the top of the Vezina voting.

Both these sentences are true, but it seems to me like voters are quite rigid in giving Vezina votes to the top performers in a particular season in GAA and SV%. So the top guys, the guys we'll be discussing or have already discussed in this thread, are generally in and around the top-10 in voting, but they often lose out to the "flavour of the week" guys who beat them that year in SV% by a few points.

The last fifteen years or so, maybe reputation hasn't played enough of a role, and there's a been hyperfocus on SV% and GAA. It's kind of why we have a hazy picture of the super-modern goalies. If you are just looking at the Vezina results, it's going to be very fragmented.

For a random example, Philip Grubauer's 2021 3rd place finish ahead of Hellebucyk. That's one for me where if I'm voting... I don't know if the .06 lead in SV% is going to have me give the nod to the Grubauer. Examples abound though.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I'm not that big into the whole newspaper scouring, but...

Anything on Roy Worters 30-31 season? Because, from a purely hockey-reference scouting perspective, that season looks mighty impressive : team had worst offence but best defense, the roster is about as New York Americans as it can possibly get, and ended up with no Hart voting support whatsoever (Worters won the Hart And also finished Top-5 three more times). Eddie Gerard's systems may have something to do with that (but they were back to worst in the NHL for goals allowed next season).

...
Backed up by little Roy Worters, who is the perfect hockey player, the Americans came well into the third period of the Garden fracas with no score on either side.
...
[description of the goal; basically the puck flipped into the air, landed a foot in front the goal and Mush March batted it in]
...
Clearly, no one can place the blame for permitting a goal like that. It has been observed here before that a goal off Roy Worters is an act of God.

While Roy Worters was tending goal for the Star Spangled Americans in MSG last night, "a lapse occurred, the kind that happens one time in a life." Roy didn't cut his salad with a knife, like the young lady in that poem, he just tossed the puck into his net.
...
George Mantha fired at Worters from 20 feet out and to Roy's right. The goalie met the puck squarely and caught it against his body with his left hand. This hand was covered by a badly worn glove and as Roy tossed the rubber to his left, it caught a tear through which padding emerged between thumb and fore-finger...[struck] the upright about eight inches from the top. It fell into the goal.

(This lost the game for the Americans 2-1 against the Canadiens who "were badly off their game")

This publication, which for several years has rated the boxers of fistiana and race horses of turfdom, so that today it is recognized by sport authorities the world over, enters a new field this week. A system has been evolved by Collyer's experts so that hockey performers in the National and American Leagues can be ranked by their playing ability.

...[talking about adjusting for poor defenses and all that]

Accuracy of these ratings is shown this week in listing goal tenders. Chuck Gardiner, sensational youngster of the Chicago Black Hawks, who is regarded by many as the premier goalie of big time hockey, tops the field. Roy Worters ranks next after Gardiner, while Benny Grant, Chuck Hainsworth, Dolly Dolson, and Tiny Thompson boast fine marks. Five of this sextet are recognized as the foremost goal tenders in the NHL.

...

The Blackhawk star has a good sized lead over his rivals...Worters, Hainsworth, Dolson, and Thompson are bunched with the American veteran having an edge.
...
Although the new major circuit (AHA) plays a more open game than the National League, goal scoring seems to be on an even basis. At least it speaks well of the American League net custodians.

In an article on that same page, they talked about the quality of some of AHA players. They specifically mentioned Donnie MacFadyen - a rookie out of Marquette - as being NHL caliber. After one more season in the AHA, he spent four seasons - being reasonably productive - with Chicago. They also mentioned Sim Halderson - he played several seasons in the PCHA and NHL. They also mentioned how offensively gifted the Tulsa team looked. They'd go on to lead the league in goals that year by 33 goals over the 2nd best team (in 48 games) and won the championship. So, they might have a good eye for the game actually...

##

##

##

##

An article I found mentioned that 33 (!) players garnered votes for the Hart Trophy in 1930-31. How that's possible, I don't know. But Worters was not among the top 8.

##

Of perhaps no note, a lot of references to Madison Square Garden being "hot and sticky" and the ice conditions poor. Made poorer still by ice skating races performed between periods created deep grooves in the surface.

Not sure if we have all of this information or not already, but a game on or around Feb. 25, 1930 where the Americans beat the Canadiens 4-2. Worters made 29 saves, Murray made 21.

On a game on or around Mar. 12, 1931 which the Americans won 2-0 over Ottawa, Worters made 19 saves, Connell made 42.

All in all, there isn't as much fanfare for this season or Worters at large around this time. At least, relative to the hypothesis. There are a number of New York papers available in the dataset too. Obviously he's considered a high-end goalie. Probably not the best. And this season the Americans seem to not suck as much.

