How is Jacques Plante considered better than Glenn Hall?

[RomersWorld*]

How? I always see Plante listed top 5 and Hall after him, usually 5-8. On this HOH board, Plante is listed 13th best player of all time while Glenn Hall is listed 25th best, right after Sawchuk. Hall and Plante are especially interesting to compare because they almost completely overlapped. Plante's 1st all star game was in 1956 and 1970 was his last. Hall's 1st all star game was in 1955 and 1969 was his last.

Glenn Hall
Calder Trophy winner
3x Vezina Trophy winner
Conn Smythe Trophy winner
13x All Star Games
7x All Star Team Selection (1st team)
4x All Star Team Selection (2nd team)
1x Stanley Cup Champion

Jacques Plante
7x Vezina Trophy winner
Hart Memorial Trophy winner
8x All Star Games
3x All Star Team Selection (1st team)
4x All Star Team Selection (2nd team)
6x Stanley Cup Champion (5x as #1 goalie)

So we know that Plante won the Norris more often, but isn't that more of a team stat? Plante played on a dynasty team and the Norris at that point was given to the goalie with the lowest GAA. That would mean Brian Elliot would be the Norris winner this year.

Plante does have the Hart trophy which is a big plus on his side of the argument. But Glenn Hall does have a Conn Smythe to his name which Plante doesn't. I give Plante the edge there though with the Hart being more evident of dominance.

Then we have the all star games. From 1956 to 1960, Plante made the all star game every year. But from 1961 to 1970, Plante only made the all star game 3 times(1962, 1969, 1970). Meanwhile, Glenn Hall made the all star game from 1955 to 1958 every time. He missed in 1959 but would be an all star 9 straight years, 1960 to 1969. From 1955-1969, Hall wasn't an all star ONE time. 13 times out of 14 years.

But what I feel is the best argument is that Glenn Hall was being voted as a better goalie over Jacques Plante quite a few times.

ALL STAR TEAMS(goalies):
1955-56: Jacques Plante (1st team), Glenn Hall (2nd team)
1956-57: Glenn Hall (1st team), Jacques Plante (2nd team)
1957-58: Glenn Hall (1st team), Jacques Plante (2nd team)
1958-59: Jacques Plante (1st team), Terry Sawchuk (2nd team)
1959-60: Glenn Hall (1st team), Jacques Plante (2nd team)
1960-61: Johnny Bower (1st team), Glenn Hall (2nd team)
1961-62: Jacques Plante (1st team), Glenn Hall (2nd team)
1962-63: Glenn Hall (1st team), Terry Sawchuk (2nd team)
1963-64: Glenn Hall (1st team), Charlie Hodge (2nd team)
1964-65: Roger Crozier (1st team), Charlie Hodge (2nd team)
1965-66: Glenn Hall (1st team), Gump Worsley (2nd team)
1966-67: Ed Giacomin (1st team), Glenn Hall (2nd team)
1967-68: Gump Worsley (1st team), Ed Giacomin (2nd team)
1968-69: Glenn Hall (1st team), Ed Giacomin (2nd team)
1969-70: Glenn Hall (1st team), Ed Giacomin (2nd team)
1970-71: Ed Giacomin (1st team), Jacques Plante (2nd team)

So there you have it. Looks to me like the voters agree Glenn Hall was the better goalie throughout his career. The arguments I usually see have to do with Stanley Cups(team stat) and Vezina Trophies(team stat). The one thing that Plante has on Hall is the Hart Trophy. Again, Hall has the Smythe and Calder but the Hart trumps that. Still, I think that Hall's 4 more 1st team selections and 5 more all star games may give him the edge.

What do you guys think? How is Glenn Hall rated 25th overall while Plante is 13th overall? Are they really that far apart? And does Sawchuk really belong between them? Hall should be over Sawchuk fairly easily IMO. I'd love to hear some opinions.

