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

[jigglysquishy]

Does anyone have either Luongo or Broda near top of their ballots? They got almost 0 discussion this round.

I have them kind of in the middle, and wonder if either/or might sneak in.

Not top no, somewhere in the middle.

I've been pouring over tons of stuff about the 40s and 60s Leafs dynasties. I'm pretty confident at this point in Bower being ahead of Broda.

Hap Day ran a punishing and tight defensive system that minimized chances against. Broda had a comparatively easy time. He saw shots, but they were typically from distance. Centres stayed back to protect the net. And the system worked since they won 5 Cups (arguably 6) on it. It is the most defense prioritized dynasty I've come across.

It's hard to rank Broda high when all the contemporary reports highlight team defense over goaltender. But I do think he needs to go next round. The longevity is still impressive.

The 60s Leafs were still a defensive juggernaut, but not nearly to the same degree. Bower shouldered more responsibility and is heaped with praise. The Habs teams they played pre dynasty might be the best ever and Bower is 1B to Plante in those series.

Luongo should go soon but not now.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Does anyone have either Luongo or Broda near top of their ballots? They got almost 0 discussion this round.

I have them kind of in the middle, and wonder if either/or might sneak in.

"Absolutely not" for Broda.
"No, there are too many better goalies available" for Luongo.

 

[nabby12]

Does anyone have either Luongo or Broda near top of their ballots? They got almost 0 discussion this round.

I have them kind of in the middle, and wonder if either/or might sneak in.

Yep, I have Broda in the top-3 this round, which is where he should be rightfully going.

Luongo is near the bottom of my list this round.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Yep, I have Broda in the top-3 this round, which is where he should be rightfully going.

What's the case here? I haven't seen any defense of Broda from anyone in this thread. "Rightfully" ought to come with a pitch...right?

 

[Professor What]

I have Broda high at the moment, though I think it's a bit fragile. There are some guys underneath him that could easily topple him if the discussion goes the wrong way for him. Honestly, I think it's largely an artifact of my having had him high to start with. He hasn't quite been brought down, but he hasn't been buoyed like some guys have.

Luongo is in the middle of my ballot right now, I suspect he's going to end up there.

 

[blogofmike]

Hap Day ran a punishing and tight defensive system that minimized chances against. Broda had a comparatively easy time. He saw shots, but they were typically from distance. Centres stayed back to protect the net. And the system worked since they won 5 Cups (arguably 6) on it. It is the most defense prioritized dynasty I've come across.

What of the system of Tommy Gorman?

After starting out working for the Senators, Gorman was the New York Americans coach for Roy Worters first year. After Gorman left, the Americans stopped winning and Worters wasn't outperforming his backups, including Jake Forbes (who @Michael Farkas recently described as "not good.")

He left to go into horse racing. After a suspicious horse murder, (Johnny Fontaine is getting a part in that picture!) Gorman returned to the NHL.

He was Chicago's coach for the Charlie Gardiner Cup in his first full season. While the Vezina Trophy stayed in Chicago following Gardiner's death, the Stanley Cup followed Gorman to the Montreal Maroons.

He then became GM of the Canadiens for the 2 40s Cups.

Might be relevant (to varying degrees) to Clint Benedict, Roy Worters, Charlie Gardiner, Alec Connell, and Bill Durnan, though perhaps less so for Benedict and Durnan as he was a front office guy.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I think it's largely an artifact of my having had him high to start with.

Yeah...this has been tough to overcome it seems.

We have Broda with a narrow 1st team (which probably went to him by a vote over Brimsek due to the GAA connection), a 2nd team in 1942, a 3rd team in a War weakened 1947, a tie for a 1st team in 1948, another 3rd team in 1949 and 1950.

We can't guarantee (in fact, I'd suggest we can fairly assume NOT) any what-if boost from the War years he lost because I don't think he was better than Durnan and it's quite clear he wasn't on the same level of Brimsek at all.

He played for one of the better defensive clubs of the era, as js has pointed out in detail.

