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

[DN28]

Holeček should receive more credit than implications he was propped up the Czechoslovak defensive system. What more was left for him to do? Like what is he missing in his career?

When European hockey finally got on the same foot as the North American around 1970, no goalie has received more best goalie awards, more all-star votes than Holeček.

All-stars were voted by writers, best goaltender awards were decided by the IIHF directoriate. Different group of voters, yet both were repeatedly selecting Holeček. No goalie has even won internationally more of these than Holeček before or since. Including a goalie, who's already on the list, and was in better position to earn more all-stars / goalie awards since he played internationally considerably longer.

"Who cares about awards? They're binary. You either win it or don't. Don't tell us full picture. And voters make mistakes."

If you're suspect about voters being wrong, we will surely find a basis for it in stats...

No, we won't. Holeček recorded the SV% the same way as awards. Goaltending statistics are available here: Goaltenders Internationally in 1964-1990 (stats and awards)

It would be easy to reject Holeček if the stats invalidate the awards but the opposite is true.

Defensive system and good coaches didn't really help the Czechoslovak team in 1970 and 1979, did they? I'd be curious how could anyone explain away Holeček's stats in contrast with the Czechoslovak goalies' SV% immediately before and after Holeček.

World Championship 1970
1. Vladislav Tretiak (USSR): 6 games / 4 goals allowed / 76 saves / 0.9500
2. Viktor Konovalenko (USSR): 8 games / 7 goals allowed / 116 saves / 0.9431
3. Leif Holmqvist (SWE): 8 games / 14 goals allowed / 166 saves / 0.9222
4. Urpo Ylönen (FIN): 6 games / 18 goals allowed / 188 saves / 0.9126
5. Miroslav Lacký (CSSR): 1 game / 2 goals allowed / 16 saves / 0.8889
6. Klaus Hirche (E. GER): 7 games / 30 goals allowed / 232 saves / 0.8855
7. Vladimír Dzurilla (CSSR): 10 games / 28 goals allowed / 200 saves / 0.8772
8. Jorma Valtonen (FIN): 4 games / 22 goals allowed / 141 saves / 0.8650
9. Walery Kosyl (POL): 8 games / 44 goals allowed / 259 saves / 0.8548
10. Gunnar Bäckman: 2 games / 7 goals allowed / 36 saves / 0.8372
11. Dieter Pürschel (E. GER): 5 games / 20 goals allowed / 97 saves / 0.8291
12. Andrzej Tkacz (POL): 3 games / 26 goals allowed / 116 saves / 0.8169
IIHF Directoriate´s Best Goaltender: Urpo Ylönen
All-Star Team Voting: 1. Viktor Konovalenko (43 votes out of 87 ballots), 2. Leif Holmqvist (23 votes), 3. Urpo Ylönen (21 votes)

World Championship 1971
1. Jiří Holeček (CSSR): 8 games / 12 goals allowed / 216 saves / 0.9474
2. Vladislav Tretiak (USSR): 5 games / 6 goals allowed / 80 saves / 0.9302
3. Jorma Valtonen (FIN): 7 games / 17 goals allowed / 223 saves / 0.9292
4. Marcel Sakáč (CSSR): 3 games / 8 goals allowed / 85 saves / 0.9140
5. Christer Abrahamsson (SWE): 9 games / 27 goals allowed / 284 saves / 0.9132
6. Viktor Konovalenko (USSR): 7 games / 18 goals allowed / 165 saves / 0.9016
7. Anton Kehle (W. GER): 8 games / 39 goals allowed / 319 saves / 0.8911
8. Dick Tomasoni (USA): 2 games / 6 goals allowed / 48 saves / 0.8889
9. Mike Curran (USA): 2 games / 9 goals allowed / 71 saves / 0.8875
10. Carl Wetzel (USA): 8 games / 38 goals allowed / 299 saves / 0.8872
11. Josef Schramm (W. GER): 4 games / 23 goals allowed / 167 saves / 0.8789
12. Urpo Ylönen (FIN): 4 games / 25 goals allowed / 171 saves / 0.8724
13. William Löfqvist (SWE): 1 game / 6 goals allowed / 29 saves / 0.8286
IIHF Directoriate´s Best Goaltender: Jiří Holeček
All-Star Team Voting: 1. Jiří Holeček (32 votes out of 60 ballots), 2. Jorma Valtonen (19 votes), 3. Carl Wetzel (4 votes), 4. Viktor Konovalenko, Christer Abrahamsson (2 votes)

World Championship 1978
1. Denis Herron (CAN): 255 min. (5 games) / 12 goals allowed / 138 saves / 0.9200
2. Jiří Crha (CSSR): 60 min. (1 game) / 2 goals allowed / 22 saves / 0.9167
3. Jiří Holeček (CSSR): 540 min. (9 games) / 19 goals allowed / 207 saves / 0.9159
4. Vladislav Tretiak (USSR): 480 min. (8 games) / 21 goals allowed / 208 saves / 0.9083
5. Erich Weishaupt (W. GER): 502 min. (9 games) / 33 goals allowed / 277 saves / 0.8935
6. Alexander Pashkov (USSR): 120 min. (2 games) / 5 goals allowed / 41 saves / 0.8913
7. Daniel Bouchard (CAN): 344 min. (6 games) / 24 goals allowed / 186 saves / 0.8857
8. Göran Högosta (SWE): 392 min. (7 games) / 22 goals allowed / 153 saves / 0.8743
9. Antero Kivelä (FIN): 240 min. (4 games) / 19 goals allowed / 131 saves / 0.8733
10. Hardy Aström (SWE): 208 min. (4 games) / 15 goals allowed / 102 saves / 0.8718
11. Urpo Ylönen (FIN): 360 min. (6 games) / 25 goals allowed / 167 saves / 0.8698
12. Peter LoPresti (USA): 540 min. (9 games) / 50 goals allowed / 292 saves / 0.8538
13. Jim Warden (USA): 60 min. (1 game) / 8 goals allowed / 37 saves / 0.8222
14. Bernard Engelbrecht (W. GER): 98 min. (2 games) / 10 goals allowed / 44 saves / 0.8148
15. Roland Herzig (E. GER): 399 min. (7 games) / 36 goals allowed / 142 saves / 0.7978
16. Wolfgang Kraske (E. GER): 201 min. (4 games) / 21 goals allowed / 74 saves / 0.7789
Source
IIHF Directoriate´s Best Goaltender: Jiří Holeček
All-Star Team Voting: 1. Jiří Holeček (79 votes out of 118 ballots), 2. Daniel Bouchard (??? votes)