 

[bobholly39]

Things to like about Carey Price’s resume & peak – in no particular order:

2014 Olympics & international resume

In my opinion, this is the greatest goalie Olympic performance after Hasek in 1998. Back to back shutouts in the semis and finals to win close games, 1-0 & 3-0. 972 sv% on the tournament overall. Yes – he obviously had a great team, but he still played incredible – 31 shots and 24 shots in his 2 shutouts vs US and Sweden.

If you expand this beyond just the 2014 Olympics – where does Carey Price rank all-time for Canada – or overall – for international resume as a goalie? I think he ranks #1 for Canada, not sure overall.

2014-2015 Hart/Lindsay/Vezina season

Where does this season rank all-time among goaltenders? Very few goalies have ever won a hart. In fact – Carey Price had 89% 1st place votes for hart – that’s a lot more than Theodore in 2002, and more than Hasek in 98 (~80%), and barely behind Hasek in 97 (~93%).

I don’t think anyone left in this round – or maybe still to come – has a single season as good as this season was for Carey Price.

Also – if you want to understand just how valuable Price was to his team and their success – the Habs literally went from 1st in the league to last in the league the following season when he got injured. And Habs went from cruising to round 3 of playoffs – eliminating president champs Boston in round 2 – in the playoffs the year prior with Price, to a super quick & easy out as soon as he went down to injury in round 3.

Voted best goalie by peers, repeatedly.

For a stretch of ~3-5 years, Carey Price won all the NHLPA player polls, or Athletic player polls for any question resembling “best goalie”. I unfortunately can’t seem to track down all of the Athletic polls or when they started, so I’ll concentrate on NHLPA:

2017-2018 season – 41% of players vote Carey Price as most difficult to score on

2017-2018 season – 9.74% of players vote Carey Price for “if you need to win one game, who is the #1 player you want on your team”. He was 3rd overall behind Crosby and McDavid, but the only goalie mentioned.

2018-2019 – 29.89% of players voted Carey Price as the best goalie (#1).

2019-2020 – 41.55% of players voted Carey Price as the best goalie (#1).

So for a 3 year stretch, he was voted #1 among peers. He also finished #2 and 3 the following 2 years. And – this isn’t even during his peak, as his peak was really in the 2013-2017 stretch, but NHLPA didn’t run polls those years. If they had, good chance he’d have won best goalie 3-4 more times.

 

[bobholly39]

Carey Price’s impact on team success.

Which player in NHL history had a greater direct impact on their team success than Carey Price? Which player in NHL history had worst injury luck than Carey Price (not in terms of severity of injury, but more in terms of timing of injury in relation to team success – 3x he got injured at the worst time possible).

Open ended questions – not saying Carey Price is necessarily #1 in history for those questions, but I’d love to see some names thrown out to contend with Price here.

Carey Price spent his whole career playing for a bad team. All of his contemporaries – Lundqvist, Vasilevskiy, Luongo, Quick, Rask…just to name a few – either played for contenders their whole careers, or at least played for contenders very often in comparison. The Habs couldn’t get anything done without Carey Price – their success was always completely dependent on him. In this post – I’ll point out the impact Carey Price’s injuries had on his team’s success, vs other comparable players and how their own injuries impacted their team’s success.


Henrik Lundqvist.

In the 2014-2015 season, he was injured for a stretch of 25 games, from February 2nd to March 28th.

With Lundqvist in the lineup – Rangers are 46-30-13. 922 sv%, 2.25 GAA

25 games without – Rangers are 18-4-3, 931 sv%, 2.08 GAA

They actually improved and did better without him.


Jonathan Quick.

2016-2017 season. He played 1 game, then missed everything until return on February 25th.

With Quick – Kings are 8-5-2, 917 sv%, 2.26 GAA

Without Quick – 29-26-4, 904 sv%, 2.46 GAA

A better record with Quick in the lineup, but still maintained a winning record overall without him.


Crosby/Malkin

Both are injured at the same time, for a long stretch of the 2011 season. As of February 4th, neither player plays another game.

Pittsburgh before February 4th – 34-15-4

Pittsburgh after February 4th – 15-10-4

Again, better record with Crosby/Malkin then without – but the team still maintains a winning record without them.

Pekka Rinne.

In the 2013-2014 season, Rinne had a major injury, and misses games between October 23rd to March 3rd.

With Rinne - 10-10-3, 902 sv%, 2.77 GAA (500 record)
Without Rinne - 21-21-9, 895 sv%, 2.90 GAA

Same record with vs without him. This is a season sandwitched between his vezina top 3 finishes.