Again, not that I love the "vs. teammates" stuff, but superficially...

Leafs goalies from 1936 to 1952:
Broda 304-222-102 (.564) | 2.53 | 61 SO (every 10.3 GP)
Rest 138-117-43 (.535) | 2.70 | 28 SO (every 10.6 GP)

Then you look at things like the mobility and stylistic stuff that promote some rebound issues...it seems fairly clear that he likely would have struggled in virtually any other environment. And given his: 1st, t-1st, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd line across 13 seasons, seems like he's already sort of holding on by a thread to even be in the discussion right now at all.

I know Billy Smith is on a pitch count and therefore, effectively, ineligible for awards...but if you need a money goalie, Smith had a much more scalable game. But I wouldn't even necessarily advocate for either of these guys right now...we have absolute killers in Price and Vasilevskiy right here. We have a better version of Billy Smith in Bernie Parent here. We have like 30 decades of greatness from Bower going against a murderer's row of goalies that we already placed.

I just can't imagine what goes into Broda or Benedict or Holecek right now...where is the case for these guys? Tough to see how they're near the top of ballots right now for me. Real tough.

 

[seventieslord]

What's the case here? I haven't seen any defense of Broda from anyone in this thread. "Rightfully" ought to come with a pitch...right?

He's from Manitoba.

 

[Michael Farkas]

He's from Manitoba.

Oh...why didn't anyone say so?!?!

 

[MXD]

I ranked Broda towards the top of my rankings on a preliminary basis since I don't know if I'll be able to post on Sunday. It's probably the ranking I'm the least certain of, but he's not crashing down anytime soon.

There's something to be said for getting consistently done in the playoffs, PLUS, there's a determined amount of credit that has to be given, and I always considered Ted Kennedy to be somewhat overrated in the grand scheme of things. And there's the longevity too. And I'm also weary of giving undue weight to coaching, since too many stupid shit is sometimes attributed to this factor, like Jean Perron having somehow a POSITIVE EFFECT on a netminder.

Luongo is firmly mid pack.

 

[nabby12]

He's from Manitoba.

Yeah exactly, James. Real good of you to pipe up there.

Oh and also, Broda won Five Stanley Cups, two Vezinas, two First Team All Stars. And also considered one of the top 3 goalies of his era with Brimsek/Durnan. What did Luongo win exactly, besides the OGM on a stacked Canada team. He was a born loser in the playoffs.

But Hap Day was defensive!? Broda was a system's goalie and anyone could have been slotted in and have also been as successful!! The claims in this thread are getting so absurd.

It's also hysterical that Farkas can watch 10 minutes of footage from the 1930s/1940s and try to make claims if a goalie is good or not. So ridiculous.

But that's a lot of what we've seen in this HOH: guys like James and Farkas...people who constantly act like they're the smartest in the room when in reality, they don't crack the top 20.

 

[Michael Farkas]

There's something to be said for getting consistently done in the playoffs

Where is Smith for you this round?

 

[nabby12]

I ranked Broda towards the top of my rankings on a preliminary basis since I don't know if I'll be able to post on Sunday. It's probably the ranking I'm the least certain of, but he's not crashing down anytime soon.

There's something to be said for getting consistently done in the playoffs, PLUS, there's a determined amount of credit that has to be given, and I always considered Ted Kennedy to be somewhat overrated in the grand scheme of things. And there's the longevity too. And I'm also weary of giving undue weight to coaching, since too many stupid shit is sometimes attributed to this factor, like Jean Perron having somehow a POSITIVE EFFECT on a netminder.

Luongo is firmly mid pack.

Exactly. Being one of the best money goaltenders of all time should certainly carry some weight here.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Yeah exactly, James. Real good of you to pipe up there.

Oh and also, Broda won Five Stanley Cups, two Vezinas, two First Team All Stars. And also considered one of the top 3 goalies of his era with Brimsek/Durnan. What did Luongo win exactly, besides the OGM on a stacked Canada team. He was a born loser in the playoffs.