 

[RomersWorld*]

Also for comparisons sake:

Glenn Hall
Calder Trophy winner
3x Vezina Trophy winner
Conn Smythe Trophy winner
13x All Star Games
7x All Star Team Selection (1st team)
4x All Star Team Selection (2nd team)
1x Stanley Cup Champion

Jacques Plante
7x Vezina Trophy winner
Hart Memorial Trophy winner
8x All Star Games
3x All Star Team Selection (1st team)
4x All Star Team Selection (2nd team)
6x Stanley Cup Champion (5x as #1 goalie)

Terry Sawchuk
Calder Trophy winner
4x Vezina Trophy winner
11x All Star Games
3x All Star Selection (1st team)
4x All Star Selection (2nd team)
4x Stanley Cup Champion

 

[Killion]

... "back in the day" you had your Big 4 or 6 Goaltenders. Im talkin circa 1960's when these guys were all playing. Glenn Hall & Jacques Plante were like the "Godfathers" of goaltenders then & for everything that followed. Guys like Bower, Worsley, earlier Chadwick & Broda; Eddie Johnston, Eddie Giacomin, Cheevers & all of the rest were basically just side dishes. Those guys all stole bits & pieces from each ones game. Bernie Parent & countless others Plante disciples; Tony Esposito to Brodeur & Luongo Hall disciples... but mixed,

Those two guys, Hall & Plante, re-defined the position. Plante with his wandering (aggressively acting like a 3rd defenceman) & stand-up style, playing the angles to scientific precision; Hall more gut including the origination of the Butterfly, including a basket full of other tricks (shouting at the player to "shoot shoot SHOOT" as an eg; etc...) all part of the package. Fundamentally, they share equal importance, ranking 1A&B on the scale. "B" being equal. No way can you claim one is better than the other unless statistically you tear them apart. Now, all that being said, I'd go with Plante every day & twice on Sundays. There are holes in Halls game, the Butterfly, apparent to this day.

 

[BillyShoe1721]

Hall's GAA goes up by .29 in the playoffs. Plante's goes down by .24 in the playoffs.

 

[Killion]

Hall's GAA goes up by .29 in the playoffs. Plante's goes down by .24 in the playoffs.

Glen Hall did not "steal" games from the opposition. Plante did. So did most of Montreals long list of goaltenders since time immemorial, starting with Georges' Vezina. No one on this planet gets it like french Canadians. I tell you as a former goaltender the Hall system is lacking, its weak, you get beat. Indeed, the entire premise of sole reliability on the Butterfly is flawed, a system of luck & chance, ameliorating mistakes, weak. Mentally, physically. Its a matter of desperation, blocking, chance & angles. Ridiculous, pathetic.

 

[Iain Fyffe]

What do you guys think? How is Glenn Hall rated 25th overall while Plante is 13th overall? Are they really that far apart? And does Sawchuk really belong between them? Hall should be over Sawchuk fairly easily IMO. I'd love to hear some opinions.

When evaluating a player's career, peak value has to be balanced against career value. No one's going to precisely agree on the weight to assign to each.

Besides that, they're really not rated far apart at all. The difference between a player at 13 on a list like this and a player at 25 is tiny. At best you can say Plante is rated marginally ahead of Hall.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Glen Hall did not "steal" games from the opposition. Plante did. So did most of Montreals long list of goaltenders since time immemorial, starting with Georges' Vezina. No one on this planet gets it like french Canadians. I tell you as a former goaltender the Hall system is lacking, its weak, you get beat. Indeed, the entire premise of sole reliability on the Butterfly is flawed, a system of luck & chance, ameliorating mistakes, weak. Mentally, physically. Its a matter of desperation, blocking, chance & angles. Ridiculous, pathetic.

I take it this is sarcasm?

 

[reckoning]

Just a couple of points:

While Hall's 7-3 edge is 1st All-Star Team seems huge, two of those seasons ('58 and '60) were basically dead heats where he beat out Plante by razor-thin margins. All it would've taken in both those years would be for just one writer to put Plante ahead of Hall on his ballot, and 7-3 becomes 5-5.