Hasek - two examples

Hasek is actually a great comparable to Price with these 2 examples. He had a major injury in a season very close to his hart win (like Price in 2016), and Buffalo also traded Hasek in 2002, so we can see the impact of Hasek gone from one year to the next (like Price in 2022).

In 1999-2000, Hasek is injured on October 29th, and returns on February 1st.

With Hasek, Buffalo that year has a record of 15-11-6. 919 sv%, 2.21 GAA

Without Hasek, 17-18-5. 903 sv%, 2.50 GAA. Out of all of the examples posted here, this is the first negative record below 500. This is still good for 18th in the league (out of 28th teams) during that stretch. In contrast, with Hasek in lineup they’d be around ~12th in standings based on their record extrapolated to 82 games. An important impact, but not huge.

In the 2000-2001 season - with Hasek playing for Buffalo - Buffalo are 8th overall in league standings. 916 sv%, 2.24 GAA

In the 2001-2002 season, with Hasek traded to Detroit - Buffalo is 20th overall in league standings. maintains a .500 record but misses playoffs. 906 sv% 2.44 GAA,

Clearly - Hasek being gone had a big impact on the team, as they miss the playoffs.

Carey Price. Two examples:

2015-2016 season:

In the 2015-2016 season, Price & Habs start the season on fire. This is one year after his hart/Lindsay win, and for the first time in the Price era in Montreal, Habs have a team that could actually be a contender entering a new season. The problem is – Price gets injured on November 25th – 12 games in, and misses rest of the year.

With Price: 12 games, 10-2-0, 934 sv%, 2.06 GAA. 1st in NHL standings

If you include all games until November 25th – even the ones Price didn’t play (he was out for ~3 weeks from Oct 30th to Nov 19th) Habs overall record is still 17-4-2, 924 sv%2.17 GAA, still #1 overall in NHL standings.

As soon as Price’s season is ended on November 25th, the rest of the way, Habs record is: 21-34-4, 895 sv%, 3.10 GAA, dead last in NHL standings. They’re last in points, in points %, in wins, most losses, and last in GAA. They were first in all of those categories in league prior to Nov 25th (4th in GAA).

2022 season:

In the 2021 playoffs – Carey Price has a fantastic playoff run. Helps Habs rally past division leaders Toronto despite 3-1 deficit, sweeps Jets in round 2, and beats Vegas easily in round 3. They lose to Tampa in the finals.

In the off-season – Carey Price is injured/off-ice issues, and misses the 2022 season.

Habs go from Stanley Cup Finalist to dead last in the NHL in the 2022 season.

To be fair – Habs lost more than just Price, as they also lost Weber and Danault that off-season, but it’s obvious Carey Price was the biggest impact.

Summary:

1. Lundqvist, Quick, Crosby/Malkin, Rinne major injuries - teams maintain winning/similar records without them.

2. Hasek 2000 major injury - losing record (1 game below 500). Buffalo drops 6 spots in NHL standings without Hasek

3. Hasek trade - gone in 2002. Buffalo drops 12 spots (from 8th to 20th)

4. Carey Price 2016 major injury - Habs go from #1 in league with Price, to dead last (#30) without him

5. Price injury - misses 2022 season. Habs go from Stanley Cup finalist with Price, to dead last without him

Carey Price played on bad teams his whole career. If he had played on a good team, or even an average team, his statistics, his vezina record, and his playoff successes would be much greater.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Voted best goalie by peers, repeatedly.

For a stretch of ~3-5 years, Carey Price won all the NHLPA player polls, or Athletic player polls for any question resembling “best goalie”. I unfortunately can’t seem to track down all of the Athletic polls or when they started, so I’ll concentrate on NHLPA:

To piggyback on this...

14 evaluators (goalie coaches, scouts, GMs, etc.) get a rating of 1 to 5, 1 being the best. It's not a list, so multiple goalies can have a number because they do the whole league. But 1's are relatively rare.

2013-14 - Price 1.07 rating (marginally 3rd behind Lundqvist and Quick because there is an element of team success in these)

2014-15 - Price 1.00 rating (1st, "Price was the only goalie to earn a 1 from every voter. In fact, there was never any hesitation."); Lundqvist fell to 2 for the first time in two seasons.