But Hap Day was defensive!? Broda was a system's goalie and anyone could have been slotted in an be so successful!! The claims in this thread are getting so absurd.

It's also hysterical that Farkas can watch 10 minutes of footage from the 1930s/1940s and try to make claims if a goalie is good or not. So ridiculous.

But that's a lot of what we've seen in this HOH: guys like James and Farkas...people who constantly act like they're the smartest in the room when in reality, they don't crack the top 20.

We're ranking the posters now...? ****!

Ugh, there's only 19 panelists and I didn't make the top 20...**** me, tough start to the weekend...

 

[MXD]

Where is Smith for you this round?

Lower, the playoffs being probably the reason why he's even ranked in the first place (... well, probably not -- I'm really down on Tiny Thompson if no one had figured that out yet). And he did have better team support than Broda too.

 

[nabby12]

Lower, the playoffs being probably the reason why he's even ranked in the first place (... well, probably not -- I'm really down on Tiny Thompson if no one had figured that out yet). And he did have better team support than Broda too.

I'm in a similar boat here with Smith and Thompson.

In addition to Broda, I had Benedict and Worters in my top-3 this round. I've always been very high on Benedict and still think he's better or as good as Vezina, while Worters was insanely good despite playing on very poor teams. He's still so incredibly underrated, but I wonder if Worters had gotten his Cup like Gardiner did, where he'd be in these rankings.

Oh, and also Benedict and Worters are not from Manitoba!!

We're ranking the posters now...? ****!

Ugh, there's only 19 panelists and I didn't make the top 20...**** me, tough start to the weekend...

 

[seventieslord]

But that's a lot of what we've seen in this HOH: guys like James and Farkas...people who constantly act like they're the smartest in the room when in reality, they don't crack the top 20.

Hey now, there's no need for that. I think it's worth mentioning that you seem higher on almost every goalie that's either from Manitoba or played there, that's all.

 

[jigglysquishy]

I don't want to reduce Broda down to just a systems goalie. He's ten tiers ahead of a Brian Elliott. I still think he's a top 20 goalie here, just not a top 15 goalie.

I have Benedict in my top 4 too along with Vasilevsky, Bower, and Price.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Lower, the playoffs being probably the reason why he's even ranked in the first place (... well, probably not -- I'm really down on Tiny Thompson if no one had figured that out yet). And he did have better team support than Broda too.

I get it, I'm just trying to figure out the logical consistency. I like a money goalie too. And you can only play who you can play, but...how much credit is too much credit? To hit rewind just a couple days, it was a big hullabaloo that we force Vezina in as quickly as possible because otherwise we're taking the 3rd best from another era.

Now...we have clear bests in a higher quality league with Price and Vasilevskiy and we're gonna force-feed Broda - the clear third of the War generation - right now because...

1942 Final - he beat a .438 Wings team (bottom 3 offense)
1947 Semi-final - he beat a .458 Wings team
1948 Semi-final - he beat a .492 Bruins team (bottom 2 offense)
1949 were both upsets by the Leafs by a sub .500 Leafs team, fair enough
1951 Semi-final - he beat a .443 Bruins team and 1951 Final - a.464 Habs team

I'm sure Smith got a cupcake round too, but...again, I don't really want him here either.

I'm just not sure I'm following the logic intra-thread or from thread to thread at this point...which I'm not saying at you MXD. But once again, it seems like goalies are getting a lot of points for Being-On-The-Last-List/60.

Then again, full disclosure, I've been nominated as Dunce of the Week recently...so following logic is not my strength haha

 

[nabby12]

Hey now, there's no need for that. I think it's worth mentioning that you seem higher on almost every goalie that's either from Manitoba or played there, that's all.

More so the older goalies, I'll tend to research more and defend as I've more often than not have written about them in the past. However, I'm not as high on Belfour even though I now write for the newspaper in his hometown!