About Hall's '68 Conn Smythe: maybe someone here old enough to remember it can shed a little more light on it, but I was always under the impression that it was because everyone thought Montreal would destroy St. Louis, and the series ended up being 4 one-goal games. Was Hall's Smythe based on the media's low expectations for St. Louis more than his actual play? And how much of the credit for the games being close should go to Hall as opposed to the rest of the team?

Quote from Barclay Plager:
"We worked hard the first year because we were proud to be the first expansion team in the finals. We didn’t work as hard the second time."
http://lowetide.ca/blog/2008/05/tracers-barclay-plager-2.html

Did Plante actually "carry" the team more the following year?

Hall in the '68 playoffs: 8-10; 2.43; .916
Plante in the '69 playoffs: 8-2; 1.43, .946

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Plante was likely underrated in All Star voting because the media had trouble separating his performance from that of his stacked team, especially Doug Harvey. It's noteworthy that the season after Harvey was traded, Plante won the Hart Trophy

Also keep in mind that a couple (not all!) of Hall's 1st Teams seem almost by default. People criticize some of Brodeur's Vezinas for being overly affected by Games Played; you might say the same for Hall. In some of the years in the mid-late 60s, basically every team but Chicago was using a platoon system.

 

[Canadiens1958]

1968 Glenn Hall

Just a couple of points:

While Hall's 7-3 edge is 1st All-Star Team seems huge, two of those seasons ('58 and '60) were basically dead heats where he beat out Plante by razor-thin margins. All it would've taken in both those years would be for just one writer to put Plante ahead of Hall on his ballot, and 7-3 becomes 5-5.

About Hall's '68 Conn Smythe: maybe someone here old enough to remember it can shed a little more light on it, but I was always under the impression that it was because everyone thought Montreal would destroy St. Louis, and the series ended up being 4 one-goal games. Was Hall's Smythe based on the media's low expectations for St. Louis more than his actual play? And how much of the credit for the games being close should go to Hall as opposed to the rest of the team?

Quote from Barclay Plager:
"We worked hard the first year because we were proud to be the first expansion team in the finals. We didn’t work as hard the second time."
http://lowetide.ca/blog/2008/05/tracers-barclay-plager-2.html

Did Plante actually "carry" the team more the following year?

Hall in the '68 playoffs: 8-10; 2.43; .916
Plante in the '69 playoffs: 8-2; 1.43, .946

1968 Glenn Hall also won two game 7s, 1 home, 1 road to get to the finals.

Finals you had the mentor / student coaching match-up. Retiring Toe Blake vs his student Scotty Bowman.

Then you had the rosters. 1968 Blues finals roster featured three of the 1956-60 five SC Canadiens - Harvey,Moore, Talbot.plus 5 former Canadiens or farmhands playing against former teammates. If ever an underdog had the knowledge to play and perform against a favourite this was the year. In this context Hall was great but the reality of sports is that what you keep should beat what you discard and this is what happened.

Then in 1969, Plante was simply greater as the numbers show.

 

[Killion]

I take it this is sarcasm?

.... of course. Im blaming it on the heat, the Jack Daniels.

 

[pappyline]

Just a couple of points:

While Hall's 7-3 edge is 1st All-Star Team seems huge, two of those seasons ('58 and '60) were basically dead heats where he beat out Plante by razor-thin margins. All it would've taken in both those years would be for just one writer to put Plante ahead of Hall on his ballot, and 7-3 becomes 5-5.

About Hall's '68 Conn Smythe: maybe someone here old enough to remember it can shed a little more light on it, but I was always under the impression that it was because everyone thought Montreal would destroy St. Louis, and the series ended up being 4 one-goal games. Was Hall's Smythe based on the media's low expectations for St. Louis more than his actual play? And how much of the credit for the games being close should go to Hall as opposed to the rest of the team?

Quote from Barclay Plager:
"We worked hard the first year because we were proud to be the first expansion team in the finals. We didn’t work as hard the second time."
http://lowetide.ca/blog/2008/05/tracers-barclay-plager-2.html

Did Plante actually "carry" the team more the following year?

