HOH Top 60 Goaltenders of All Time (2024 Edition) - Round 2, Vote 5

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,368
7,694
Regina, SK
....oh, i see what's happening here. You think I said Hainsworth used to be considered top 10, as though I was making an appeal to canon. Not in the least. I'm proud of how many pegs we've brought him down. It was well deserved.
 

DN28

Registered User
Jan 2, 2014
655
691
Prague
Leaving out CC76 is leaving out their only best-on-best appearance, no?

1976 Canada Cup (SILVER)
Dzurilla 5 GP, .920, 2.36
Holecek 5 GP, .861, 3.25

As for the others:

1966 WC (SILVER)
Dzurilla 6 GP, .901, 1.97
Holecek 2 GP, .861, 2.58

1972 Olympics (BRONZE)
Dzurilla 5 GP, .926, 1.89
Holecek 3 GP, .849, 3.48

1972 WC (GOLD)
Dzurilla 4 GP, .925, 1.50
Holecek 3 GP, .923, 1.67

1976 WC (GOLD)
Dzurilla, 2 GP, .976, 0.50
Holecek 8 GP, .943, 1.63

1977 WC (GOLD)
Dzurilla, 7 GP, .888, 2.70
Hplecek, 4 GP, .870, 4.20

Holecek seems to get a lot of mileage out of being the hero of 1976 (when Martinec was the leading scorer and Pospisil voted top defender), but over the Gold medal WC wins, they split the games fairly evenly, with Dzurilla playing more in 1972 and 1977.

Dzurilla runs into Simpson's paradox. Dzurilla beats Holecek in every tournament, but he plays less in 1976 and more in 1977, so while he's 6-0 in head to head competition with Holecek for save percentage titles, he's 0-1 in the aggregate.
If it wasn't clear, Canada Cup SV% were included in the save percentage stats of Holeček, Dzurilla and Tretiak in my previous post.

Only the CSSR and USSR goals allowed comparison didn't include Canada Cup GAs because the Czechoslovakia played 2 more games than Soviet Union. If I take round robin GAs, the difference between the Czechs' and Soviets' goals allowed during 1971-78 period would further increase in favor of Czechoslovakia.

You got the 1972 WHC stats incorrect. Holeček played 6 games; and importantly all of games against top opponents (vs. USSR 2x, vs. SWE 2x, vs. FIN 1x, vs. SWI 1x). Dzurilla played 4 games (W. GER 2x, SWI 1x, FIN 1x).

Similarly with 1976 WHC, Dzurilla led the tournament's SV% with 0.9762 but he played just two games. One vs. Poland with the score 12-0, and the other vs. West Germany with the score 9-1. Holeček played 8 games; all encounters with Soviets & Swedes; finishing with the SV% 0.9427.

If we look at SV% leaders solely among starters of all participating national teams, Holeček wins at:
WHC 1971
WHC 1972
WHC 1975
OG 1976
WHC 1976
WHC 1978

Dzurilla among starting goaltenders internationally led the SV% at:
WHC 1965
WHC 1969

And why not to include Tretiak while we're at it. Tretiak SV% titles among starting goaltenders:
WHC 1981
CC 1981
WHC 1983
OG 1984
 

DN28

Registered User
Jan 2, 2014
655
691
Prague
Here’s a collection of quotes speaking about Hugh Lehman as one of the best „net guardians“ in the world from 1912 to 1924. I’ve searched them around HF and ATD sub-board. I also used a lot of work done & published by @Sanf. The two 1922 quotes are also stolen right from Thursday’s post by @jigglysquishy.

The Province, February 12, 1912:
Jimmy Hewitt commented on Lehman’s inclusion in the PCHA all-star team:
"There is no questioning the choice of Lehman for goal for he is easily the best of the three net guardians. He has shown up wonderfully well in the games so far and the other players affirm he is every bit as good as Percy Lesuer of the Ottawa Stanley cup holders, who is recognized as the best man in his position in the East."