2015-16 - Price 1.00 rating (1st, only goalie with straight 1's that I could find)

2016-17 - Price 1.05 rating (1st again)

2017-18 (now a 10 person panel) - Price 1.05 (1st again, all 1's except one person gave him a 1.5, because "I don't think anyone is a sure one"; in the same poll, a panelist tried to give him a number below one to represent Price being in a class by himself)

The quality of the poll seems to drop a bit here because of the reasoning cited. Like...what's the point of asking a goalie coach to evaluate a goalie if they're gonna look at the team in front of him as a reason to knock him? Any goon can do that...I'll post what I could find of the 2019-20 poll re: Vasilevskiy and Price because it's valid for this thread.

Tier 1​

The gap between Andrei Vasilevskiy and the next goalie on this list is as large as any in this project. That’s a sign of just how much better panelists believe Vasilevskiy is than any other goalie. Really, he could be in his own tier. Last year, he was tied for first on this list and his rating has improved every year since he took over as starter.

“He can win a game by himself,” said one head coach. “Let’s say we get them on a back-to-back and they’re not in the game and we’re barraging them – breakaways, 2-on-1s – it’s save, save, save. Next thing you know, they get into the game, they start playing and – bang, bang, bang – the game is over. He gives them a chance to win every game no matter what.”

Multiple panelists pointed out that the Lightning can play loose as a team and Vasilevskiy is often the difference until the Tampa Bay offense gets going.

“It’s 82 games, they’re just floating in … turning the puck over,” explained a coach. “All of a sudden, you’re getting chances and Vasilevskiy is making back door saves, saves against a regular goalie that probably go in. That’s what happens. Then they start playing, get rolling, get a sweat and now it’s going in. But he’s the reason they won the game.”

As good as the 2019 Vezina Trophy winner was last year, he doesn’t come without concerns. Vasilevskiy had a .856 save percentage in the playoffs last postseason and one panelist said that’s part of the reason he gave a 1.5 instead of a one.

“When they fell apart, he fell apart,” he said. “’You’re still ahead of the elite goalies in the league but you have a hell of a team in front of you buddy.’ Tampa not only wins games, Tampa demoralizes teams. They’re so good.”

After dropping into fifth place on this list last year, Carey Price is back in the top tier, even if it’s still his second-lowest rating since we started collecting these opinions. Price finished last season with a .918 save percentage, right at his career average.

“He’s just so f***ing good,” said one executive. “He’s technically good, he’s mentally good. That’s a tough place, all the bullshit they have to go through. He stays healthy. He’s pretty darn good for me.”

“He’s battled some things but I have no issue with him,” said one GM who put Price in the top tier.

A goalie coach who gave Price a two, said it had more to do with his team than the goalie.

“His team has been so up and down,” he said. “Him and Vasilevskiy are two of the best goalies in the league along with (John) Gibson knocking on the door. But these guys need support. You put them on good teams, they’re all going to be (tier) ones and Vezina Trophy candidates. Environment plays a big role in the success of a goalie.”

The following season (2021):
It's...
1. Vasilevskiy (1.03, the lowest mark since Price's perfect 1's)
2. Price (1.27)
t-2. Hellebuyck (1.27)
[gap]
4. Rask

##

Some people like to point at nonsense stats and blame the media and all kinds of excuses...but in absolutely no uncertain terms, if you don't like Carey Price, you don't know the sport. There's just not a question about the caliber of this player.

Full disclosure, I had him at 6th overall in my prelim list, just behind Hasek. Hasek gets a lot of "woe is me...Buffalo" points. Carey Price ought to get the same. As bobholly pointed out, the Canadiens fell off a cliff without Price. Hasek gets a red carpet roll out for playing behind a very defensive Czech team in '98...Carey Price sometimes got away from Montreal and...

The little bit of time that we saw him outside of Montreal against the top of his class:
2016 World Cup 5-0, 1.47, .957
2014 Olympics 6-0, 0.59, .972
2007 WJCs 6-0, 1.14, .961

17-0, a ~1ish GAA, .960ish save pct. (just eyeballing those numbers).

I get it's a small sample, I get it's Canada...but compared to guys like Dryden, even Brodeur...this was a peerless run.

Imagine if we had a yearly panel of experts and another of players in a 30+ team pro circuit(s) situation in, say, 1925 or whatever and there's almost a decade long stretch of what is said about Carey Price...he'd probably be in the conversation for 1st overall. Instead, he's going to fight and claw for freakin' 15th...? I don't know, boys...I know that new is scary sometimes, but here's one where we have the answer key.

 

[MadArcand]

Full disclosure, I had him at 6th overall in my prelim list, just behind Hasek. Hasek gets a lot of "woe is me...Buffalo" points. Carey Price ought to get the same. As bobholly pointed out, the Canadiens fell off a cliff without Price. Hasek gets a red carpet roll out for playing behind a very defensive Czech team in '98...Carey Price sometimes got away from Montreal and...