Hall in the '68 playoffs: 8-10; 2.43; .916
Plante in the '69 playoffs: 8-2; 1.43, .946

Ok so you want to take away 2 of Hall's 1st allstars and give them to Plante which i disagree with. The resuls are what they are. Still when you talk total AS selections (1st & 2nd). It is Hall 11 to Plante 7.

You know for a while there I was going with the HOH canon that Plante is better but now I think Hall was better. I know at the time The consensus was that Plante was a product of the team whereas Hall was just damn good. My eyes tell me Hall was better.

 

[seventieslord]

Ok so you want to take away 2 of Hall's 1st allstars and give them to Plante which i disagree with. The resuls are what they are. Still when you talk total AS selections (1st & 2nd). It is Hall 11 to Plante 7.

It obviously matters how close they were.

 

[seventieslord]

I came to this section originally with Hall ahead of Plante on my list. a well-constructed case by BM67 really changed my mind on that.

 

[Big Phil]

For starters, there is not a ton that seperates the goalies from #1-6. They are - randomly - Sawchuk, Roy, Brodeur, Hasek, Hall, Plante. Three of the goalies are 1950s and 1960s goalies. The others are 1990s and 2000s goalies. After that there are a range of goalies you can pick. Give me Turk Broda at #7, but that's another story.

So basically this is your "big 6" that is nearly universal. The order of this big 6 is the question mark. I've always felt the thing that holds Hall back from being #1 all-time is his playoff resume. Yes he won a Cup in 1961 and played well. Yes he won a Conn Smythe in 1968 in a losing cause. But he also had some mediocre playoffs in between for some great Chicago teams. Upon reviewing stats you can see that Mikita, Hull and Pilote generally keep up their pace in the postseason. They don't necessarily always carry the team on their back, but they aren't really at fault for losses either. Kenny Wharram, among other Hawk secondary players is a guy who fails in the postseason. And as far as I am concerned Hall is another member who let the team down at times. Too often he didn't play up to his level in the postseason as he did the regular season.

Out of the big 6 goalies all-time he has the worst playoff portfolio. Certainly significantly worse than Plante, Roy and Sawchuk. Worse than Brodeur too. I would also say he is behind Hasek in that category. This is what seperates him from Plante and the others.

 

[Psycho Papa Joe]

At the end of the day, when given a team capable of winning the cup, plante won most of the time. Hall only won once. The hawks really should have won more than one cup in the 60's and considering Hall's gaa went up in the playoffs he has to share a good burden of the blame for the hawks underachieving in the playoffs in the 60's.

That plante actually improved his already great numbers come playoff time gives him the edge IMO.

 

[tarheelhockey]

So, whatever happened to that top-30 goalies project?

considering Hall's gaa went up in the playoffs he has to share a good burden of the blame for the hawks underachieving in the playoffs in the 60's.

GAA has never been a good measure of goaltending. If Hall was a contemporary goalie, we wouldn't even bring it into the conversation.

I'd want to see some proof that Hall was personally responsible for those numbers.

 

[tarheelhockey]

More specifically:

In 1963, the Blackhawks won their first two semifinal games against Detroit. The Wings swept the rest of the series, scoring 4, 4, 4, 7. What happened?

1964: Chicago takes the series lead over Detroit after 5 games. The Wings win the next two games 7-2 and 4-2. What happened?

1966: Chicago once again up on Detroit, two games to one. Lose the next three in a row -- 5-1, 5-3, 3-2. What happened?

1967: Hall only plays 3 playoff games, with a 1-2 record. Why?

To me, the story is in the details of those playoff series.
Knowing exactly how the Hawks got stomped so badly in those critical games is essential to knowing how much blame to put on Hall.

 

[Dark Shadows]

Ok so you want to take away 2 of Hall's 1st allstars and give them to Plante which i disagree with. The resuls are what they are. Still when you talk total AS selections (1st & 2nd). It is Hall 11 to Plante 7.