Winnipeg Tribune, February 28, 1914:
About Lehman's all-star selection:
"It seems hard that after all the grand work done for Victoria, Bert Lindsay should have to take second place to Lehman, but there is no getting around the fact that the Westminster goal-tender has a slight edge. The Argus-eyed, Briarean goal-tender of the Royal City Club has been picking out, handing and turning aside shots that the majority of goalies would never see, much less stop, and this right from commencement of the season. It has been his consistent brilliancy that has held New Westminster in the race. Lindsay has this consolation, that he has been just shaded by one of the greatest masters of goal-tending the game ever has known, and also that he has not had the same plentitude of opportunities to distinguish himself, for the reason that the defence in front of him is stronger than that in front of Lehman."

The Morning Leader, October 28, 1914:
"As a goalkeeper, Lesueur is still in a class by himself. They talk about Moran, Holmes, Vezina and others, but the only net guardian capable of giving Lesuer a run for the honours is Hugh Lehman."

The Toronto World, October 28, 1915:
"Hugh Lehman, the best goaltender in the game, will be between the flags."

The Seattle Star, February 4, 1916:
„Harry Holmes, the genial Seattle goal, is receiving praise all over the circuit for his good work at the net. There are some good net guardians in the league this season. Last season Hugh Lehman, the Vancouver player, was so far ahead of any other goal tenders that there was nothing to it. While Lehman is still the best goal tender in the world, he is being pressed pretty close for that honor this season.“

The Toronto World, November 18, 1916:
"Holmes' work last season was sensational at times, but he had nothing on Hugh Lehman, the unassuming young gentleman from Pembroke, Ont., who guards the Vancouver citadel."

The Regina Leader, March 26, 1918:
„Lehman is the Vezina of the Coast league. He has been for years acknowledged the best man between the flags on the coast circuit.“

The Morning Leader, February 26, 1919:
„…and last but not least, the goal-minders, who have demonstrated that they can stop the hard shots a la George Vezina and Hugh Lehman.“

The Regina Leader, March 15, 1919:
„Hugh Lehman, the great goaler of the Vancouver Millionaires, who is reputed to be the best in his position on the coast. In fact, the critics out there say he is as good as Georges Vezina.“

The Vancouver Sun, March 22, 1922:
„Toronto hockey fans were given an exhibition of goal-tending by Hughie Lehman the like of which has never been seen in the Queen City. Eastern sport writers have been singing the praises of John Ross Roach, the St. Patrick's goaler, but after seeing "Old Eagle Eye" in action they are convinced that the west has the greatest netminder in the business.“

The Vancouver Sun, March 24, 1922:
„Although a whole lot of credit is due each member of the team, the lion's share must go to Hughie Lehman for his wonderful performance in the net. A goalkeeper who can go through four grueling games of world's championship hockey without having a goal scored against him surely deserves the title of the "greatest in the game."

The Morning Leader, October 31, 1924:
“Back in the dear dim days before the present hermit of doom organized his own league headed by ‘Meinself Und Gott,’ before even the advent of ‘shock troops,’ a quiet unassuming chap with a mop of black hair was absorbing ‘puck shocks’ in goal for Westminster, then an active entity in the Pacific Coast hockey league. That was in 1911 the first year of the league's existence and the ‘shock absorber’ was Hugh Lehman, goal-keeper for the Royals and the teams most colorful player. Back in 1903 broke into organized hockey as a goalkeeper with Pembroke, Ontario. and it is a simple mathematical calculation to realize that this remarkable athlete has been actively engaged at his favorite winter pastime for twenty-one seasons. Lehman will start his twenty-second consecutive year in organized hockey with the Maroons this year. His contract reposes in the club's strong box, and Mr. Patrick sighed with relief when he received it, for Lehman has no peer today as a custodian. One of the super-stars of the game, Lehman has no counterpart in sport on the continent. Where are the baseball, the lacrosse or the track star of 22 years ago today— gone where the woodbine and the ivy twines, enjoying the fruit of early endeavors in ease and comfort. One of Sport's Greatest If this is an age of hero worship in athletics write the name Hugh Lehman, the "eagle eye" of the fastest sport in the world, high up on the small boy's shrine. Clean, purposeful, active and bettle-browed in action, no man has ever taken liberties with Lehman's citadel and escaped scathless.”