This is not a comparison I like. Peak, maybe. But Hasek comes in without very high expectations, keeps pace with Belfour immediately, then outperforms Fuhr/Puppa and goes on a run like no one else. Price? Comes in with god-like expectations and has a good RS, but then repeatedly sucks in the playoffs, gets grossly outperformed by Halak (and even somehow Budaj on one occasion), has one good year in the year 2-6 stretch of his career... then he finally takes off and lives up to the expectations. It's a very different thing.

 

[Michael Farkas]

But Hasek comes in without very high expectations, keeps pace with Belfour immediately, then outperforms Fuhr/Puppa

Hasek is #1 and Price is fighting for 15th right now, so it's ok to have a gap here...but Hasek "keeps pace with Belfour immediately" doesn't reflect the situation very well imo. Hasek spent more time in the minors there because it was so clearly Belfour's crease. Hasek got two decisions across two playoffs.

And if we take the small data set of numbers as "immediately keeping pace" in Chicago, then surely the .896 vs. .891 and .890 of virtually irrelevant Puppa and washed Fuhr is also keeping pace...

He was also given away at this time. Which happens...but if folks thought that he was "keeping pace with Belfour", there'd be a line out the door for him. This was a player that spent time in the minors, and then was a regular part of a three-man rotation. Then the run started...

 

[bobholly39]

This is not a comparison I like. Peak, maybe. But Hasek comes in without very high expectations, keeps pace with Belfour immediately, then outperforms Fuhr/Puppa and goes on a run like no one else. Price? Comes in with god-like expectations and has a good RS, but then repeatedly sucks in the playoffs, gets grossly outperformed by Halak (and even somehow Budaj on one occasion), has one good year in the year 2-6 stretch of his career... then he finally takes off and lives up to the expectations. It's a very different thing.

Uhh.....say what now? Carey Price repeatedly sucked in the playoffs? Carey Price is actually an amazing playoff performer.

Carey Price in elimination games:

Since 2015 up until 2021 finals - Carey Price is 11-0 when his team scores 3 or more goals in a playoff game.

He was spectacular in the 2011 playoffs - the year after Montreal chose him over Halak.

He wasn't great in the playoffs at ages 21 & 22. Is that what you're basing this comment on?

 

[MXD]

This is not a comparison I like. Peak, maybe. But Hasek (1)comes in without very high expectations, keeps pace with Belfour immediately, then outperforms Fuhr/Puppa and goes on a run like no one else. (3)Price? Comes in with god-like expectations and has a good RS, but then (4) repeatedly sucks in the playoffs, gets grossly outperformed by Halak (5)(and even somehow Budaj on one occasion), (6) has one good year in the year 2-6 stretch of his career... then he finally takes off and lives up to the expectations. It's a very different thing.

(1) : Hasek was already a pro in his prime and expectations should've been higher. That's an expectations/scouting problem, not an Hasek selling point. Besides, Hasek is #1. Price won't be ranked above #15.
(2) : He did. It wasn't prime Fuhr and Puppa won't make this list. Besides, Hasek is #1. Price won't be ranked above #15.
(3) : Expectations as a rookie netminder who hasn't hit his prime. Not many 21 years old broke out in the league since.
(4) : I guess you mean before 2011. If you don't, that's... credibility-damaging. If you do... fair : he wasn't terrible in 2008, but he wasn't great either; he was meh in 2009, but it's more a case of a team that had completely given up and him being an NPC, and he was pretty bad whenever he played in 2010.
(5) : That was in 2013, the year he was visibly injured but continued playing.
(6) : You called "good" 2010-2011 (that's a serious understatement) and worse than good 2011-2012, which is probably descriptive of some reality, but not of Carey Price's actual performance in 2011-2012.


I personally think it's a bit early for Price... But also that he came up for voting at the right time. As I've said before, there's a reason why Lundqvist is widely considered better than Price, and it has absolutely nothing to do with their skill level. Whether it's due to lack of seriousness (think whatever happened before 2010-2011), injuries (2013, 2015-2016) or team/coaching (2011-2012, late Therrien days), the sum of results don't quite align with skill level. Some of these should absolutely have no effect on performance and require to put his performance in context (team/coaching), but the lack of seriousness and injuries are absolutely on him.

But, on the other hand, Price started his NHL starting (at least 1B) career at 20 years old. That wasn't super frequent in 2008, and that's still not super frequent now. Compare with Hasek who started his NHL career in his prime, and whose pre-NHL career is generally considered to be worth at least something non-negligible, and those two are, like, super odd comparisons.