World Championship 1979
1. Jim Craig (USA): 5 games / 11 goals allowed / 133 saves / 0.9236
2. Vladislav Tretiak (USSR): 7 games / 12 goals allowed / 140 saves / 0.9211
3. Vladimir Myshkin (USSR): 2 games / 2 goals allowed / 21saves / 0.9130
4. Sigmund Suttner (W. GER): 7 games / 21 goals allowed / 210 saves / 0.9091
5. Jorma Valtonen (FIN): 4 games / 11 goals allowed / 103 saves / 0.9035
6. Jiří Králík (CSSR): 6 games / 17 goals allowed / 126 saves / 0.8811
7. Antero Kivelä (FIN): 4 games / 16 goals allowed / 110 saves / 0.8730
8. Henryk Wojtynek (POL): 8 games / 40 goals allowed / 270 saves / 0.8710
9. James Rutherford (CAN): 6 games / 24 goals allowed / 162 saves / 0.8710
10. Sune Ödling (SWE): 2 games / 8 goals allowed / 54 saves / 0.8710
11. Erich Weishaupt (W. GER): 2 games / 10 goals allowed / 62 saves / 0.8611
12. Marcel Sakáč (CSSR): 4 games / 15 goals allowed / 89 saves / 0.8558
13. James Warden (USA): 4 games / 17 goals allowed / 100 saves / 0.8547
14. Pelle Lindbergh (SWE): 6 games / 38 goals allowed / 220 saves / 0.8527
15. Ed Staniowski (CAN): 3 games / 19 goals allowed / 85 saves / 0.8173
16. Henryk Buk (POL): 1 games / 2 goals allowed / 5 saves / 0.7143
IIHF Directoriate´s Best Goaltender: Vladislav Tretiak
1st All-Star Team: Vladislav Tretiak

Thirdly, I hoped game reports goalies mentions, that I posted yesterday, would convey clearly that Holeček was consistently one of the best players of his team. If you don't believe in hundreds of voters' competency in declaring who the best goalie each championship was (even though those writers mostly see 90%+ of games and all goalies in action so they knew who they're voting for).. Okay..

If you deny the validity of Holeček's superior statistics in his prime being affected by the system he played in (even though the Czechoslovaks' SV% dropped like a rock right before and after Holeček for multiple tournaments in a row).. Okay..

But I don't see how you can't deny how reports acclaimed Holeček, game after game, tournament after tournament. I've covered only WHC 1971, OG 1972, WHC 1972 and WHC 1973. But I can assure you the papers are singing praises for Holeček the same way in other championship except for 1977.

So back to my original question - what Holeček himself should have done more? Awards - check, stats - check, admiration expressed in contemporary reports - check.

Holeček will not be 1st nor 2nd in my ballot. But he also won't be last.

I personally don't see how anyone, who claims how he values consistency in goalies ranking, would then vote Parent ahead of Holeček. Take 1974 & 1975 out, does Parent appear in the project at all? Take the same two seasons out of Holeček, he just comes to discussion 3 weeks later.

 

[Dr John Carlson]

I personally don't see how anyone, who claims how he values consistency in goalies ranking, would then vote Parent ahead of Holeček. Take 1974 & 1975 out, does Parent appear in the project at all?

Certainly, the coach's polls had him as a top 5 goalie in 1971 (before his peak seasons) and tied for the best goalie in 1974 during his first peak season (the vote would've taken place sometime in January - in other words, before his big Smythe-winning run).

I'm sold enough that Parent's got a lot more going on for him than 74/75.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Sorry, I don't want to dismiss Holecek out right. I don't want to reduce him to "some guy playing behind a good defense" or anything like that.

I also didn't think VI's "how did anyone beat the Soviets (once in a while)?" rhetorical question as if that's some sort of trump card for top 15 and 20 places of all time.

I will say that stats aligning directly with award voting would make me much more suspicious of the award voting. I look at that as a bug before I look at it as a feature...

If we remove the best two year peak in goalie history, perhaps, for Parent...what about the games that Holecek didn't play?

Didn't make (?) the team in '65...
Didn't start over Dzurilla in '66
Didn't start over Ndarchal in '67
Didn't make (?) team in '69...hurt?
Didn't make (?) team in '70
Didn't start in the '72 Olympics
Split with Crha in '74
Split time in Canada Cup '76
Didn't start over Dzurilla in '77

Just looking at it superficially, of course...

What about in his home league? Is there anything there? You can only play who you play, but the 70s Worlds aren't exactly brimming with talent. It was basically a two horse race a lot of time. Do we have splits of Holecek vs the Soviets compared to other Czech goalies?

I just need more to suggest that he blew the doors off of Dzurilla before I'm ready to compare him to Bower...the tape on Holecek is up and down, so I'm open to the idea of him but skeptical of his reliability at this stage...

 

[bobholly39]

I like Luongo as a goalie, and I think overall he’s had a very long and consistent career, which is commendable. But at the same time, I always got the sense that when it comes to reliability, he wasn’t the most reliable.

I know I talked a lot about Carey Price in this thread. There are team similarities between both goalies, as both played a stretch of their careers on poor teams, where simply making playoffs was a struggle, let alone contending. Carey Price I feel was the type of goalie that when the games become more important, whether it’s playoffs, internationally, or in-season down the stretch trying to make playoffs – he gets better. With Luongo, I usually got the opposite feeling.

Here are two key examples for Luongo.