The Morning Leader, October 31, 1924:
“Those who suggest that Lehman is about through should have seen him in action against Canadiens last year in the world's series. Early in the first game a flying puck broke the Lehman nose. He was of briefly for repairs, came on again and played spectacularly. Next game he played equally well. He was hailed as the most wonderful goalkeeping star in Canada and his work was regarded as faultless.”
_______________________________________________________

Hugh Lehman was getting called the all-star goalie out west for incredibly long time, every season between 1912-1924; with the only exception being the 1913 season.
It seems that Ion´s opinions were solely used as PCHA All-Stars from 1919 onwards. To that point Lehman had almost 15 years of pro hockey and for 10 years been the most wanted pro goalies of the business.

This will probably look horrendous info dump, but here are all the All-Star selections (that I have found) from Hugh Lehman´s time in PCHA/WCHL that I see atleast somewhat valuable. Only goalie selections. Remove it to somewhere else if it messes the game.

The Vancouver Sun 19. Mar 1912
Writers opinion
1. Hugh Lehman
2. Alan Parr


The Winnipeg Tribune 2. Mar 1912
Vancouver Saturday Sunset writer
1. Hugh Lehman

The Victoria Daily Times 1. Mar 1913
1. Bert Lindsay
HM or 2. Hugh Lehman


The Victoria Daily Times 12. Feb 1914
The Vancouver Province writer Jimmie Hewitt
1. Hugh Lehman
Victoria Daily Times response to Hewitts selection
1. Bert Lindsay

The Oregon Daily Journal 24. Jan 1915
Vancouver writer A.P. Garvey
Midseason selection.
1. Hugh Lehman
2. Mike Mitchell


The Oregon Daily Journal Feb 28. 1915
Writer R.A. Cronin
1. Hugh Lehman
HM or 2. Mike Mitchell


The Ottawa Journal, 18 Feb 1916
Tommy Phillips (PCHA referee that season)
1. Hugh Lehman

The Spokesman-Review 6. Feb 1916
A.P. Garvery sporting editor of Vancouver World
Midseason selection.
1. Hugh Lehman

The Vancouver Sun 8. Feb 1916
Mike Jay Vancouver Sun Sport writer
1. Hugh Lehman

The Province 19. Feb 1916
Lieut. James T. Hewitt former sporting editor of the Province
1. Hugh Lehman
2. Hap Holmes


Calgary Herald 6. Feb 1917
Writers from all the cities. Midseason selection.
A.P. Garvey Vancouver Province
1. Hugh Lehman
J.S. Bain Spokane Review
1. Hec Fowler
Lou Kennedy Portland Tel.
1. Hap Holmes
Royal Broughman Seattle Star
1. Hec Fowler

Spokane Daily Chronicle - Mar 2, 1917
Compiled All-Star team from League Officials
1. Hugh Lehman
Voters
Fred Ion
1. Hugh Lehman
George Irvine
1. Hugh Lehman
James Seaborn
1. Hugh Lehman

The Calgary Daily Herald - Mar 6, 1918
Official All-Star Team selected by Frank Patrick
1. No selection. Tie between Lehman, Murray and Fowler.

The Toronto World - Mar 9, 1918
Referees selections
Fred Ion
1. Hugh Lehman
George Irvine
1. Hugh Lehman

Edmonton Journal Mar 14. 1918
Official Scorers selection. Compiled list.
1. Hugh Lehman
2. Hec Fowler

Voters
A.P. Garvey Vancouver Sun
1. Hugh Lehman
Royal Brougham Seattle Star
1. Hugh Lehman
Lou Kennedy Portland
1. Hec Fowler