Like, if we're being honest, Carey Price shouldn't be credited for being a great playoffs netminder for his early career. But penalizing him when his peers we not in the NHL feels a bit disingenuous. Not AS disingenuous as the rando who said Price had great team support, citing Alex Emelin as an example, but still disingenuous.

 

[jigglysquishy]

Tiny Thompson in the Cup Finals

1929 Finals
Boston beat NYR 2-0 in a best of 3 series
Bruins 1 Rangers 0

The Border Cities Star - March 29, 1929

During the final session the Bruins played carefully and the Rangers carried the play into Boston territory throughout the period, but were unable to tally on account of the splendid exhibition of goal-tending by Tiny Thompson and the fine defensive work of Hitchman and Shore.

Boston wins 2-1 to win Cup
Bruins 2 Rangers 0

The Montreal Gazette - March 30, 1929

Boston had a clear margin in territorial play and their defence also appeared stronger than that of their opponents. Roach was called upon to make 35 saves, many of them from close-in shots, while Thompson at the other end played 32 safely, but many of these were from long range.

I can't complain about 1 goal against in 2 games. But those Bruins were stacked and are talked about as the wide favourite coming into it. Shore and Hitchman are a deadly pairing to have in front of you


1930 Finals
Montreal beats Boston 3-0 in a best of 3 series. Hainsworth and Shore noted as the stars.
Bruins 0 Habs 1

The Montreal Gazette - April 2, 1930
Of note, it's said repeatedly that Montreal dominated the game start to finish. Thompson is barely noted.

Hainsworth is Star
Backing the Canadiens was the cool and collected George Hainsworth. Instilling his utter rigidity into all his teammates at the critical times when the Bruins were threatening, Hainsworth made another contribution to the victory in more palpable form.

Montreal beats Boston 4-3 to win the Cup
Bruins 0 Habs 2
The Calgary Daily Herald - April 4, 1930

Canadiens opened up with an amazing burst of speed which swept them in on Tiny Thompson and netted two goals in the first period.
Morenz raced in for his own rebound, but Thompson was too quick for him.
Morenz and McCaffrey raced around the Boston defence, but Thompson saved.
Joliat tricked the Boston defence to put Larochelle in perfect scoring position, but Thompson fell to smother the shot.

Montreal thoroughly outplayed Boston this series. Thompson gets lots of praise in game 2, but Hainsworth gets lots in game 1.



Overall, four Stanley Cup final games are not a lot to learn from.



A few concerns I have regarding Thompson. There are several times when the Bruins are a regular season powerhouse, but fall in the playoffs. In 1930 they have one of the greatest regular seasons ever, but lose to the Canadiens. In 1933 they tie for first overall in the league, but lose to Toronto in the first round. In 1938 they are again the best regular season team only to get swept by Toronto.

Now, these series are tight and it's obviously not all on Thompson. I don't love the look of him being their starter for 10 years and the first year he's gone old-man Shore and young-man Brimsek win the Cup. And it's clear in the 1930s that it's Eddie Shore's team. Is Thompson the sixth biggest star of the Bruins 1927-1942 behind Shore, Clapper, Schmidt, Brimsek, and Cowley?


In terms of the 1927-1939 era (post-Vezina/Benedict and pre-Brimsek) we've already established Gardiner as the clear king, by both contemporary opinion and all-star voting. I think there's an appreciable gap to number 2. Where are we sitting on Worters vs. Thompson for 2?

 

[MXD]

In terms of the 1927-1939 era (post-Vezina/Benedict and pre-Brimsek) we've already established Gardiner as the clear king, by both contemporary opinion and all-star voting. I think there's an appreciable gap to number 2. Where are we sitting on Worters vs. Thompson for 2?

The dates kindof exclude him, but George Hainsworth would probably like to have his word here. I'm not sure I want Thompson in before there's a Thompson/Kerr dive that can possibly be done (I realize this isn't super likely).

 

[jigglysquishy]

The dates kindof exclude him, but George Hainsworth would probably like to have his word here. I'm not sure I want Thompson in before there's a Thompson/Kerr dive that can possibly be done (I realize this isn't super likely).

That's a fair point. It's a shame his prime is just before we have all-star voting. Worters has the Hart votes, Thompson has the AS votes, Hainsworth as the GAA stats.

Hainsworth does get much more praise on the 1936-1952 era all-time lists. He fairs better than Worters or Thompson.