2003-2004 regular season. Luongo is 24, having a strong season. Has yet to ever make playoffs. By march 2nd, Panthers are 9th in east, with a little over 1 month to go. A little ways off last playoff spot (8 points), but with 15 games to go, it’s still possible if they get hot/one of the other teams has a losing streak. It’s time to do your best.

Up until march 2nd – first 60 games – Luongo’s record is 21W, 23L, 16 OTL. 936sv%, 2.18GAA.

Last 12 games after march 2nd – 4W, 6L, 2OTL. 903 sv%, 3.42GAA. Florida finishes 12th in east, and misses playoffs.

2007-2008 regular season. Luongo is 28. Finally made playoffs with Van the year before, and did well. Expectations are high in Vancouver, and for Luongo.

Up until Feb 29th – Luongo plays 55 games. 28W, 18L, 9OTL. 10 games above 500. 922 sv%, 2.2 GAA. Canucks are in 7th place in West, well in playoff position.

After Feb 29th – Luongo’s record is 7W, 11L. 899 sv%, 2.6 GAA. Canucks go from 7th in west to 11th and miss playoffs.

Two prime examples of Luongo's performance taking a nose dive at the worst time possible, and his team missing the playoffs instead of qualifying, or at least making a strong push down the stretch to try and qualify.


Carey Price – 2018-2019 season. Also got Vezina consideration in a season with no playoffs, like Luongo 2004 & 2008.

First 54 games – 913 sv%, 2.55 GAA.

Last 12 games, 935 sv%, 1.92 GAA. Habs finish 2 points out of playoffs.

Carey Price – 2011 season, first post-Halak season.

First 55 games, 919 sv%, 2.38 GAA. Last 17 games (as of March 1st) – 935 sv%, 2 GAA. Habs make playoffs.

 

[VanIslander]

Give up on the refrigerator repairman, please.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Give up on the refrigerator repairman, please.

Gladly. Just need some reasoning. I believe you just said, "don't just say one guy is better than another", right?

Also, Dzurilla is a Czech and IIHF HOFer, reducing him to refrigerator repairman is certainly not a good look for respecting hockey history.

Wasn't a lot of talk about Vezina the baker's assistant or Vezina the animal hide tanner...

 

[VanIslander]

Yeah, i'll have to dignify stating Holecek is better than Dzurilla - far better - but it is 12:40 am late Saturday night/Sunday morning here and i've soju, beer and a desire for bed in me. Will contribute on the other side.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

I've never really seen the case for Worters. His stats benefit from playing in a really low scoring era, and in a league where 60-75% of the teams made the playoffs, managed to miss the playoffs more times (7) than he made it (5). The years where his goals against were at the top of the league correlate to a severe lack of goal scoring for his teams, ie concentrating on defense at the expense of offense, which doesn't say much for the ability of Worters to erase mistakes. His playoff record is non-existent, just 11 games with nary a Finals appearance. He had 2 great years and spent the other 10 years as a basically league-average starter for a below-average team. He shares that distinction with another Hart-winning goaltender in Theodore.

You seem really confident that you can properly identify team effects on goalies in the pre-save percentage era, so I'm just going to post some stats and ask you a question.

Here are Worters' teams (with a couple of seasons before and after, if available):

Year	Team	Pre/With/Post	GF	GA	Avg GF	GF vs Avg	GA vs Avg
1926​	PTP	Worters	82​	70​	83​	0.99​	0.84​
1927​	PTP	Worters	79​	108​	88​	0.90​	1.23​
1928​	PTP	Worters	67​	76​	84​	0.80​	0.90​
1929​	PTP	Post-Worters	46​	80​	64​	0.72​	1.25​
1930​	PTP	Post-Worters	102​	185​	130​	0.78​	1.42​

Year	Team	Pre/With/Post	GF	GA	Avg GF	GF vs Avg	GA vs Avg
1927​	NYA	Pre-Worters	82​	91​	88​	0.93​	1.03​
1928​	NYA	Pre-Worters	63​	128​	84​	0.75​	1.52​
1929​	NYA	Worters	53​	53​	64​	0.83​	0.83​
1930​	NYA	Worters	113​	161​	130​	0.87​	1.24​
1931​	NYA	Worters	76​	74​	105​	0.72​	0.70​
1932​	NYA	Worters	95​	142​	120​	0.79​	1.18​
1933​	NYA	Worters	91​	118​	109​	0.83​	1.08​
1934​	NYA	Worters	104​	132​	116​	0.90​	1.14​
1935​	NYA	Worters	100​	142​	121​	0.83​	1.17​
1936​	NYA	Worters	109​	122​	104​	1.05​	1.17​
1937​	NYA	Worters	122​	161​	118​	1.03​	1.36​
1938​	NYA	Post-Worters	110​	111​	122​	0.90​	0.91​
1939​	NYA	Post-Worters	119​	157​	122​	0.98​	1.29​

And here are Roberto Luongo's Florida teams:

Year	Team	Pre/With/Post	GF	GA	Avg GF	GF vs Avg	GA vs Avg
1999​	FLA	Pre-Luongo	210​	228​	216​	0.97​	1.06​
2000​	FLA	Pre-Luongo	244​	209​	225​	1.08​	0.93​
2001​	FLA	Luongo	200​	246​	226​	0.88​	1.09​
2002​	FLA	Luongo	180​	250​	215​	0.84​	1.16​
2003​	FLA	Luongo	176​	237​	218​	0.81​	1.09​
2004​	FLA	Luongo	188​	221​	211​	0.89​	1.05​
2006​	FLA	Luongo	236​	252​	248​	0.95​	1.02​
2007​	FLA	Post Luongo	245​	249​	236​	1.04​	1.06​
2008​	FLA	Post Luongo	211​	220​	223​	0.95​	0.99​

So, how exactly can you be so confident that Worters was a "league-average starter" while Luongo was "consistently above-average" (your words), based on the above information?

 

[Michael Farkas]

Being reductive for a moment, maybe Luongo is also a bad team goalie that is tough to win with...maybe he's a "fun to watch" but not overly overly serious guy.

What's the best defensive situation Luongo ever played in...?

 

[MXD]

I like Luongo as a goalie, and I think overall he’s had a very long and consistent career, which is commendable. But at the same time, I always got the sense that when it comes to reliability, he wasn’t the most reliable.

I know I talked a lot about Carey Price in this thread. There are team similarities between both goalies, as both played a stretch of their careers on poor teams, where simply making playoffs was a struggle, let alone contending. Carey Price I feel was the type of goalie that when the games become more important, whether it’s playoffs, internationally, or in-season down the stretch trying to make playoffs – he gets better. With Luongo, I usually got the opposite feeling.

Here are two key examples for Luongo.

2003-2004 regular season. Luongo is 24, having a strong season. Has yet to ever make playoffs. By march 2nd, Panthers are 9th in east, with a little over 1 month to go. A little ways off last playoff spot (8 points), but with 15 games to go, it’s still possible if they get hot/one of the other teams has a losing streak. It’s time to do your best.

Up until march 2nd – first 60 games – Luongo’s record is 21W, 23L, 16 OTL. 936sv%, 2.18GAA.

Last 12 games after march 2nd – 4W, 6L, 2OTL. 903 sv%, 3.42GAA. Florida finishes 12th in east, and misses playoffs.

2007-2008 regular season. Luongo is 28. Finally made playoffs with Van the year before, and did well. Expectations are high in Vancouver, and for Luongo.

Up until Feb 29th – Luongo plays 55 games. 28W, 18L, 9OTL. 10 games above 500. 922 sv%, 2.2 GAA. Canucks are in 7th place in West, well in playoff position.

After Feb 29th – Luongo’s record is 7W, 11L. 899 sv%, 2.6 GAA. Canucks go from 7th in west to 11th and miss playoffs.

Two prime examples of Luongo's performance taking a nose dive at the worst time possible, and his team missing the playoffs instead of qualifying, or at least making a strong push down the stretch to try and qualify.


Carey Price – 2018-2019 season. Also got Vezina consideration in a season with no playoffs, like Luongo 2004 & 2008.

First 54 games – 913 sv%, 2.55 GAA.

Last 12 games, 935 sv%, 1.92 GAA. Habs finish 2 points out of playoffs.

Carey Price – 2011 season, first post-Halak season.

First 55 games, 919 sv%, 2.38 GAA. Last 17 games (as of March 1st) – 935 sv%, 2 GAA. Habs make playoffs.

I wanted to see if those numbers could be taken at face value.

For 2011, the last 17 teams faced by Price were, on average, 14.7th for goalscoring. As league average as it gets. Legit number. And it's not a case of specific carveout : Price had a bad outing vs. Boston in early February, but the reminder of the month appears decent at the very worst, and we're then going, like, 7 games back. Legit stat for what it measures.

For 2019. the last 12 teams faced by Price we, on average, 13.7th for goalscoring. So, probably above average all in all (though this includes the best offence of the league, which were given a 1 for the purposes of the exercise... Which was the Lightning by the way -- a good time as any other to point out that teams scoring goals actually HELP netminders and put them in an easier environment, regardless of how many goals they allow). Legit number. ... Though there's some specific carve-out here, as that brings us around mid-march. For the games between March1st and March12th, Carey Price was 2-2-0-0, SV% 0.871. In the two losses, the Canadiens loss 8-2 and 4-1. Teams scoring one goals aren't expected to win; teams scoring two goals are not quite expected to win. I DON'T LIKE THE CARVEOUT, but it's not like those games costs the Habs the playoffs either from a purely goal prevention perspective. I'd add that this is a team that should've made the playoffs if you're going by points, goals for and goals against (both were above league average), but on the other hand, this is also a team whose first center was Max Domi.

In 2008, the last 18 teams faced by Luongo were, on average, 15.44 in goalscoring. So rather league average (better than the Canucks by the way). Legit number. But 18 games in 36 days is some crazy stupid workload (also 20 games in 41 days, if you also include the last days of February). As a comparison, for 2011, Price played those 17 games in 41 days, if if you stretch to 18 games, you get 18 games in 46 days. The stat is legit, but there's a crucial element missing, both in absolute terms, and if you want to compare Luongo 2008 to Price 2011.

In 2004, the last 12 teams face by Luongo were, on average, 15,25 in goalscoring. Legit number. ... Why exactly is Luongo's shutout from March 2nd not included on the countdown? Why specifically start a count from March 3rd instead of March 1st? Also, from Feb20th to Feb 29th, Luongo allowed 7 goals in 6 games, netting three shutouts along the way. His record? 3 wins, 1 loss (4-1 with an EN) and 2 ties, in which he allowed two goals. For his three shutouts, his teams scored two goals on every game.

In other words, prior to your specifically chosen start date of March 3rd, Luongo had allowed 7 goals in 7 games, netting FOUR shutouts and allowed more than two goals once. During that span, the team won... exactly four games. But that was an increased rate of winning for the Panthers that season, who won about one third of their games. Seems to me like the Panthers, who werent THAT close from the playoffs in the first place by March 3rd, would've been even further without that stretch; they were indeed 12th on Feb 19th, and managed to leap a few teams in that timespan, despite winning only 4 games, WHICH WERE ALL SHUTOUTS. The stat is absolutely not legit : weird carveout of the March 2nd shutout, and the only reason why the Panthers were 9th in the first place was that shutout spree.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

I like Luongo as a goalie, and I think overall he’s had a very long and consistent career, which is commendable. But at the same time, I always got the sense that when it comes to reliability, he wasn’t the most reliable.

I know I talked a lot about Carey Price in this thread. There are team similarities between both goalies, as both played a stretch of their careers on poor teams, where simply making playoffs was a struggle, let alone contending. Carey Price I feel was the type of goalie that when the games become more important, whether it’s playoffs, internationally, or in-season down the stretch trying to make playoffs – he gets better. With Luongo, I usually got the opposite feeling.

Here are two key examples for Luongo.

2003-2004 regular season. Luongo is 24, having a strong season. Has yet to ever make playoffs. By march 2nd, Panthers are 9th in east, with a little over 1 month to go. A little ways off last playoff spot (8 points), but with 15 games to go, it’s still possible if they get hot/one of the other teams has a losing streak. It’s time to do your best.

Up until march 2nd – first 60 games – Luongo’s record is 21W, 23L, 16 OTL. 936sv%, 2.18GAA.

Last 12 games after march 2nd – 4W, 6L, 2OTL. 903 sv%, 3.42GAA. Florida finishes 12th in east, and misses playoffs.

2007-2008 regular season. Luongo is 28. Finally made playoffs with Van the year before, and did well. Expectations are high in Vancouver, and for Luongo.

Up until Feb 29th – Luongo plays 55 games. 28W, 18L, 9OTL. 10 games above 500. 922 sv%, 2.2 GAA. Canucks are in 7th place in West, well in playoff position.

After Feb 29th – Luongo’s record is 7W, 11L. 899 sv%, 2.6 GAA. Canucks go from 7th in west to 11th and miss playoffs.

Two prime examples of Luongo's performance taking a nose dive at the worst time possible, and his team missing the playoffs instead of qualifying, or at least making a strong push down the stretch to try and qualify.

First, it was widely reported that Luongo's late-season collapse in 2007-08 was largely because of personal off-ice issues surrounding his wife's complicated pregnancy (link to one story on this here), including repeatedly flying back and forth across the continent to be with both his team and his family. Up to you if you want to count that as being unreliable I guess.

Secondly, the rest looks like cherry-picking end dates to fit an agenda to me. On January 13, 2004, the Florida Panthers were 13th in the Eastern Conference in points percentage and were just about to replace their second head coach of the season. Luongo then went on a ridiculous 21 game run at a .947 to go 9-8-3 and just barely keep that team from falling completely out of contention. I agree that if you pick the dates to neatly cut out the entirety of Luongo's run there and look at the rest of his season, it doesn't look that impressive. However, if you actually care about making the playoffs, and not just awarding brownie points for looking like you tried hard while coming up short, then you definitely shouldn't care about any of those final games. The Panthers had 65 points on March 2. The Islanders finished 8th with 91 points, which means Florida needed 26 points in their final 15 games to tie for the final playoff spot (and probably lose on tiebreakers). When Luongo was at .947, they went 9-8-3. That's a .525 winning percentage. To make the playoffs, they needed an .867 winning percentage. Do the math on what kind of goaltending they would have needed to hit that latter number.

I'm seriously supposed to blame Luongo because he didn't put up a .980 or whatever for a month and half? Because anything less than that would have made exactly the same difference with respect to Florida's playoff chances.

It's entirely possible to make similar arguments for any goalie who missed the playoffs. Carey Price is no different.

Like this: It's 2011-12, Montreal is 7 points out with 23 games remaining. Primed for a playoff run, if their goalie can only play up to the challenge.

But whoops, ol' unreliable Carey Price goes 1-6-0, .892 to tank the team's hopes. Obviously you just can't count on that guy to carry his team in crunch time.

And that's not even talking about how often injuries tend to come up in reliability discussions surrounding goalies, where Price does not exactly have a sterling history (for the record, that doesn't bother me, I'm just saying that if you think reliability is ultra important then I don't see how that shouldn't factor in for you).

 

[MXD]

Like this: It's 2011-12, Montreal is 7 points out with 23 games remaining. Primed for a playoff run, if their goalie can only play up to the challenge.

But whoops, ol' unreliable Carey Price goes 1-6-0, .892 to tank the team's hopes. Obviously you just can't count on that guy to carry his team in crunch time.

I totally agree with you on the Luongo argument. Thanks for bringing out the personnal issues, ON TOP OF THE STUPID WORKLOAD. Bravo Keenan, ostie de jambon.

But for this snippet above...
I hope you aren't trying to make a serious point here, other than pointing out why analysing specific stretches is sometimes a bit risky.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

I totally agree with you on the Luongo argument. Thanks for bringing out the personnal issues, ON TOP OF THE STUPID WORKLOAD. Bravo Keenan, ostie de jambon.

But for this snippet above...
I hope you aren't trying to make a serious point here, other than pointing out why analysing specific stretches is sometimes a bit risky.

Of course not, this is a completely sarcastic example of cherry-picking data to support a conclusion.

 

[Michael Farkas]

My phone sent me a push notification because someone used the terms "Carey Price" and "unreliable" together...nice to see it was a false alarm...

 

[Vilica]

I assume you don't complain that the Norris is primarily an award for "best offensive defenseman" or that it has especially heavy offensive leanings...if this is the logic that vaults Luongo to the top of this mountain.

Sure, Norris votes overvalue offense over defense, but these are the players who received Norris votes in front of Luongo - Christian Ehrhoff, Dan Hamhuis, Alexander Edler, Kevin Bieksa in Vancouver, young Aaron Ekblad and old Brian Campbell in Florida. It's a whole bunch of #2/3s that probably were greater than the sum of their parts, but no real stars amongst them.

Look at that 03-04 Florida team - Mike Van Ryn, a 20yo Jay Bouwmeester, Andreas Lilja, a 35yo Lyle Odelain, Pavel Trnka, and Mathieu Biron are their 6 most common defensemen, to go along with 3 different coaches (Keenan, Dudley and Torchetti). Luongo puts up a 0.931 on 34 shots a game. I'm sure if you looked at video you'd see whole bunch of Luongo being left on an island.

Here's the advanced stats for the Jennings-winning 10-11 Canucks team - Defensive Pairs - Natural Stat Trick

Two balanced pairings in Hamhuis/Bieksa and Ehrhoff/Edler, but the 3rd most used pairing at even strength is Alberts/Ballard.

Compare Luongo's defense in front of him to the rest of the round:
Vasilevskiy - Hedman, Price - Subban, Benedict - Gerard, Bower - Horton, Smith - Potvin, Worters - Lionel Conacher, Thompson - Eddie Shore

 

[MXD]

Sure, Norris votes overvalue offense over defense, but these are the players who received Norris votes in front of Luongo - Christian Ehrhoff, Dan Hamhuis, Alexander Edler, Kevin Bieksa in Vancouver, young Aaron Ekblad and old Brian Campbell in Florida. It's a whole bunch of #2/3s that probably were greater than the sum of their parts, but no real stars amongst them.

Look at that 03-04 Florida team - Mike Van Ryn, a 20yo Jay Bouwmeester, Andreas Lilja, a 35yo Lyle Odelain, Pavel Trnka, and Mathieu Biron are their 6 most common defensemen, to go along with 3 different coaches (Keenan, Dudley and Torchetti). Luongo puts up a 0.931 on 34 shots a game. I'm sure if you looked at video you'd see whole bunch of Luongo being left on an island.

Here's the advanced stats for the Jennings-winning 10-11 Canucks team - Defensive Pairs - Natural Stat Trick

Two balanced pairings in Hamhuis/Bieksa and Ehrhoff/Edler, but the 3rd most used pairing at even strength is Alberts/Ballard.

Compare Luongo's defense in front of him to the rest of the round:
Vasilevskiy - Hedman, Price - Subban, Benedict - Gerard, Bower - Horton, Smith - Potvin, Worters - Lionel Conacher, Thompson - Eddie Shore

Ehhh... Fair point for Florida, but Luongo had a pretty decent defense in Vancouver. Also one of the above isn't quite like the others.

 

[Vilica]

You seem really confident that you can properly identify team effects on goalies in the pre-save percentage era, so I'm just going to post some stats and ask you a question.

Here are Worters' teams (with a couple of seasons before and after, if available):

Year	Team	Pre/With/Post	GF	GA	Avg GF	GF vs Avg	GA vs Avg
1926​	PTP	Worters	82​	70​	83​	0.99​	0.84​
1927​	PTP	Worters	79​	108​	88​	0.90​	1.23​
1928​	PTP	Worters	67​	76​	84​	0.80​	0.90​
1929​	PTP	Post-Worters	46​	80​	64​	0.72​	1.25​
1930​	PTP	Post-Worters	102​	185​	130​	0.78​	1.42​

Year	Team	Pre/With/Post	GF	GA	Avg GF	GF vs Avg	GA vs Avg
1927​	NYA	Pre-Worters	82​	91​	88​	0.93​	1.03​
1928​	NYA	Pre-Worters	63​	128​	84​	0.75​	1.52​
1929​	NYA	Worters	53​	53​	64​	0.83​	0.83​
1930​	NYA	Worters	113​	161​	130​	0.87​	1.24​
1931​	NYA	Worters	76​	74​	105​	0.72​	0.70​
1932​	NYA	Worters	95​	142​	120​	0.79​	1.18​
1933​	NYA	Worters	91​	118​	109​	0.83​	1.08​
1934​	NYA	Worters	104​	132​	116​	0.90​	1.14​
1935​	NYA	Worters	100​	142​	121​	0.83​	1.17​
1936​	NYA	Worters	109​	122​	104​	1.05​	1.17​
1937​	NYA	Worters	122​	161​	118​	1.03​	1.36​
1938​	NYA	Post-Worters	110​	111​	122​	0.90​	0.91​
1939​	NYA	Post-Worters	119​	157​	122​	0.98​	1.29​

And here are Roberto Luongo's Florida teams:

Year	Team	Pre/With/Post	GF	GA	Avg GF	GF vs Avg	GA vs Avg
1999​	FLA	Pre-Luongo	210​	228​	216​	0.97​	1.06​
2000​	FLA	Pre-Luongo	244​	209​	225​	1.08​	0.93​
2001​	FLA	Luongo	200​	246​	226​	0.88​	1.09​
2002​	FLA	Luongo	180​	250​	215​	0.84​	1.16​
2003​	FLA	Luongo	176​	237​	218​	0.81​	1.09​
2004​	FLA	Luongo	188​	221​	211​	0.89​	1.05​
2006​	FLA	Luongo	236​	252​	248​	0.95​	1.02​
2007​	FLA	Post Luongo	245​	249​	236​	1.04​	1.06​
2008​	FLA	Post Luongo	211​	220​	223​	0.95​	0.99​

So, how exactly can you be so confident that Worters was a "league-average starter" while Luongo was "consistently above-average" (your words), based on the above information?

Quick and dirty expansion of your table:

			Team GA	G GA	LA GF	% GP	GA/100%	G GA vs Avg	T GA vs Avg
1929	NYA	Worters	53	46	64	0.864	53.26	0.83	0.83
1930	NYA	Worters	161	135	130	0.818	165.00	1.27	1.24
1931	NYA	Worters	74	74	105	1.000	74.00	0.70	0.70
1932	NYA	Worters	142	112	120	0.833	134.40	1.12	1.18
1933	NYA	Worters	118	116	109	0.979	118.47	1.09	1.08
1934	NYA	Worters	132	75	116	0.750	100.00	0.86	1.14
1935	NYA	Worters	142	142	121	1.000	142.00	1.17	1.17
1936	NYA	Worters	122	122	104	1.000	122.00	1.17	1.17
1937	NYA	Worters	161	69	118	0.479	144.00	1.22	1.36
2001	FLA	Luongo	246	107	226	0.573	186.68	0.83	1.09
2002	FLA	Luongo	250	140	215	0.707	197.93	0.92	1.16
2003	FLA	Luongo	237	164	218	0.793	206.89	0.95	1.09
2004	FLA	Luongo	221	172	211	0.878	195.89	0.93	1.05
2006	FLA	Luongo	252	213	248	0.915	232.88	0.94	1.02

Basically the entire reason why Florida's goals against is higher than league average is due to Luongo's backups. I'm aware this data isn't completely accurate, because I used games played data instead of games started, thus inflating Luongo's numbers a bit, but for a quick response it works. According to the games played data, Worters played 86% of his team's games, 91% if you exclude his final year, while Luongo played 77% of his team's games, 82% if you exclude his first year.

I think trying to untangle pre/post-movement, especially in the pre-war days where replacement-level talent might not actually be replacement-level, is forecasting too much. You also have tinier samples and way less teams. To give an example, look at Pittsburgh post-Worters, where their goals against went up by 4, but because LA GF went from 84 to 64, had a massive change in their percentage. That's because league-wide, about 200 goals went missing between both years. In an 82 game season with 30 teams, a drop of 200 goals between years only causes about a difference of 6-7 (I grabbed 14-15 at random, 6549 goals scored/30 teams=218.3, 6349/30=211.6). Even if you prorate that drop to an 82 game equivalent of 372, it's still 205.9, or down 12. Florida replaced Luongo with Ed Belfour (though he was 41) and Tomas Vokoun. There's just a much deeper talent pool for them to draw on compared to the 20s and 30s.

 

[Vilica]

Ehhh... Fair point for Florida, but Luongo had a pretty decent defense in Vancouver. Also one of the above isn't quite like the others.

I wanted to respond with that table to Contrarian, but I grabbed a draft without this last line:

Even Parent had Barry Ashbee finishing 4th in Norris voting in 73-74, while Broda had possibly a similar collection of #2/3s in Mortson, Thomson and Barilko, among others.

Also, I'm assuming you mean Subban when you say one of these not like the others, and I thought about throwing in Markov and/or Weber, but Subban was a Norris finalist in Price's Hart year. One of the points I was making is that for almost all the others, in their Vezina/peak years, they also had a defensemen receiving Norris/leaguewide attention, apart from Luongo.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Compare Luongo's defense in front of him to the rest of the round:
Vasilevskiy - Hedman, Price - Subban, Benedict - Gerard, Bower - Horton, Smith - Potvin, Worters - Lionel Conacher, Thompson - Eddie Shore

I wouldn't want Subban, defensively, over many of Luongo's listed d-men. I also find Shore to be not a stalwart all the time...

Regardless, Norris voting has nothing to do with goalie performances. Team defense and defensive evaluation of players is necessary. Norris voting is a shortcut not worth taking...

 

[jigglysquishy]

Thompson also benefited from Lionel Hitchman. Dit Clapper later converted to d too.

The 30s Bruins were very competent defensively. Honestly, looking at some of the those mid 30s rosters they look like they should have been a dynasty.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

When facing elimination, Billy Smith was 7-0 in the playoffs, with a .926 save percentage and 2.24 GAA (he was pulled from Game 5 of the 84 Finals 2 goals in, they lost 5-2).

Does that only cover a portion of Smith's career (ie dynasty years?) Surely he must have faced elimination more than 7 times over 132 games right?

 

[overpass]

Thompson also benefited from Lionel Hitchman. Dit Clapper later converted to d too.

The 30s Bruins were very competent defensively. Honestly, looking at some of the those mid 30s rosters they look like they should have been a dynasty.

Playoff hockey was very different from regular season hockey in the 1930s.

1. Teams played three times a week in the regular season, sometimes only twice. Tied games were ended after 10 minutes of overtime. Playoff games were every other day, and games could go into multiple overtimes. And they often did. As a result, depth was more important in the playoffs than in the regular season. Teams with a solid second pairing and third line had an edge.

2. Playoff hockey was very defensive and low-scoring. The numbers are clear. And we've seen quotes from the 40s on how playoff hockey was more entertaining than the past, when teams were cautious on the attack and afraid to be caught out of position.

As a result, the best regular season teams weren't necessarily the best playoff teams. Boston was not built for the playoffs. They had very poor depth. From 1928-29 on, after Sprague Cleghorn retired, they never had a decent fourth defenceman, and from 32-33 through 36-37 their third defenceman was pretty weak too. Eddie Shore played almost every minute in the playoffs. This lack of depth cost Boston dearly in 1933, when Toronto eliminated Boston in 1933 on a giveaway by Shore after he had played over 150 minutes of a 164 minute, 6 OT game, on his fifth game and fourth OT game in nine days And Shore and Babe Siebert spent themselves in playing close to 90 minutes to win game 1 in 1935, and weren't themselves for the rest of the series.

Also, Boston had slow forwards, especially after acquiring Nels Stewart in 32-33, and relied on Shore to rush the puck. So they struggled to score in a defensive playoff game when Shore stayed back, and risked allowing chances when he went up.

Boston didn't put together a real contending roster with depth and dynamism until 1937-38, when Thompson and the Bruins lost to Broda and the Leafs. I don't know how much Thompson deserves blame for that loss, but for the six previous years, I would blame Boston's management and their shortsighted approach to filling out their roster. They cheaped out on depth and got away with it in the regular season when Shore could cover up for the lacks. But the bill came due in the playoffs.

 

[Doctor No]

Does that only cover a portion of Smith's career (ie dynasty years?) Surely he must have faced elimination more than 7 times over 132 games right?

Looks like he's genuinely 7-0. Curiously, Smith was the backup for 24 other games where the Islanders could be eliminated, which perhaps says something else.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

Quick and dirty expansion of your table:

			Team GA	G GA	LA GF	% GP	GA/100%	G GA vs Avg	T GA vs Avg
1929	NYA	Worters	53	46	64	0.864	53.26	0.83	0.83
1930	NYA	Worters	161	135	130	0.818	165.00	1.27	1.24
1931	NYA	Worters	74	74	105	1.000	74.00	0.70	0.70
1932	NYA	Worters	142	112	120	0.833	134.40	1.12	1.18
1933	NYA	Worters	118	116	109	0.979	118.47	1.09	1.08
1934	NYA	Worters	132	75	116	0.750	100.00	0.86	1.14
1935	NYA	Worters	142	142	121	1.000	142.00	1.17	1.17
1936	NYA	Worters	122	122	104	1.000	122.00	1.17	1.17
1937	NYA	Worters	161	69	118	0.479	144.00	1.22	1.36
2001	FLA	Luongo	246	107	226	0.573	186.68	0.83	1.09
2002	FLA	Luongo	250	140	215	0.707	197.93	0.92	1.16
2003	FLA	Luongo	237	164	218	0.793	206.89	0.95	1.09
2004	FLA	Luongo	221	172	211	0.878	195.89	0.93	1.05
2006	FLA	Luongo	252	213	248	0.915	232.88	0.94	1.02

Basically the entire reason why Florida's goals against is higher than league average is due to Luongo's backups. I'm aware this data isn't completely accurate, because I used games played data instead of games started, thus inflating Luongo's numbers a bit, but for a quick response it works. According to the games played data, Worters played 86% of his team's games, 91% if you exclude his final year, while Luongo played 77% of his team's games, 82% if you exclude his first year.

I think trying to untangle pre/post-movement, especially in the pre-war days where replacement-level talent might not actually be replacement-level, is forecasting too much. You also have tinier samples and way less teams. To give an example, look at Pittsburgh post-Worters, where their goals against went up by 4, but because LA GF went from 84 to 64, had a massive change in their percentage. That's because league-wide, about 200 goals went missing between both years. In an 82 game season with 30 teams, a drop of 200 goals between years only causes about a difference of 6-7 (I grabbed 14-15 at random, 6549 goals scored/30 teams=218.3, 6349/30=211.6). Even if you prorate that drop to an 82 game equivalent of 372, it's still 205.9, or down 12. Florida replaced Luongo with Ed Belfour (though he was 41) and Tomas Vokoun. There's just a much deeper talent pool for them to draw on compared to the 20s and 30s.

Absolutely fair point to remove backups for Luongo, especially because Worters was playing nearly all of the games. However, I think you aren't comparing fairly here with respect to league average if you're comparing Luongo's GA to overall league GA numbers because of empty net goals (which have a much more significant impact on 21st century NHL results).

We have Luongo's GAA and we have league average GAAs by season on Hockey Reference. He wasn't consistently outperforming average in Florida:

Year	Luongo GAA	LgAvg GAA	Ratio
2001​	2.44​	2.65​	0.92​
2002​	2.77​	2.51​	1.10​
2003​	2.66​	2.54​	1.05​
2004​	2.43​	2.46​	0.99​
2006​	2.97​	2.92​	1.02​

That said, whether Luongo comes in slightly above average or slightly below average honestly doesn't even make much of a difference to my question to you. My point is that if there was a 1920s Luongo in Florida, how do we know for sure that we would have recognized him as such? You seem to be arguing that average GAA = average goalie, yet we see that Luongo's GAA numbers are very average. In addition, Worters was better than league average in GAA 4 of his first 6 seasons as well, he doesn't cumulatively drop below average on a career basis until the latter years for the Americans. Even if we are fine putting a heavy emphasis on GAA in our evaluation, why would we conclude that Worters was average his whole career, rather than viewing him as outstanding early and then fading late? There seem to be more possible explanations to consider.

The other reason I wanted to post the team results was because of your contention that Worters' teams' lack of offence implied that they played stronger defensively. I agree that's possible that teams trade offence for defence, but it's a better signal for good teams who have the option of playing multiple styles. If a team is bad, it could be that they didn't score simply because they lacked talent.

Year-by-year averages:
Luongo-era Florida teams: 0.87 goals scored relative to average
Worters teams (career): 0.88 goals scored relative to average

We know that the Panthers didn't play a low pace game and were routinely at the top of the league in shots against, so again, why are we assuming that couldn't have been the case for Worters? Especially on an expansion team in Pittsburgh, at the very least.

 

[bobholly39]

First, it was widely reported that Luongo's late-season collapse in 2007-08 was largely because of personal off-ice issues surrounding his wife's complicated pregnancy (link to one story on this here), including repeatedly flying back and forth across the continent to be with both his team and his family. Up to you if you want to count that as being unreliable I guess.

Secondly, the rest looks like cherry-picking end dates to fit an agenda to me. On January 13, 2004, the Florida Panthers were 13th in the Eastern Conference in points percentage and were just about to replace their second head coach of the season. Luongo then went on a ridiculous 21 game run at a .947 to go 9-8-3 and just barely keep that team from falling completely out of contention. I agree that if you pick the dates to neatly cut out the entirety of Luongo's run there and look at the rest of his season, it doesn't look that impressive. However, if you actually care about making the playoffs, and not just awarding brownie points for looking like you tried hard while coming up short, then you definitely shouldn't care about any of those final games. The Panthers had 65 points on March 2. The Islanders finished 8th with 91 points, which means Florida needed 26 points in their final 15 games to tie for the final playoff spot (and probably lose on tiebreakers). When Luongo was at .947, they went 9-8-3. That's a .525 winning percentage. To make the playoffs, they needed an .867 winning percentage. Do the math on what kind of goaltending they would have needed to hit that latter number.

I'm seriously supposed to blame Luongo because he didn't put up a .980 or whatever for a month and half? Because anything less than that would have made exactly the same difference with respect to Florida's playoff chances.

It's entirely possible to make similar arguments for any goalie who missed the playoffs. Carey Price is no different.

Like this: It's 2011-12, Montreal is 7 points out with 23 games remaining. Primed for a playoff run, if their goalie can only play up to the challenge.

But whoops, ol' unreliable Carey Price goes 1-6-0, .892 to tank the team's hopes. Obviously you just can't count on that guy to carry his team in crunch time.

And that's not even talking about how often injuries tend to come up in reliability discussions surrounding goalies, where Price does not exactly have a sterling history (for the record, that doesn't bother me, I'm just saying that if you think reliability is ultra important then I don't see how that shouldn't factor in for you).

Regarding 2008 Luongo - thanks for posting that link. I remember hearing about it at the time vaguely, but didn't remember it till you posted that.

For 2012 Price - it's funny you're trying to paint that as a negative (even sarcastically), because it's one of the seasons I looked at for Price (since Habs missed playoffs), but didn't see value in sharing anything since Habs finished in last place. But Price still looks strong to finish the season:

Price 2012 - before all-star break, 913 sv%. After all star break, 920 sv%.
before March 3rd - 914 sv%
after march 3rd - 927 sv%

Also - regarding Luongo 2004 - no, you're not supposed to blame Luongo for missing playoffs. It was a steep hill to climb. But - that's when you want your goalie at his best. Florida had no control over what NYI might have done or not, all they could control is their own play, and instead of digging deep and having his best stretch, he finishes the season weak. He's done that a few times in his career.