You know for a while there I was going with the HOH canon that Plante is better but now I think Hall was better. I know at the time The consensus was that Plante was a product of the team whereas Hall was just damn good. My eyes tell me Hall was better.

My eyes told me Hall was worse.

We can agree to disagree since we have had this argument before

 

[Psycho Papa Joe]

So, whatever happened to that top-30 goalies project?



GAA has never been a good measure of goaltending. If Hall was a contemporary goalie, we wouldn't even bring it into the conversation.

I'd want to see some proof that Hall was personally responsible for those numbers.

Well I only have the word of my dad and others and the numbers.

You'll have to discuss the matter with eyewitnesses. In general most of the people I've spoken with blame hall for the hawks disappointing playoff results in the 60's. The general theme is that he was great in the regular season but took a backseat to the likes of Worsley and Bower come playoff time that decade.

 

[BM67]

Sawchuk-Plante-Hall Era

This is still missing the first few years of Sawchuk's career.

SV%
52-53
Plante 73-77 .948
Hall 134-144 .931
Sawchuk 1559-1679 .929
Average 10950-11956 .916
53-54
Plante 418-445 .939
Sawchuk 1798-1927 .933
Average 11400-12409 .919
54-55
Hall 58-60 .967
Sawchuk 1654-1786 .926
Plante 1359-1469 .925
Average 11343-12402 .915
55-56
Plante 1549-1668 .929
Hall 1724-1872 .921
Sawchuk 1862-2043 .911
Average 11556-12620 .916
56-57
Hall 1954-2111 .926
Sawchuk 939-1020 .921
Plante 1394-1517 .919
Average 11381-12511 .910
57-58
Plante 1431-1550 .923
Hall 1985-2187 .908
Sawchuk 1996-2203 .906
Average 11790-12965 .909
58-59
Plante 1780-1924 .925
Hall 1805-2013 .897
Sawchuk 1798-2007 .896
Average 11537-12754 .905
59-60
Hall 1989-2169 .917
Plante 1870-2045 .914
Sawchuk 1530-1686 .907
Average 11994-13232 .906
60-61
Hall 2030-2210 .919
Plante 1059-1171 .904
Sawchuk 971-1084 .896
Average 122265-13526 .907
61-62
Plante 1995-2161 .923
Hall 1948-2134 .913
Sawchuk 1122-1265 .887
Average 12058-13322 .905
62-63
Hall 1800-1966 .916
Plante 1436-1574 .912
Sawchuk 1231-1350 .912
Average 12179-13428 .907
63-64
Hall 1962-2110 .930
Sawchuk 1519-1657 .917
Plante 2236-2456 .910
Average 12659-13812 .917
64-65
Hall 1135-1234 .920
Sawchuk 967-1059 .913
Plante 997-1106 .901
Average 11645-12840 .907
65-66
Hall 1748-1905 .918
Sawchuk 798-882 .905
Average 11916-13182 .904
66-67
Hall 760-824 .922
Sawchuk 730-796 .917
Average 12108-13350 .907
67-68
Hall 1228-1346 .912
Sawchuk 814-913 .892
Average 24542-26982 .910
68-69
Plante 1104-1174 .940
Hall 1102-1187 .928
Sawchuk 292-320 .913
Average 26600-29288 .908
69-70
Plante 759-826 .919
Hall 459-508 .904
Sawchuk 165-185 .892
Average 27160-29780 .912
70-71
Plante 1227-1300 .944
Hall 788-859 .917
Average 31403-34767 .903
71-72
Plante 952-1038 .917
Average 30463-33755 .902
72-73
Plante 1051-1154 .911
Average 34702-38735 .896
Totals
Plante 22690-24655 .920
Hall 24609-26839 .917
Sawchuk 21745-23862 .911