The Calgary Daily Herald - Mar 12, 1919
Fred Ion
1. Hugh Lehman
2. Hap Holmes


The Calgary Daily Herald - Mar 9, 1920
Fred Ion
1. Hugh Lehman
2. Hap Holmes


The Seattle star., March 08, 1921
Fred Ion
1. Hugh Lehman
2. Hap Holmes


The Calgary Daily Herald - Feb 24, 1922
Fred Ion
1. Hugh Lehman
2. Hap Holmes


The Seattle Star 18. Feb, 1922
1. Hap Holmes

The Vancouver Sun 19. Feb 1922
Si Griffis
1. Hugh Lehman
Fred Taylor
1. Hap Holmes
Mickey Ion
1. Hugh Lehman

The Province 14. Feb 1923
Fred Ion
1. Hugh Lehman
2. Hap Holmes


March 6, 1924 The Ottawa Journal
Fred Ion
1. Hugh Lehman

The Calgary Daily Herald - Mar 17, 1925
Fred Ion
1. Hap Holmes

The Gazette 1. Feb, 1926
(Regina Post)
Sporting editors of west voting. 11 voters
1. George Hainsworth 5 votes
 

rmartin65

Registered User
Apr 7, 2011
2,849
2,425
Here’s a collection of quotes speaking about Hugh Lehman as one of the best „net guardians“ in the world from 1912 to 1924. I’ve searched them around HF and ATD sub-board. I also used a lot of work done & published by @Sanf. The two 1922 quotes are also stolen right from Thursday’s post by @jigglysquishy.


























_______________________________________________________

Hugh Lehman was getting called the all-star goalie out west for incredibly long time, every season between 1912-1924; with the only exception being the 1913 season.
I'll add an article from the Vancouver Daily World, 1 February 1912:

That none of the great net men have anything on Hugh Lehman, the great Westminster goal tender, was the almost unanimous consensus of opinion as the fanning bee broke up and the players drifted away. Were half [?] the players in the British Columbia league picking a representative team of Canada against any other man, it would be a matter of indifference to them who had first choice of goal keepers. Lehman would satisfy them for the fastest aggregation in the Dominion, and that means the world

Hugh works with his hands, feet, body, legs, and stick, as well as with his skilled eye and keen brain. He appears possessed of a hockey prescience which warns him at what exact angle a shot will be made, who will make it, even where there are three or four men working in combination, and he is in the exact spot he should be when his citadel is attacked.

and

Four other names stood very much to the front when it came to picking the greatest hockey goal keepers. They were Percy Leseur, Paddy Moran, "Dutchy" Morrison and "Whitey" Merritt"

Lehman will be fairly high for me this round.
 

rmartin65

Registered User
Apr 7, 2011
2,849
2,425
And another about Lehman being the best/one of the best: VIctoria Daily Times, 3 April 1912

"Paddy" Moran, the famous goaltender of the Stanley cup holders, and "Hughie" Lehman of the Westminster champions, are considered the best net-custodians in the game to-day, with the possible exception of "Percy" Leseur of the Ottawas

And an interesting column from the Province, 4 March 1922, where Lehman is called the best goalie in hockey at the time, but not as good as a couple previous netminders-

"Eagle Eye Hughie Lehman, Vancouver goalkeeper, who bats 1000 or more, and sometimes needs a curfew to call him back into the cage, may be the greatest backstop in the puck sport today, but don't think for a minute that he is the greatest custodian in the annals of the winter pastime. Not at all. There were others before him to whom the old-timers will refer when any argument arises as to the stars of the present and a decade or so ago.

"Whatea think of the goalkeepers of today, and those who shimmied between the net years ago?" asked George Irvine, Vancouver amateur referee, and in 1917 a P.C.H.A. arbiter, asked of Frank Patrick, en route to Seattle night before last. "Don't you think the present-day men are superior?"

