HOH Top 60 Goaltenders of All Time (2024 Edition) - Round 2, Vote 9

[blogofmike]

Who do you prefer between Fleury and Liut? I feel like Fleury in the playoffs is basically (a worse?) Liut on a better team, but I'm interested to hear what you and others think here.

I don't know what to make of Fleury. But Fleury.

He's less helpful as a regular season presence, and his playoffs are also erratic, (this is why they traded for Tomas Vokoun or Rick Wamsley or Richard Brodeur), but he actually has some good runs in there.

Perhaps it helps that he was replaced a few times when he might've really done damage.

Fleury could string together a good series much more frequently than Liut did. Fleury fighting to make a scrambly save in the dying seconds of 2009 Finals is the opposite of Liut moving away from a shot for no reason against the Habs.

 

[rmartin65]

I don't know what to make of Fleury. But Fleury.

I'm sorry, but I don't know what this is?

Fleury could string together a good series much more frequently than Liut did. Fleury fighting to make a scrambly save in the dying seconds of 2009 Finals is the opposite of Liut moving away from a shot for no reason against the Habs.

I think that is true- Fleury's highs were better than I understand Liut's were. But Fleury's lows are atrocious. I mean-

 

[Michael Farkas]

- On a super light workload
- It also wasn't particularily close.
- Too many netminders who weren't good enough to be candidates here have done very well for that franchise since.

Is Tuukka Rask your modern Tiny Thompson? haha

I don't disagree with any of that, it's a perfectly reasonable opinion to have. The only thing I will say is that my approach slices through the third bullet point pretty cleanly. You don't have to wonder about chicken or egg (system or player) when you evaluate the talent. Rask was relatively high on my list. Whatever that's worth (I guess 1/20th of a cent, as with most coupons)...

 

[blogofmike]

I'm sorry, but I don't know what this is?

I think that is true- Fleury's highs were better than I understand Liut's were. But Fleury's lows are atrocious. I mean-

I find him difficult to assess. But I choose Fleury.

There are some fun ones in the Fleury reel, and a couple that are kind of pedestrian.

As for Liut, here's him in 1982:

Here's Game 1


Fleury getting beat by Ryan Johansen from 50 feet out is bad, but Liut gives you multiple versions of that in the same game.

 

[jigglysquishy]

The post lockout Bruins certainly attract Vezina candidates. Much like the 1930s Rangers did. Thomas, Rask, Ullmark. Swayman won a Jennings.

I guess you could say Nashville too with Rinne and Saros and Vokoun. Or Rangers with Lundqvist and Shesterkin.

 

[rmartin65]

Fleury getting beat by Ryan Johansen from 50 feet out is bad, but Liut gives you multiple versions of that in the same game.

The difference for me is that I feel like goalies in the 80s- especially the early 80s- gave those kinds of goals up somewhat regularly. Fleury’s peers aren’t making the same gaffes at nearly the same frequency, in my opinion.

Since I’m big on relative-to-peer performance as a way to account for differences between eras, that matters to me.

 

[jigglysquishy]

Fleury occupies a pretty unique place in being eligible to play in multiple best on best tournaments, but never actually playing.

Him and Giacomin (though he was functionally only in his prime for 1972). Vernon will come up too. Besides that, do we count Resch? It's a small list.

Fleury will make the list, but I think he has the lowest peak of the four post lockout players available.

 

[MXD]

The post lockout Bruins certainly attract Vezina candidates. Much like the 1930s Rangers did. Thomas, Rask, Ullmark. Swayman won a Jennings.

I guess you could say Nashville too with Rinne and Saros and Vokoun. Or Rangers with Lundqvist and Shesterkin.

With all due respect, did you get your teams/decades messed up? Because JRR and Andy Aitkenhead didn't get much awards while playing with the Rangers, and Dave Kerr did get one 1AST and another 2AST during that decade...

 

[jigglysquishy]

With all due respect, did you get your teams/decades messed up? Because JRR and Andy Aitkenhead didn't get much awards while playing with the Rangers, and Dave Kerr did get one 1AST and another 2AST during that decade...

Strictly awards, no.

But JRR, Aitkenhead, Kerr, and Chabot all had some of the best performances of their career on the 1926-1940 Rangers. It was a carousal of goalies and I think speaks more to the team as a whole than just the goalie. I do think it's more of a Frank Boucher thing.

It really sticks out when you go year by year. They post strong stats, but get just okay praise compared to Boucher and the Cooks.

 

[MXD]

Strictly awards, no.

But JRR, Aitkenhead, Kerr, and Chabot all had some of the best performances of their career on the 1926-1940 Rangers. It was a carousal of goalies and I think speaks more to the team as a whole than just the goalie. I do think it's more of a Frank Boucher thing.

It really sticks out when you go year by year. They post strong stats, but get just okay praise compared to Boucher and the Cooks.

Fair for Chabot (and he probably be benefitted from the better team) but JRR's best season was probably with the Wings, Aitkenhead never played with another team, and Kerr was super young when he was a Maroon and had possibly not hit his prime. Also never played with a prime Boucher in the first place.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Never thought about it, the Rangers are in six Finals in 13 years and there's, what, 6 goalies involved (Lester Patrick and Joe Miller contributing)...? Only Kerr and JRR have multiple appearances?