 

[Michael Farkas]

I don't want to reduce Broda down to just a systems goalie. He's ten tiers ahead of a Brian Elliott. I still think he's a top 20 goalie here, just not a top 15 goalie.

I have Benedict in my top 4 too.

Yeah, I don't think any reasonable person would come to the conclusion that he's "just a systems goalie" from the discussion...I think that's a hysterical reaction that isn't necessary here. But at the same time, it's important (in my opinion) to consider context and weigh some important factors. I don't think we're trashing history or the province of Manitoba by making Broda wait his turn. As...there's been no legitimate backing of him so far, other than "he's a money goalie"...which isn't so much a defense as it is a topic statement of a bigger case...one would think...

 

[nabby12]

Yeah, I don't think any reasonable person would come to the conclusion that he's "just a systems goalie" from the discussion...I think that's a hysterical reaction that isn't necessary here. But at the same time, it's important (in my opinion) to consider context and weigh some important factors. I don't think we're trashing history or the province of Manitoba by making Broda wait his turn. As...there's been no legitimate backing of him so far, other than "he's a money goalie"...which isn't so much a defense as it is a topic statement of a bigger case...one would think...

Agree to disagree, clearly, as myself and other posters feel that Broda's turn has arrived in this round...

 

[overpass]

Broda had a long career with a contending team and if there's a theme it's that he exceeded expectations. I don't think he was often regarded as the best, but his team kept coming out on top.

Even at the end of his career he was exceeding expectations. I don't think the Leafs intended Broda to be their goalie past 1950, but they were struck with an unexpected situation in training camp of September 1949. Within a week, their goalie depth disappeared. Baz Bastien of the Pittsburgh Hornets, regarded as the best goalie in the AHL, lost an eye to a shot and was forced to retire. And Howie Harvey, Doug's brother who was an up and coming netminder for the Leafs, retired due to an equipment skin rash.

So the Leafs traded for Al Rollins, but he was never quite able to beat out Broda, and they traded him for Harry Lumley.

My guess is that Smythe expected Harvey or Bastien to have taken over in goal by 1950 or 1951. But who knows, maybe they wouldn't have been able to unseat Broda either.

 

[MXD]

I get it, I'm just trying to figure out the logical consistency. I like a money goalie too. And you can only play who you can play, but...how much credit is too much credit? To hit rewind just a couple days, it was a big hullabaloo that we force Vezina in as quickly as possible because otherwise we're taking the 3rd best from another era.

Now...we have clear bests in a higher quality league with Price and Vasilevskiy and we're gonna force-feed Broda - the clear third of the War generation - right now because...

1942 Final - he beat a .438 Wings team (bottom 3 offense)
1947 Semi-final - he beat a .458 Wings team
1948 Semi-final - he beat a .492 Bruins team (bottom 2 offense)
1949 were both upsets by the Leafs by a sub .500 Leafs team, fair enough
1951 Semi-final - he beat a .443 Bruins team and 1951 Final - a.464 Habs team

I'm sure Smith got a cupcake round too, but...again, I don't really want him here either.

I'm just not sure I'm following the logic intra-thread or from thread to thread at this point...which I'm not saying at you MXD. But once again, it seems like goalies are getting a lot of points for Being-On-The-Last-List/60.

Then again, full disclosure, I've been nominated as Dunce of the Week recently...so following logic is not my strength haha

I've seen enough, and I'm also well aware of, Vasilevskiy's play, career, context and limitations.

As for Price... You really want to go there, considering I saw him play... what, about 775 pro games?

 

[Michael Farkas]

Agree to disagree, clearly, as myself and other posters feel that Broda's turn has arrived in this round...

Will those posters ever state why? If not, I feel like maybe a week is too long for the discussion round if it's just going to be closely kept secrets where people vote on their pre-conceived notions and their birth place...

I've seen enough, and I'm also well aware of, Vasilevskiy's play, career, context and limitations.

As for Price... You really want to go there?

He's eligible for this round and, for me, should already be up there. And this is - perhaps - the forum to do so...