 

[MadArcand]

(1) : Hasek was already a pro in his prime and expectations should've been higher. That's an expectations/scouting problem, not an Hasek selling point. Besides, Hasek is #1. Price won't be ranked above #15.
(2) : He did. It wasn't prime Fuhr and Puppa won't make this list. Besides, Hasek is #1. Price won't be ranked above #15.
(3) : Expectations as a rookie netminder who hasn't hit his prime. Not many 21 years old broke out in the league since.
(4) : I guess you mean before 2011. If you don't, that's... credibility-damaging. If you do... fair : he wasn't terrible in 2008, but he wasn't great either; he was meh in 2009, but it's more a case of a team that had completely given up and him being an NPC, and he was pretty bad whenever he played in 2010.
(5) : That was in 2013, the year he was visibly injured but continued playing.
(6) : You called "good" 2010-2011 (that's a serious understatement) and worse than good 2011-2012, which is probably descriptive of some reality, but not of Carey Price's actual performance in 2011-2012.


I personally think it's a bit early for Price... But also that he came up for voting at the right time. As I've said before, there's a reason why Lundqvist is widely considered better than Price, and it has absolutely nothing to do with their skill level. Whether it's due to lack of seriousness (think whatever happened before 2010-2011), injuries (2013, 2015-2016) or team/coaching (2011-2012, late Therrien days), the sum of results don't quite align with skill level. Some of these should absolutely have no effect on performance and require to put his performance in context (team/coaching), but the lack of seriousness and injuries are absolutely on him.

But, on the other hand, Price started his NHL starting (at least 1B) career at 20 years old. That wasn't super frequent in 2008, and that's still not super frequent now. Compare with Hasek who started his NHL career in his prime, and whose pre-NHL career is generally considered to be worth at least something non-negligible, and those two are, like, super odd comparisons.

Like, if we're being honest, Carey Price shouldn't be credited for being a great playoffs netminder for his early career. But penalizing him when his peers we not in the NHL feels a bit disingenuous. Not AS disingenuous as the rando who said Price had great team support, citing Alex Emelin as an example, but still disingenuous.

1. (also to @bobholly39 ) yes, obviously I'm talking about his first bunch of playoff runs. Actually he had a poor showing in 2013 too, but 2011 is sandwiched between this and the early 3 bad runs.
2. would you really call his 2011-12 as anything better than "above average"? Genuinely curious, you've witnessed it first hand, but just by numbers it doesn't look that hot.
3. I like Price much more than Lundqvist myself, peak Price reached levels that Lundqvist couldn't attain even in his dreams; and Price's problems are mostly his rocky 1st 1/3 of his career and injuries later on, not actual skill level (unlike Lundqvist, but I digress).
4. As for Price starting early... sure, felt even forced and too early really. But getting outplayed by just 2 years older Halak..?

 

[MXD]

That's a fair point. It's a shame his prime is just before we have all-star voting. Worters has the Hart votes, Thompson has the AS votes, Hainsworth as the GAA stats.

Hainsworth does get much more praise on the 1936-1952 era all-time lists. He fairs better than Worters or Thompson.

Just for some context, there's... probably some shutout counting at work here. But also, in 1936, Hainsworth's career was over, while Thompson's wasn't. Maybe voter familiarity? Just spitballing some contextual elements here.

 

[bobholly39]

1. (also to @bobholly39 ) yes, obviously I'm talking about his first bunch of playoff runs. Actually he had a poor showing in 2013 too, but 2011 is sandwiched between this and the early 3 bad runs.
2. would you really call his 2011-12 as anything better than "above average"? Genuinely curious, you've witnessed it first hand, but just by numbers it doesn't look that hot.
3. I like Price much more than Lundqvist myself, peak Price reached levels that Lundqvist couldn't attain even in his dreams; and Price's problems are mostly his rocky 1st 1/3 of his career and injuries later on, not actual skill level (unlike Lundqvist, but I digress).
4. As for Price starting early... sure, felt even forced and too early really. But getting outplayed by just 2 years older Halak..?

I mean - Patrick Roy famously got outplayed by Brian Hawyard in the 1987 season and playoffs. And again, in 1988 season and mostly playoffs.

Yes - Price had a bit of ups and downs when he was really young, but I don't think that's a big blemish for a goalie at that age. It's impressive he was playing in the NHL so young.

 

[MXD]

1. (also to @bobholly39 ) yes, obviously I'm talking about his first bunch of playoff runs. Actually he had a poor showing in 2013 too, but 2011 is sandwiched between this and the early 3 bad runs.
2. would you really call his 2011-12 as anything better than "above average"? Genuinely curious, you've witnessed it first hand, but just by numbers it doesn't look that hot.
3. I like Price much more than Lundqvist myself, peak Price reached levels that Lundqvist couldn't attain even in his dreams; and Price's problems are mostly his rocky 1st 1/3 of his career and injuries later on, not actual skill level (unlike Lundqvist, but I digress).
4. As for Price starting early... sure, felt even forced and too early really. But getting outplayed by just 2 years older Halak..?