"Not at all," replied the Coast proxy with a yawn: the hockey fans had been discussing hockey before your time and mine, yes, even further back, but the hour was 3 a.m., but argument waxed warm on the merits and demerits of the past and present players. "I regard our present goalies as wonderful players. Their work boarders on the sensational, but at the same time, in Percy Leseuer, old Ottawa goalie, Paddy Moran, of QUebec, and "Bouse" Hutton, of Ottawa, we had three of the greatest men in the nets, players every bit as good as the present-day performers. There we no greater players, past or present, than those men," declared the c.p. The men who guard the nets today play wonderful hockey, but let us not forget the old school. Hutton, Moran and Leseuer were remarkable goalkeepers. And also let it be said that Tom Phillips and Si Griffis, in their day, had no equals in hockey. There were just as brilliant and as effective as any players in the game today. The old school provided sensational players just the same as the present-day team. We must give credit where it is due. Today we have wonderful players, but let's not overlook the stars of ye olde days."
 

MXD

Partying Hard
Oct 27, 2005
51,707
17,573
Lehman is the most consistently praised player available this round and will go high for me.
I'll go a step further and say that Lehman is the most consistently praised player, and the stronger player relative to contemporaries except MAYBE Shesterkin, that we'll get until the end of the project.

Biggest issue with him is how to calibrate the very obvious era/competition concerns.
 

jigglysquishy

Registered User
Jun 20, 2011
8,390
9,168
Regina, Saskatchewan
Hellebucyk is off to another great year. Probably leading in Vezina contention at this point. He gets shit on for the playoffs, but I think it can largely be chalked up to team defense.

I'm sure @Mike Farkas can be more eloquent and detailed. But I do firmly believe he's actually that good.
 

MXD

Partying Hard
Oct 27, 2005
51,707
17,573
Hellebucyk is off to another great year. Probably leading in Vezina contention at this point. He gets shit on for the playoffs, but I think it can largely be chalked up to team defense.

I'm sure @Mike Farkas can be more eloquent and detailed. But I do firmly believe he's actually that good.
His team defense is good enough to enable him to post Vezina-worthy numbers in the regular season.
 
Last edited:

Michael Farkas

Celebrate 68
Jun 28, 2006
14,849
10,254
NYC
www.youtube.com
Hellebucyk is off to another great year. Probably leading in Vezina contention at this point. He gets shit on for the playoffs, but I think it can largely be chalked up to team defense.

I'm sure Farkas can be more eloquent and detailed. But I do firmly believe he's actually that good.
Detailed? Maybe.
Eloquent? I, uh, the thing...uhh...I don't...bel...umm...nah.

Let's take a look at a sample together...



0:27 - It's a nice shot to the corner. This might be unpopular, but ideally that's a save. Ideally, everything is a save, of course. He's down here, and that's sort of his thing. I initially thought he was a little off his angle, but maybe not. He plays the percentages and loses. Winnipeg thinks they can change their D, and they lose. Tough break. Is it a "bad" goal? Nah. But it's not impossible to stay up there.

2:25 - Pretty clear debacle here. Logan Stanley is in the league for height and draft capital purposes only and Dylan Samberg isn't strong enough to carry him. Those two combine to ruin Hellebuyck's life here. That's not on him.

2:57 - I don't think Dylan DeMelo gets enough discredit for his defensive game. It's come leaps and bounds and I still don't like it. That said...make a save, Buck-a-roo.

6:45 - Tipped in front of him, not much you can do there. Dylan DeMelo doesn't have a stick. Ideally, Hellebuyck fights for ice at the top of the paint there. Even if he initiates contact, he's likely gonna draw an interference wash out. One of the things with how goalies express themselves when they aren't confident...(not) taking ice is a common one. Let's see if it holds...

8:26 - Yeah, very next goal. This is a calamity...but come on, dude, you're sitting on the goalline almost and Makar has it at the point. Take. Your. Ice. You know who has it, you know how he shoots...you're just not feeling it right now and this is the kind of stuff that happens if your mental game starts to spiral.

9:06 - Not quite a garbage time goal. I mean, it hits Brenden Dillon in the nameplate and goes in. Neal Pionk is a zilch defensively. He tries to foul COL62 and can't even do that right.

##

Let's see how he lost the series...