Playoffs
52
Sawchuk 224-229 .978
53
Plante 99-106 .934
Sawchuk 139-160 .869
54
Sawchuk 314-334 .940
Plante 194-209 .928
55
Sawchuk 284-310 .916
Plante 307-338 .908
56
Plante 215-233 .923
Hall 277-305 .908
57
Plante 250-268 .933
Hall 114-129 .884
58
Plante 299-319 .937
Sawchuk 118-137 .861
59
Hall 209-230 .909
Plante 278-306 .908
60
Plante 211-222 .950
Sawchuk 169-189 .894
Hall 116-130 .892
61
Hall 397-424 .936
Sawchuk 209-227 .921
Plante 162-178 .910
62
Hall 375-406 .924
Plante 176-195 .903
63
Plante 126-140 .900
Hall 216-241 .896
Sawchuk 292-328 .890
64
Sawchuk 301-330 .912
Hall 176-198 .889
65
Hall 347-375 .925
Sawchuk 36-39 .923
66
Sawchuk 66-72 .917
Hall 152-174 .874
67
Sawchuk 337-362 .931
Hall 96-104 .923
68
Hall 489-534 .916
Sawchuk 119-137 .869
69
Plante 264-278 .950
Hall 67-72 .931
70
Plante 116-124 .935
Hall 205-226 .907
Sawchuk 41-47 .872
71
Plante 65-72 .903
Hall 57-66 .864
72
Plante 24-29 .828
73
Plante 53-63 .841
Totals
Plante 2839-3080 .922
Sawchuk 2649-2901 .913
Hall 3293-3614 .911

All-star voting
50-51 (out of 90)
Terry Sawchuk, Det 70 (10-6-2)
Chuck Rayner, NYR 40 (5-3-6)
51-52 (out of 90)
Terry Sawchuk, Det 90 (18-0-0)
Jim Henry, Bos 23 (0-7-2)
52-53 (out of 90)
Terry Sawchuk, Det 69 (10-6-1)
Gerry McNeil, Mtl 57 (8-5-2)
53-54 (out of 180)
Harry Lumley, Tor 127 (57-70)
Terry Sawchuk, Det 95 (35-60)
54-55 (out of 180)
Harry Lumley, Tor 152 (80-72)
Terry Sawchuk, Det 128
Jacques Plante, Mtl 3rd votes unknown
55-56 (out of 180)
Jacques Plante, Mtl 119 (63-56)
Glenn Hall, Det 84 (34-50)
Terry Sawchuk, Bos 4th 14 1st half voting points
56-57 (out of 180)
Glenn Hall, Det 121 45-76)
Jacques Plante, Mtl 85 (23-62)
Terry Sawchuk, Bos 3rd 67 1st half voting points
57-58 (out of 180)
Glenn Hall, Chi 108 (65-43)
Jacques Plante, Mtl 104 (44-60)
3rd unknown
58-59 (out of 180)
Jacques Plante, Mtl 145 (66-79)
Terry Sawchuk, Det 98 (75-23)
3rd unknown
59-60 (out of 180)
Glenn Hall, Chi 106 (22-84)
Jacques Plante, Mtl 105 (68-37)
Terry Sawchuk, Det 3rd 65 1st half voting points
60-61 (out of 180)
Johnny Bower, Tor 156 (84-72)
Glenn Hall, Chi 113 (50-63)
Terry Sawchuk, Det 4th in 1st half voting points with 2
61-62 (out of 180)
Jacques Plante, Mtl 157 (73-84)
Glenn Hall, Chi 86 (32-54)
62-63 (out of 180)
Glenn Hall, Chi 142 (61-81)
Terry Sawchuk, Det 76 (61-15)
Jacques Plante, Mtl 3rd 71 (30-41)
63-64 (out of 180)
Glenn Hall, Chi 132 (88-44)
Charlie Hodge, Mtl 97 (23-74)
Terry Sawchuk, Det 5th in 1st half voting points with 9
Jacques Plante, NYR 6th in 1st half voting points with 4
64-65 (out of 180)
Roger Crozier, Det 157 (67-90)
Charlie Hodge, Mtl 79 (72-7)
Glenn Hall, Chi 27 (5-22) 4th
Terry Sawchuk, Tor 5th 23 (10-13)
65-66 (out of 180)
Glenn Hall, Chi 144 (84-60)
Gump Worsley, Mtl 85 (18-67)
66-67 (out of 180)
Ed Giacomin, NYR 149 (90-59)
Glenn Hall, Chi 62 (27-35)
Terry Sawchuk, Tor 5th 9 (5-4)
67-68 (out of 120)
Gump Worsley, Mtl 55 (24-31)
Ed Giacomin, NYR 41 (5-36)
Glenn Hall, St L 4th 24 (11-13)
Terry Sawchuk, LA T11th 2 (0-2)
68-69 (out of 180)
Glenn Hall, St L 115
Ed Giacomin, NYR 102
Jacques Plante, St L 3rd 61
69-70 (out of 180)
Tony Esposito, Chi 180
Ed Giacomin, NYR 81
Jacques Plante, St L 3rd 28
70-71 (out of 210)
Ed Giacomin, NYR 157
Jacques Plante, Tor 111
Glenn Hall, St L T6th 1
72-73 (out of 240)
Ken Dryden, Mtl 238
Tony Esposito, Chi 83
Jacques Plante, Tor-Bos T11th 1

 

[Killion]

More specifically:

In 1963, the Blackhawks won their first two semifinal games against Detroit. The Wings swept the rest of the series, scoring 4, 4, 4, 7. What happened?

1964: Chicago takes the series lead over Detroit after 5 games. The Wings win the next two games 7-2 and 4-2. What happened?

1966: Chicago once again up on Detroit, two games to one. Lose the next three in a row -- 5-1, 5-3, 3-2. What happened?

1967: Hall only plays 3 playoff games, with a 1-2 record. Why?

To me, the story is in the details of those playoff series.
Knowing exactly how the Hawks got stomped so badly in those critical games is essential to knowing how much blame to put on Hall.

Roger Crozier with Detroit; Terry Sawchuk in the 67 Semi's against Toronto is "what happened" pretty much. Those two guys stood on their heads. Hall outplayed. Chicago wasnt great when they fell behind, squeezed their sticks too hard, while certainly the Leafs & to a slighter lesser degree the Wings would fall into their defensive shell's once they'd gotten the lead, the goals scored thereafter by the Wings & Leafs tending to be of the opportunistic nature as I re-call. I guess to draw an analogy, imagine the early 80's Oilers as Chicago vs Lemaires Devils as Detroit & Toronto, the latter prevailing. Not dissimilar.

 

[Jumptheshark]

I view Pante as being more of a thinker goalie and Hall brute force. Many years ago when I was in my teens I went to a few hockey camps and these were run by some current NHlers ( who more or less dropped in first and last day), but was run by a few former nhlers. One former nhl when addressing that most of the old NHlers where knuckle draggers. (I can not remember his name for the life of me) gave examples of old timers who broke that mold and went into how Plante approach the game and said that Plante was always reading "educated" books and when they had difficult questions they asked him. The only thing I know about Hall is when he needed to think he painted his Barn.

BTW

for the record. Most people I know consider Hall the better goalie

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

So, whatever happened to that top-30 goalies project?
.

Put on hold due the fact that interest fell apart as soon as June started. I figure I'll start it up again in a few weeks when people are jonsing for hockey to start

 

[Killion]

Put on hold due the fact that interest fell apart as soon as June started. I figure I'll start it up again in a few weeks when people are jonsing for hockey to start

... I Fehr you may have long-wait on that front TDMM, along with everyone else for that matter, but back to the subject at hand; do you or anyone else re-call watching Plante when he was playing for the Rangers?. Those seasons were certainly a disappointment while Glenn Hall was still ascendant. His style such that it was remarkable in & of itself, which for a lot of viewers & young players like myself at that time elevated him to the number one post for at least a few years. Both were pathfinders, laid the tracks for much that followed in terms of playing style, most goalies through the 60's & 70's taking pieces & parts from both goaltenders games. Most notably at the NHL level Esposito (a Hall disciple) & Bernie Parent (a Plante product for all intensive purposes).