1 : Visibly injured but played regardless. Like, his SV% went from around 0.925 a bit past mid-season to .905 at the end.
2 : He was at the very worst "good" in 2011-2012. That was a clearly well below-average skater group held together by a bad Head Coach. The defensive pairings were a total mishmash, except for the still-a-bit-green PK Subban - Josh Gorges (!) first pairing; the next two players sorted by icetime are NHL rookies and NHL-sized rinks rookies Raphael Diaz and Alex Emelin. This is a team that signed Chris Campoli at the beginning of the season and traded for Tomas Kaberle despite his contract in the middle of the season BECAUSE THEY WERE SEEN AS IMPROVEMENTS OVER WHAT THEY HAD (... you won't read many more things ridiculous than this today). This is a team that finished 3rd last that probably should've finished last, and would've if they had Price and the otherwise perfectly adequate Budaj had split duties, and if Columbus didn'T stick with Steve Mason for about 25 more games than they should've.
3 : If Halak had always played like he did in the 2010 playoffs, he'd already be voted to the list. As for the season itself, they mostly split duties.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I had Halak and Hainsworth nearly back to back on my prelim...in other words, Hainsworth can kick (and likely miss) the biggest rocks he can find...if we're holding off on Tiny Thompson for the benefit of Hainsworth, then it's the equivalent of two skydivers getting their parachutes tangled in the air for me.

I'm a much bigger fan of Thompson...and even Worters, who appears to get "you tried your best, but life sucks" Hart recognition, but that may not be a clear indicator that he himself was the greatest goalie of the era. It seems quite likely not, in fact.

 

[seventieslord]

That's a fair point. It's a shame his prime is just before we have all-star voting. Worters has the Hart votes, Thompson has the AS votes, Hainsworth as the GAA stats.

Hainsworth does get much more praise on the 1936-1952 era all-time lists. He fairs better than Worters or Thompson.

I'm concerned that a lot of that is GAA and vezina related though. It's easy for people to look back and see that he won the three straight vezinas. And there are no official all-star teams in those seasons to refute that. It's way too convenient for him.

Worters, I think, was clearly the most highly revered goalie, particularly when you include The unofficial coach voted all-star teams.

And I think we are missing one or two of them, but his hockey card from 1930 or whatever seems to indicate that he led the vote all of the past four years.

 

[MXD]

I had Halak and Hainsworth nearly back to back on my prelim...in other words, Hainsworth can kick (and likely miss) the biggest rocks he can find...if we're holding off on Tiny Thompson for the benefit of Hainsworth, then it's the equivalent of two skydivers getting their parachutes tangled in the air for me.

I'm a much bigger fan of Thompson...and even Worters, who appears to get "you tried your best, but life sucks" Hart recognition, but that may not be a clear indicator that he himself was the greatest goalie of the era. It seems quite likely not, in fact.

..Errhmm...
Worters won the Hart in 1929, with the exact same GAA as Tiny Thompson, who benefitted from much, much, much better defensive and offensive support.

 

[Michael Farkas]

..Errhmm...
Worters won the Hart in 1929, with the exact same GAA as Tiny Thompson, who benefitted from much, much, much better defensive and offensive support.

I have no doubts about this. But that's just a thing...that...numbers...spit out...

Roy and Cechmanek can have the same GAA in different situations, but there's never a reason to choose Cechmanek...unless it's a single eyebrow raising contest...

Worters was dealt a bad hand mostly, but that doesn't automatically make him better. Thompson was dealt a better hand and that doesn't automatically make him worse. Not that you're necessarily saying that, but sometimes we get into an "MVP of the goalies" contest in era competition. I think that can be a piece of the puzzle, but not a driving force...

 

[MadArcand]

I mean - Patrick Roy famously got outplayed by Brian Hawyard in the 1987 season and playoffs. And again, in 1988 season and mostly playoffs.

Yes - Price had a bit of ups and downs when he was really young, but I don't think that's a big blemish for a goalie at that age. It's impressive he was playing in the NHL so young.

I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying here. I'm not trying to downplay Price, just pointing out the differences between his and Hasek's situation and saying that the comparison falls extremely flat for me. For what it's worth, I'll take Price over Lundqvist and Vasilevsky in a heartbeat.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I'll take Price over Lundqvist and Vasilevsky in a heartbeat.

Sold! That's good enough for me.

 

[The Macho King]

Habs fans...

 

[MadArcand]

Habs fans...

I've been accused of many things, but this? What's next, Pens fan?