2:00 - All right, so hold on...no speed over the puck or behind it. It's 3 on 3 at the line. This shouldn't be so bad, how are they gonna blow this?

WPG22 is gonna "chip" (to use a football term) Nathan MacKinnon. Good idea, but only if it doesn't cost you puck. But it does. So, now Rantanen is sort of alone, facing the middle of the rink. Then WPG62 over-compensates for Rantanen being loose - but like...don't. He's standing in the corner of the offensive zone and WPG22 is gonna address him on his own time. Just don't let them flip the ice on you...make them put it behind or, even better, put it on net from a mile away.

Rantanen hits the 4th man. Now, I can't see a number there...but I'd bet a dollar that a player with that one-touch playmaking must be Makar. That seam pass...there's just no recovering from that. Morrissey is pinned back by MacKinnon, so he can't do much. He could have thrown his body into it into desperation, but I rarely support that kind of thing in first place. Hellebuyck is powerless to stop this, as Winnipeg is playing beer league defense here.

3:41 - Neal Pionk, you can take the player out of Minnesota high school hockey, but...

They score from the top of the crease to the far top corner. Hellebuyck would have to be one of those nonsense factory goalies to have a chance at this...a good goalie gives this up every time basically. Most bad goalies do too.

4:38 - Neal Pionk dunks it right in his own net. They weren't gonna defend **** on that play anyhow, but it's a particularly hilarious way to fall behind.

7:05 - Tipped going against the flow. Tough break. Nuke is near the puddle, but he's not alone. So taking more ice wouldn't have likely done anything there but get him tied up. He can't see a thing here.

8:22 - I assume that's the first 2 on 1 that DeMelo has ever faced based on that attempt. Between that and a cone, give me the cone every time. Hellebuyck is all over this and if it's anyone else but 29 and 96, he has a better shot than you think to make a save. I mean, the read, most of the timing, the pad seals right to the post, telescopic blocker but still under control. You have to respect MacKinnon as a shooter though, he shoots constantly. CH did all he could. Which is the exact opposite of what Dylan DeMelo gave.

##

One more? 2023 elimination game vs. Vegas...



0:23 - I don't even have to say anything, right? Neal Pionk plays defense like he's constantly living under power lines. This is kinda how Erik Karlsson plays defense in these situations, except EK has 10x the hand-eye. No chance for the Buckster.

0:57 - Sort of a bang bang scenario. Stone is shooting from the slot. Hellebuyck prioritizes having his feet set, so he probably isn't thrilled with his depth here. There's traffic coming through too, not sure if that got in his vision. It's probably stoppable, but it's also not one that I'd look to and go, "goalie's gotta have it" by any means.

1:13 - I mean, your choice. Overload one side and build a wall with your two D and have the center cover your backside. Or have the center support puck side and slot. Not neither. No chance for Hellebuyck with that peewee defense there.

1:49 - Dylan DeMelo is attacking the bumper from high on the power play...I mean, ok...that's fascinating. Tough to tell on these angles, but I think this is going short side high maybe and then the stick of DeMelo mutes it low and not short side. It's tough when you're reading shots and they go a different way. I'd like to see this from behind CH to be more sure of this one...but this is an A+ scoring chance no matter how you slice it. If your thought is "A+ chances aren't on the goalie", then you don't need any other angles.

##

So, yeah, in this sample...it's a lot of more or less impossible situations for Hellebuyck
 

jigglysquishy

Registered User
Jun 20, 2011
8,390
9,168
Regina, Saskatchewan
I don't want to spend too much time defending Hellebucyk. Jets fans are 10% of our panel here and I'm trying to be as unbiased as I can. He's been the best player the Jets have had since Selanne and I don't think it's as simple as "great regular season terrible playoffs"
 

Michael Farkas

Celebrate 68
Jun 28, 2006
14,849
10,254
NYC
www.youtube.com
Spend the time. He belongs now over most of these names. I had him 19th on my list. Ton of Vezina support in an era where it's tough to amass it consistently, a fair bit of Hart support in a market that isn't great for it...he should feature this round.
 

rmartin65

Registered User
Apr 7, 2011
2,849
2,425
Asking the question "why does Price's award record look worse than what is expected based on the praise he received" seems like a fair question to me. Again, though- if you don't think it is, let me know what I am allowed to ask the group.

I don't think it is a good question at this point, to be honest. I really don't. And because of that, I couldn't help but look at it as a way to undermine certain, especially modern, goalies...(I read that you like Price, I get it)

It gets documented how many times and now across, ya know 80+ years we're finding...that the media stinks and that it correlates averaging stats to awards.
Ok, so we hate media-voted awards...
Spend the time. He belongs now over most of these names. I had him 19th on my list. Ton of Vezina support in an era where it's tough to amass it consistently, a fair bit of Hart support in a market that isn't great for it...he should feature this round.

... isn't the Hart media-voted?
 

Michael Farkas

Celebrate 68
Jun 28, 2006
14,849
10,254
NYC
www.youtube.com
Ok, so we hate media-voted awards...


... isn't the Hart media-voted?
If my choices are: ignore all media awards or take them all as gospel, I'd choose ignore. If we go that way, what's your game plan? My list would be unaffected.

Regardless, award voting varies by era. They can't all be treated equally...as ya know haha
 
Last edited:

rmartin65

Registered User
Apr 7, 2011
2,849
2,425
If my choices are: ignore all media awards or take them all as gospel, I'd choose ignore. If we go that way, what's your game plan? My list would be unaffected.
Our choices aren’t ignore vs take as gospel, though.

You were the one claiming that the media awards suck, then trotted them out. I’m curious about why.
Regardless, award voting varies by era. They can't all be treated equally...as ya know haha
Well, sure. But is there an era difference between Price and Hellebucyk?

EDIT- fixed a typo
 
Last edited:

Michael Farkas

Celebrate 68
Jun 28, 2006
14,849
10,254
NYC
www.youtube.com
Our choices aren’t ignore vs take as gospel, tough.

You were the one claiming that the media awards suck, then trotted them out. I’m curious about why.

Well, sure. But is there an era difference between Price and Hellebucyk?
Like I've said since the preliminary thread and a dozen times since then...

Teams generate stats, stats get awards, awards get canon.

When it's good, it's good. When it's not, it's not. That's the nature of it. It's just like a defensive system. Roy and Brodeur played behind great defense AND were great.

Some guys played behind a great defense and were NOT good.
 

rmartin65

Registered User
Apr 7, 2011
2,849
2,425
When it's good, it's good. When it's not, it's not. That's the nature of it.
So... we can use the awards when they agree with you, but should discard them when they don't? I'm just a public school kid, so please let me know if I am misunderstanding something.

Anyway, some general thoughts on those available.

I think Hellebuyck (whose name I feel like I am constantly misspelling) is definitely a good name for this round. I think there is a pretty clear indication that he was/is held to a higher esteem relative to his peers than several other goalies on this list.

I wish Lehman came up earlier. Or, actually, I wish Benedict didn't go in last round. I think there needs to be a real conversation about the two and how they measure up against each other. Right now I lean towards Lehman being the greater player, but that doesn't mean we should be voting him in just because Benedict is in. In my opinion, we should be voting for him because he was greater than most (if not all) of the guys available this round.

Esposito and Hainsworth, what to do about the canon guys who have been/are being challenged. I am fairly convinced that Hainsworth could still wait a bit. Esposito, though, maybe it was ugly, but he seems to have been regarded as one of the better guys in net during portions of his career. I'm not discounting him yet.

Lumley- I could use some more information on Lumley.

I can wait a bit before Gump.

Holmes is probably middle of the pack for me. I like him a lot, but the praise isn't at the same level as it is for guys like Lehman.

I still don't know what to do with Holecek. I appreciate all the information that has been provided on him, but it is taking me a while to really digest it. I'm glad we are getting another week to work on this set of players.

Smith is ahead of Fuhr for me, but I'm struggling with where exactly to put him. Middle of the pack?

Worters is going to be high again for me. Higher than Thompson. But where does Thompson fit? I think that, Thompson, Holecek, and Lumley are the guys that I am the most uncertain of, and hopefully we can get some more discussion about those three.
 

Michael Farkas

Celebrate 68
Jun 28, 2006
14,849
10,254
NYC
www.youtube.com
So... we can use the awards when they agree with you, but should discard them when they don't? I'm just a public school kid, so please let me know if I am misunderstanding something.
Nah, you pretty much got it. I mean, that would make my life much simpler if I actually believed that haha

Basically, I'm saying - as always - that you need context for every single thing that you say. If you want to award count, use pnep's system and save yourself several weeks.
 

Dr John Carlson

Registered User
Dec 21, 2011
10,045
4,601
Nova Scotia
My hesitation on Lehman has always been this: the reputation is great, but how much of that is built through the weak competition he faced on the Coast? It would make total sense that the greats who played out West would think so highly of him, when he was year after year the best versus very little:

PCHA Net Competition
1912: Lehman, Bert Lindsay, Allan Parr
1913: Lehman, Lindsay, Parr
1914: Lehman, Lindsay, Parr
1915: Lehman, Lindsay, Mike Mitchell
1916: Lehman, Hap Holmes, Tommy Murray, Fred McCulloch
1917: Lehman, Holmes, Murray, Hec Fowler
1918: Lehman, Murray, Fowler
1919: Lehman, Holmes, Murray
1920: Lehman, Holmes, Fowler
1921: Lehman, Holmes, Fowler
1922: Lehman, Holmes, Murray, Fowler
1923: Lehman, Holmes, Fowler
1924: Lehman, Holmes, Fowler (Hainsworth, Hal Winkler, Red McCusker, Charlie Reid all in the WCHL, who played a split schedule vs. the PCHA this year)
1925: Lehman, Holmes, Hainsworth, Winkler, McCusker, Reid, Herb Stuart
1926: Lehman, Holmes, Hainsworth, Winkler, McCusker, Stuart

It's Holmes most of the time, Hainsworth and Winkler after Lehman was an old man, and then a whole lot of nothing. Clint Benedict had Holmes some of the time, but he had to beat out Percy LeSueur to win the starting job in Ottawa, plus he had Vezina to deal with for almost his whole career, and then John Ross Roach, Alec Connell, then Worters, Hainsworth... by Benedict's last great season in 1928, here were the goalies:

NHL Net Competition
1928: Benedict, Gardiner, Worters, Hainsworth, Holmes, Connell, Roach, Winkler, Chabot

He was still getting it done against that group, almost winning the Cup with the Maroons.

I get that Lehman was more highly regarded than Holmes, and I don't think Lehman deserves a disproportionate amount of the blame for why he lost so often compared to Holmes, so I'd have to go with Lehman of the two. But when we're dealing so much with contemporary praise for these older guys, and the praise might be partly because of his poor competition... I just think there's other guys this round that we can be more sure of, including the other two older guys in Worters and Thompson. I mean, Thompson was maybe the best against strong competition for almost a decade, and Lehman was definitely the best against weak competition for a little over a decade. I'd take the former.
 

rmartin65

Registered User
Apr 7, 2011
2,849
2,425
Basically, I'm saying - as always - that you need context for every single thing that you say.

All I'm trying to do is find that context. I asked why Price had less post-season acclaim than the popular sentiment towards him suggests he should have had. You said that is a bad/dumb question, because media-voted awards suck. Then you used media-voted recognition as a justification for why we should all like Hellebuyck. Price and Hellebuyck overlapped for 7 seasons, so it isn't like they existed in two different leagues or voting environments.

It's almost like... asking questions gets us to that context which you claim to want.

If you want to award count, use pnep's system and save yourself several weeks.
If it makes you feel better to intentionally mis-characterize my arguments because you disagree with them, have at it. If you want to have a productive conversation, please stop.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad