Round 2, Vote 1 (HOH Top Goaltenders)

[Theokritos]

Holeček is not up for voting, but HaÅ¡ek is and now that people have compared him to Holeček unfavourably, the issue can't be avoided.

The comparison between Holeček and non-NHL HaÅ¡ek is problematic because HaÅ¡ek was not regularly available for international play from 1991 on = after his 26th birthday. Consider that all of Holeček's individual honours at the world championships (best goaltender: 1971, 73, 75, 76, 78; all-star goaltender: 1971, 72, 73, 76, 78) came after he turned 26. At the same age HaÅ¡ek didn't even participate in World Championships any more because he was in North America.

Holeček:
WC 1966 (22 years old): Back up for Dzurilla, playes 2 games.
WC 1967 (23 yo): Alternating with Vladimir Nadrchal, Holeček starts in 3 games and plays in a fourth.
1968-1970: Not on the national team. Dzurilla is the starter, Nadrchal and Miroslav Lacký are the back ups.
WC 1971 (27 yo): Starter, 8 games. Best Goaltender and All-Star Goaltender.
From now on Holeček is a regular on the National Team. All his individual awards are won from 1971-1978 (age 27-34).

Hašek:
WC 1983 (18 years old): Back up for Jiří Kralík, plays 2 games.
CC 1984 (19 yo): Starter (at that age!), plays in 3 or 4 games.
WC 1985: Didn't make the team.
WC 1986 (21 yo): Starter, plays 9 games.
CC 1986 (21 yo): Starter, plays 6 games.
WC 1987 (22 yo): Starter, plays 9 games. Best goaltender and All-Star goaltender.
OG 1988 (23 yo): Alternating with Jaromír Šindel, Hašek starts in 4 games and plays in a fourth.
WC 1989 (25 yo): Starter, plays 10 games. Best goaltender and All-Star goaltender.
WC 1990 (26 yo): Starter, plays 8 games. All-Star goaltender.

HaÅ¡ek was ahead of Holeček: Participation in the World Championship 4 years earlier, individual honours 4 years earlier.

Holecek competed directly against Tretiak for his World Championship awards. Who was the best goalie Hasek competed against?

Goaltenders from the major nations at the WC during Holeček's time:
1971: Viktor Konovalenko, Christer Abrahamsson, Jorma Valtonen, Carl Wetzel
1972: Vladislav Tretiak, Leif Holmqvist, Valtonen
1973: Tretiak, William Löfqvist, Antti Leppänen
1974: Tretiak, Abrahamsson, Curt Larsson, Valtonen, Leppänen
1975: Tretiak, Holmqvist, Leppänen, Jim Warden
1976: Tretiak, Göran Högosta, Löfqvist, Valtonen, Peter LoPresti
1977: Tretiak, Högosta, Valtonen, Tony Esposito, Mike Curran
1978: Tretiak, Högosta, Urpo Ylönen, Peter LoPresti, Daniel Bouchard, Denis Herron

Goaltenders from the major nations at the WC during Hašek's time:
1986: Yevgeni Belosheikin, Peter Lindmark, Jukka Tammi, Hannu Kampurri, Tom Barasso, Chris Terreri, Kelly Hrudey, Jacques Cloutier
1987: Belosheikin, Lindmark, Jarmo Myllys, John Vanbiesbrouck, Sean Burke, Rob Froese; Karl Friesen (not from a major nation, but NHL experienced)
1989: Sergei Mylnikov, Lindmark, Tammi, Vanbiesbrouck, Robb Stauber, Grant Fuhr, Burke; Friesen
1990: Artūrs Irbe, Sergei Mylnikov, Rolf Ridderwall, Sakari Lindfors, Jon Casey, Kirk McLean

 

[Canadiens1958]

Jaundiced Eye Perspective

You're right, the sample size is a big problem. That's why participation should be a big part of the score for goalies in international tournaments.

The biggest difference between Niittymaki or Miller and Hasek is that, in addition to what he did in Nagano, Hasek played in five other best-on-best tournaments over a 22 year span. Essentially that means his countrymen repeatedly voted him the best available goalie in the nation for two decades straight, and that information alone is probably much more valuable than how he played and what kind of puck luck he had in any one of those given six-game stretches.

Obviously there are some drawbacks with going purely based on games played or tournaments entered, maybe some guy's reputation keeps unfairly earning him starts, maybe someone is only starting because the best guy withdrew or got injured, the participation score shouldn't be quite so high for Irbe on Latvia or Kolzig on Germany as it is for a Canadian goalie, etc., but it should be a large part of the equation.

An interesting international career comparison is Bill Ranford vs. Martin Brodeur. If all you care about is peak performance or best goalie awards then you would seemingly want to go with Ranford, because he had an outstanding Canada Cup and two excellent world championships that took place over three consecutive seasons. Brodeur played great and was named the best goalie in the 2004 World Cup, but that's his only individual accolade. What Brodeur did do though was get a phone call for six straight best-on-bests over a 16 year span (seven if you include the '05 WCs during the lockout), ending up as the starter in three (or 4) of them. Because of that there's an argument to be made that Brodeur's international record is much more impressive than Ranford's. Was Ranford's ability to outplay five other goalies over two weeks more significant than Brodeur's ability to repeatedly outplay hundreds of goalies over the course of a decade? Most likely not.

The sample size considerations are so important in goaltending that sometimes you have to almost by default take the guy with the larger sample size. Take for example a veteran workhorse who plays a lot of games vs. a one-year wonder (say, Jim Henry vs. Frank McCool, ideally a non-WWII aided McCool but either way). Even if you generally like peak over career, the more experienced guy should win that head-to-head matchup every time, because any goalie can get hot for a short period of time but it usually takes talent to stick around for a while and that needs to be at least some part of the equation.

Jaundiced eye perspective. Extend your analogy pool to a larger sample size. Say John Ross Roach, Lorne Chabot, Alec Connell, Davey Kerr, Normie Smith, Jim Henry, Gerry McNeil, Lorne Worsley, Charlie Hodge,Andy Moog,Tom Barrasso, Mike Vernon, Chris Osgood, Tim Thomas and the stick around factor becomes very minimal.

Throw in Karl Friesen:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/f/frieska01.html

West German stick around goalie WHC, Olympics, Canada Cup goalie - Canadian born and at an international level it is not very significant either.

Then consider Tim Thomas:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/t/thomati01.html

Perhaps the marriage of goalie, management, coach, team, system, players is a big factor? But then this is what we see in Dryden, Hasek, Durnan, Bower and their respective situations,non-traditional goalies who after years of being overlooked found an openimg. Some sooner, some later.

 

[quoipourquoi]

It means a lot more than a great "two weeks". I certainly hope best-on-best tournaments carry significant weight in these discussions.

But how much weight? That's what I'm asking. Is it the value of a Halak playoff or a Boucher shutout streak? More than that? The Olympic tournament is literally six games every 108 weeks. It's such a small window, and the format has become more suspect since 1994 (three Gold Medal game losers had previously beaten the Gold Medal winner). We can look at a guy like Niittymaki and say that his six games were not at all reflective of his larger career. For Hasek, those six games fell during the greatest hot streak of his career. For Miller, they landed in his only Vezina season (when in any of the surrounding years, it would have been Thomas in net).

The teams aren't familiar with each other. Some of the more NHL-populated countries seem to be throwing an All-Star team on the ice and hoping it gels within three days with the coach du jour.

And you're implying that 360 mins of observation at the Olympics in '98 wasn't enough to let you know anything meaningful about how good Hasek was; that he, like Miller and Niittymaki, could have just "had a good two weeks for the first time in 4 years" or something. Good thing there was a whooooole lot to observe, though (wait, you are old enough to have actually watched Hasek in the 90s, right?) that year outside of simply those 360 mins that showed us the rest of the reasons so many consider Hasek the best of all time.

Again, this is about the tournament itself. I'm getting fed up with your "good ol' Canadian" and youth accusations in the past year. I've fact-checked you enough times that I shouldn't have to respond to this. My list was accepted; that's the only qualification I need to be in this discussion.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Goaltenders from the major nations at the WC during Hašek's time:
1986: Yevgeni Belosheikin, Peter Lindmark, Jukka Tammi, Hannu Kampurri, Tom Barasso, Chris Terreri, Kelly Hrudey, Jacques Cloutier
1987: Belosheikin, Lindmark, Jarmo Myllys, John Vanbiesbrouck, Sean Burke, Rob Froese; Karl Friesen (not from a major nation, but NHL experienced)
1989: Sergei Mylnikov, Lindmark, Tammi, Vanbiesbrouck, Robb Stauber, Grant Fuhr, Burke; Friesen
1990: Artūrs Irbe, Sergei Mylnikov, Rolf Ridderwall, Sakari Lindfors, Jon Casey, Kirk McLean

Thank you. This is exactly what I was looking for. Would you happen to have Tommy Salo's competition available?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Other Factors

As mentioned above, these numbers disguise two very distinctive series. The Leafs threw the kitchen sink at Sawchuk, averaging 31 shots a game, and could hardly beat him as the series wore on. Sawchuk's .951 already looks good enough until you take away the first period of the series to get a .963; take away the first game and he had a ridiculous .977 going forward.

That makes the Montreal series all the more intriguing. While being outshot 269-197 (that's 38-28 on average) the Rocket-less Habs made Sawchuk look rather ordinary and came very close to stealing the Cup away. To make things even more difficult to explain, all three of Montreal's wins (and Sawchuk's only losses of this playoffs) came at the Montreal Forum, where Sawchuk posted an ugly .842. Compare that to .964 in Detroit and .982 in Toronto.

Ultimately the Wings prevailed and Sawchuk had his third Cup in four years, but I'd love to hear an explanation as to why Sawchuk seemed so human in Montreal and so dominant elsewhere.

Your question drifts more into the management / coaching question.

1953-55 saw a very stagnant NHL. Post 1955 playoff, Sawchuk was traded, Dick Irvin was let go in Montreal, hired in Chicago, Toe Blake was hired in Montreal, depth players were viewed differently as were defensemen.

Dick Irvin as a coach tended to micro manage games to an extreme. Didn't always work very well. This tends to be reflected in his players and opposition numbers. 1955 Playoff, Floyd Curry as Maurice Richard's replacement scores 8 goals. Obvious questions follow about Floyd Curry's usage during the Irvin era.

1951(sweeps 2) and 1954(splits), 1955(gets beat two) Playoffs in Detroit, Dick Irvin tweaks things going into Detroit for games 1 and 2 results in ( ). Back in Montreal for games 3 & 4. 1951 and 1954 Wings and Sawchuk bounce back and sweep games 3 & 4, get swept in 1955.Canadiens rebound in 1951 to upset the Wings, come close in 1954 & 1955.

 

[tarheelhockey]

^ So it was Irvin's tinkering that made the Forum such a bear for Sawchuk that year? Are we talking primarily line management or was there more to it?

The difference between his performance in either location is truly striking, especially when you consider his overall home/road split is just about even during those early years... once you remove those games in the Forum.

I'm going to do a little bit more reading on the series today.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Cumulative

^ So it was Irvin's tinkering that made the Forum such a bear for Sawchuk that year? Are we talking primarily line management or was there more to it?

The difference between his performance in either location is truly striking, especially when you consider his overall home/road split is just about even during those early years... once you remove those games in the Forum.

I'm going to do a little bit more reading on the series today.

Cumulative effect.Line management is an important part of it but there is a cost to every choice in this regard just as there is to every strategy.

On the road a coach can throw out his best checking combination and the home coach has to either play his best offensive line or react by reducing their ice time. Likewise the road coach can overplay his offensive line forcing the home coach to overplay his defensive line or match offence against offence, Who blinks first and who adjust better.

This produces ripple effects throughout the line-up - other lines, defensive pairings, down to goaltending. Have a look at what Toe Blake did in game 1, third period of the 1956 Finals against Detroit:

http://www.flyershistory.com/cgi-bin/poboxscore.cgi?O19560011

http://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/MTL/1956.html

Think there are enough clues in the game summary and the Canadiens roster plus up thread info to show that Glenn Hall's weak third period was not strictly self-induced but a combination of factors.

 

[quoipourquoi]

1995-96

League Average: .898
Roy’s Regular Season: .908 (10th; 9th among goalies with 41 decisions)
Roy’s Playoff: .921


1st Round
Expected Save Percentage: .888
Roy’s Save Percentage: .891
Quality Games: 3-3

Roy: 29/31; .935
McLean: 9/12

Roy: 24/29; .828
Hirsch: 28/32

Roy: 28/28; 1.000
Hirsch: 27/31

Roy: 22/26; .846
Hirsch: 30/33

Roy: 16/20; .800
Hirsch: 28/33

(1-0 in OT)

Roy: 20/22; .909
Hirsch: 19/22


2nd Round
Expected Save Percentage: 878
Roy’s Save Percentage: .919
Quality Games: 5-1 (8-4 Total)

Roy: 23/26; .885
Belfour: 28/30

(1-1 in OT)

Roy: 30/31; .968
Hackett: 27/32

Roy: 21/25; .840
Belfour: 18/21

(1-2 in OT)

Roy: 32-34; .941
Belfour: 54/57

(2-2 in OT)

Roy: 22/23; .957
Belfour: 24/28

Roy: 31/34; .912
Belfour: 41/45

(3-2 in OT)


3rd Round
Expected Save Percentage: .877
Roy’s Save Percentage: .905
Quality Games: 4-2 (12-6 Total)

Roy: 29/31; .935
Osgood: 27/30

(4-2 in OT)

Roy: 35/35; 1.000
Osgood: 17/20

Roy: 16/22; .727
Osgood: 15/19

Roy: 29/31; .935
Osgood: 13/16

Roy: 21/26; .808
Osgood: 26/28

Roy: 23/24; .958
Osgood: 18/22


4th Round
Expected Save Percentage: .893
Roy’s Save Percentage: .974
Quality Games: 4-0 (16-6 Total)

Roy: 25/26; .962
Vanbiesbrouck: 27/30

Roy: 27/28; .964
Vanbiesbrouck: 7/11

Roy: 32/34; .941
Vanbiesbrouck: 19/22

Roy: 63/63; 1.000
Vanbiesbrouck: 55/56

(5-2 in OT)


1996-97

League Average: .905
Roy’s Regular Season: .923 (4th; 4th among goalies with 41 decisions)
Roy’s Playoff: .932


1st Round
Expected Save Percentage: .910
Roy’s Save Percentage: .929
Quality Games: 4-2 (20-8 Career)

Roy: 22/22; 1.000
Hackett: 19/24

Roy: 24/25; .960
Hackett: 30/33

Roy: 53/57; .930
Hackett: 48/51

(5-3 in OT)

Roy: 25/30; .833
Hackett: 29/32

Roy: 25/25; 1.000
Hackett: 16/21

Roy: 21/24; .875
Hackett: 23/29


2nd Round
Expected Save Percentage: .900
Roy’s Save Percentage: .937
Quality Games: 3-2 (7-4 Total; 23-10 Career)

Roy: 35/36; .972
Joseph: 32/37

Roy: 42/43; .977
Joseph: 20/24

Roy: 34/38; .895
Joseph: 21/24

Roy: 27/29; .931
Joseph: 38/41

(6-3 in OT)

Roy: 26/29; .897
Joseph: 25/29


3rd Round
Expected Save Percentage: .907
Roy’s Save Percentage: .930
Quality Games: 4-2 (11-6 Total; 27-12 Career)

Roy: 34/35; .971
Vernon: 17/19

Roy: 36/40; .900
Vernon: 15/17

Roy: 26/28; .929
Vernon: 27/28

Roy: 20/25; .800
Vernon: 19/19

Roy: 32/32; 1.000
Vernon: 7/11

Roy: 39/41; .951
Vernon: 15/16


1997-98

League Average: .906
Roy’s Regular Season: .916 (7th; 7th among goalies with 41 decisions)
Roy’s Playoff: .906


1st Round
Expected Save Percentage: .909
Roy’s Save Percentage: .906
Quality Games: 5-2 (32-14 Career)

Roy: 31/34; .912
Joseph: 25/27

Roy: 25/27; .926
Joseph: 17/21

Roy: 27/31; .871
Joseph: 30/35

(7-3 in OT)

Roy: 26/27; .963
Joseph: 22/24

Roy: 30/32; .938
Joseph: 30/31

Roy: 21/23; .913
Joseph: 31/31; 1.000

Roy: 13/17; .765
Joseph: 31/31; 1.000


1998-99

League Average: .908
Roy’s Regular Season: .917 (8th; 6th among goalies with 41 decisions)
Roy’s Playoff: .920


1st Round
Expected Save Percentage: .909
Roy’s Save Percentage: .918
Quality Games: 4-2 (36-16 Career)

Roy: 42/43; .977
Vernon: 28/31

Roy: 23/24; .958
Vernon: 34/36

(8-3 in OT)

Roy: 29/32; .906
Vernon: 34/36

Roy: 19/25; .760
Vernon: 33/36

Roy: 29/31; .935
Shields: 30/36

Roy: 27/29; .931
Vernon: 30/33

(9-3 in OT)


2nd Round
Expected Save Percentage: .907
Roy’s Save Percentage: .938
Quality Games: 5-1 (9-3 Total; 41-17 Career)

Roy: 31/34; .912
Ranford: 37/39

(9-4 in OT)

Roy: 33/37; .892
Ranford: 28/28

Roy: 44/47; .936
Ranford: 19/24

Roy: 31/33; .939
Ranford: 11/14

Roy: 36/36; 1.000
Osgood: 23/26

Roy: 35/37; .946
Osgood: 26/31


3rd Round
Expected Save Percentage: .896
Roy’s Save Percentage: .905
Quality Games: 4-3 (13-6 Total; 45-20 Career)

Roy: 30/31; .968
Belfour: 26/28

Roy: 41/45; .911
Belfour: 17/19

Roy: 23/26; .885
Belfour: 34/34

Roy: 43/45; .956
Belfour: 42/45

(10-4 in OT)

Roy: 25/30; .833
Belfour: 19/25

Roy: 36/40; .900
Belfour: 26/27

Roy: 21/25; .840
Belfour: 18/19


1999-2000

League Average: .904
Roy’s Regular Season: .914 (10th; 8th among goalies with 41 decisions)
Roy’s Playoff: .928


1st Round
Expected Save Percentage: .895
Roy’s Save Percentage: .915
Quality Games: 4-1 (49-21 Career)

Roy: 12/15; .800
Burke: 32/38

Roy: 25/26; .962
Burke: 32/35

Roy: 23/25; .920
Burke: 22/25

Roy: 28/31; .903
Burke: 36/38

Roy: 19/20; .950
Burke: 29/31


2nd Round
Expected Save Percentage: .894
Roy’s Save Percentage: .951
Quality Games: 5-0 (9-1 Total; 54-21 Career)

Roy: 25/25; 1.000
Osgood: 24/26

Roy: 29/30; .967
Osgood: 30/32

Roy: 33/35; .943
Osgood: 22/23

Roy: 30/32; .938
Osgood: 18/21

(11-4 in OT)

Roy: 20/22; .909
Osgood: 21/25


3rd Round
Expected Save Percentage: .899
Roy’s Save Percentage: .918
Quality Games: 4-3 (13-4 Total; 58-24 Career)

Roy: 24/24; 1.000
Belfour: 16/18

Roy: 31/34; .912
Belfour: 20/22

Roy: 21/21; 1.000
Belfour: 38/40

Roy: 11/15; .733
Belfour: 38/39

Roy: 17/20; .850
Belfour: 29/31

(11-5 in OT)

Roy: 26/27; .963
Belfour: 19/21

Roy: 26/29; .897
Belfour: 31/33


2000-01

League Average: .903
Roy’s Regular Season: .913 (13th; 10th among goalies with 41 decisions)
Roy’s Playoff: .934


1st Round
Expected Save Percentage: .902
Roy’s Save Percentage: .898
Quality Games: 2-2 (60-26 Career)

Roy: 19/23; .826
Cloutier: 23/28

Roy: 18/19; .947
Essensa: 23/25

Roy: 20/23; .870
Essensa: 29/33

(12-5 in OT)

Roy: 22/23; .957
Cloutier: 25/29


2nd Round
Expected Save Percentage: .890
Roy’s Save Percentage: .943
Quality Games: 5-2 (7-4 Total; 65-28 Career)

Roy: 21/25; .840
Potvin: 34/37

(12-6 in OT)

Roy: 20/20; 1.000
Potvin: 26/28

Roy: 22/25; .880
Potvin: 17/21

Roy: 21/21; 1.000
Potvin: 18/21

Roy: 25/26; .962
Potvin: 20/20

Roy: 31/32; .969
Potvin: 33/33

(12-7 in OT)

Roy: 25/26; .962
Potvin: 31/35


3rd Round
Expected Save Percentage: .900
Roy’s Save Percentage: .939
Quality Games: 5-0 (12-4 Total; 70-28 Career)

Roy: 30/31; .968
Turek: 26/30

Roy: 28/30; .933
Turek: 16/19

Roy: 56/60; .933
Turek: 30/33

(12-8 in OT)

Roy: 28/31; .903
Turek: 23/27

(13-8 in OT)

Roy: 28/29; .966
Johnson: 34/36

(14-8 in OT)


4th Round
Expected Save Percentage: .886
Roy’s Save Percentage: .938
Quality Games: 6-1 (18-5 Total; 76-29 Career)

Roy: 25/25; 1.000
Brodeur: 25/30

Roy: 18/20; .900
Brodeur: 19/20

Roy: 21/22; .955
Brodeur: 18/21

Roy: 32/35; .914
Brodeur: 10/12

Roy: 22/26; .846
Brodeur: 22/23

Roy: 24/24; 1.000
Brodeur: 14/18

Roy: 25/26
Brodeur: 19/22


2001-02

League Average: .908
Roy’s Regular Season: .925 (2nd; 2nd among goalies with 41 decisions)
Roy’s Playoff: .909


1st Round
Expected Save Percentage: .899
Roy’s Save Percentage: .926
Quality Games: 4-3 (80-32 Career)

Roy: 26/29; .897
Potvin: 27/31

Roy: 28/31; .903
Potvin: 33/38

Roy: 15/18; .833
Potvin: 30/31

Roy: 32/32; 1.000
Potvin: 24/25

Roy: 22/23; .957
Potvin: 26/26

(14-9 in OT)

Roy: 17/20; .850
Potvin: 23/24

Roy: 23/23; 1.000
Potvin: 23/26


2nd Round
Expected Save Percentage: .889
Roy’s Save Percentage: .904
Quality Games: 4-3 (8-6 Total; 84-35 Career)

Roy: 17/22; .773
Nabokov: 27/30

Roy: 29/31; .935
Nabokov: 20/28

Roy: 34/39; .872
Nabokov: 29/33

Roy: 19/20; .950
Nabokov: 21/24

Roy: 22/26; .846
Nabokov: 18/21

Roy: 21/22; .955
Nabokov: 27/29

(15-9 in OT)

Roy: 27/27; 1.000
Nabokov: 22/23


3rd Round
Expected Save Percentage: .901
Roy’s Save Percentage: .900
Quality Games: 5-2 (13-8 Total; 89-37 Career)

Roy: 25/30; .833
Hasek: 24/27

Roy: 30/33; .909
Hasek: 22/26

(16-9 in OT)

Roy: 40/42; .952
Hasek: 20/21

(16-10 in OT)

Roy: 31/33; .939
Hasek: 19/22

Roy: 26/27; .963
Hasek: 27/29

(17-10 in OT)

Roy: 26/28; .929
Hasek: 24/24

Roy: 10/16; .625
Hasek: 19/19


2002-03

League Average: .909
Roy’s Regular Season: .920 (6th; 5th among goalies with 41 decisions)
Roy’s Playoff: .910


1st Round
Expected Save Percentage: .905
Roy’s Save Percentage: .910
Quality Games: 3-4 (92-41 Career)

Roy: 23/27; .852
Roloson: 39/41

Roy: 24/26; .923
Roloson: 25/28

Roy: 18/18; 1.000
Roloson: 15/18

Roy: 24/25; .960
Roloson: 2/4

Roy: 25/28; .893
Fernandez: 26/28

Roy: 20/23; .870
Fernandez: 22/24

(17-11 in OT)

Roy: 27/30; .900
Fernandez: 43/45

(17-12 in OT)



Career

Save Percentage
(2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10*, 10, 13*)
*Stanley Cup Season

Save Percentage (among goalies with 50% of their team’s decisions)
(2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9*, 10*)
*Stanley Cup Season

Even-Strength Save Percentage (among goalies with 50% of their team’s decisions)
1998: 8th ES; 7th Overall
1999: 4th ES; 6th Overall
2000: 2nd ES; 8th Overall
2001: 7th ES; 10th Overall
2002: 1st ES; 2nd Overall
2003: 3rd ES; 5th Overall

Overtime: 17 Wins, 12 Losses

Quality Games: 92-41

Quality Series (Positive): 19
Quality Series (Even): 2
Quality Series (Negative): 1

Series (Quality Games)
5-0 (2000 DET, 2001 STL)
6-1 (2001 NJD)
4-0 (1996 FLA)
5-1 (1996 CHI, 1999 DET)
4-1 (2000 PHX)
5-2 (1998 EDM, 2001 LAK, 2002 DET)
4-2 (1996 DET, 1997 CHI, 1997 DET, 1999 SJS)
3-2 (1997 EDM)
4-3 (1999 DAL, 2000 DAL, 2002 LAK, 2002 SJS)
3-3 (1996 VAN)
2-2 (2001 VAN)
3-4 (2003 MIN)



Patrick Roy had fewer bad series in his Colorado career (in fact, only the final series of his career carried a negative net amount of Quality Games). Take note of his .951 against the league-leading offensive Red Wings in 2000 (who had 278 Goals to #2 New Jersey's 251). And needless to say, but he dominated Florida with one of the higher single-series save percentages in Stanley Cup Final history (.974). Overall though, he didn't put on four-series stretches of the type of consistency we saw in 1986, 1989, and particularly 1993. So while he had a better number of good series from a personal standpoint, those series tended to have slightly more bad games. His regular season numbers dipped as well, but not to the extent that he would have lost his job in a six-team league.

If these were his only seasons and playoffs, they would still be enough to earn him a spot in the HOF, but he may not have earned the reputation as a money goaltender without his Montreal career (and Colorado's aggressive-offensive system from 1995-2000 did Roy's yearly save percentage no favors). To only rate peak vs. peak or prime vs. prime is a disservice to Roy, because the eight post-prime seasons in Colorado that followed the 1995 NHL lockout were a HOF career that provided highly stable playoff success that exceeds many goaltenders' post-season primes. It was more than compiling, and there aren't any what ifs about his performances outside of Montreal (no injuries, no missed playoffs).

 

[Canadiens1958]

Goalies and Teams

The issue of goalies not getting along withe coaches or management has been raised with a focus on the Roy and Hasek situations.

More commonplace in hockey than attributed:

Normie Smith in 1938:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normie_Smith

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/s/smithno01.html

Gump Worsley and Phil Watson with the Rangers was spun into a comic direction but still was similar.

Won't touch the Eddie Shore and goaltenders question.

Situations happen.

 

[BM67]

A H/R breakdown of playoff games for the 10 goalies I charted H/R splits for earlier, with wins loses and no decisions.

Player|H GP|R GP|H W|H L|H ND|R W|R L|R ND
Belfour|83|78|54|27|2|34|41|3
Brodeur|105|100|63|41|1|50|50|0
Burke|20|18|7|10|3|5|13|0
Hasek|61|58|37|22|2|28|27|3
Joseph|65|68|33|31|1|30|35|3
Lundqvist|27|28|14|13|0|11|17|0
Luongo|33|28|17|16|0|15|13|0
Osgood|64|65|47|17|0|27|32|6
Roy|130|117|88|41|1|63|53|1
Vokoun|6|5|3|3|0|0|5|0

One surprise here is that the only ones with a lower percentage of their games at home than Brodeur are the 3 goalies with more road games than home games.

Same ratio home games over 247 games:
Vokoun 134.7
Luongo 133.6
Roy 130.0
Burke 130.0
Belfour 127.3
Hasek 126.6
Brodeur 126.5
Osgood 122.5
Lundqvist 121.3
Joseph 120.7

Brodeur Career Playoff H/R split

Location|GP|MIN|W|L|GA|GAA|SA|SV%|SO|SA/60
Home|105|6498:24|63|41|200|1.85|2497|0.920|16|23.05
Road|100|6218:37|50|50|228|2.20|2761|0.917|8|26.64

The H/R SA/60 split is pretty much the same as the regular season, but the higher SV% on the road is not there.

 

[Canadiens1958]

W/L Road Differential

A H/R breakdown of playoff games for the 10 goalies I charted H/R splits for earlier, with wins loses and no decisions.

Player|H GP|R GP|H W|H L|H ND|R W|R L|R ND
Belfour|83|78|54|27|2|34|41|3
Brodeur|105|100|63|41|1|50|50|0
Burke|20|18|7|10|3|5|13|0
Hasek|61|58|37|22|2|28|27|3
Joseph|65|68|33|31|1|30|35|3
Lundqvist|27|28|14|13|0|11|17|0
Luongo|33|28|17|16|0|15|13|0
Osgood|64|65|47|17|0|27|32|6
Roy|130|117|88|41|1|63|53|1
Vokoun|6|5|3|3|0|0|5|0

One surprise here is that the only ones with a lower percentage of their games at home than Brodeur are the 3 goalies with more road games than home games.

Same ratio home games over 247 games:
Vokoun 134.7
Luongo 133.6
Roy 130.0
Burke 130.0
Belfour 127.3
Hasek 126.6
Brodeur 126.5
Osgood 122.5
Lundqvist 121.3
Joseph 120.7

Brodeur Career Playoff H/R split

Location|GP|MIN|W|L|GA|GAA|SA|SV%|SO|SA/60
Home|105|6498:24|63|41|200|1.85|2497|0.920|16|23.05
Road|100|6218:37|50|50|228|2.20|2761|0.917|8|26.64

The H/R SA/60 split is pretty much the same as the regular season, but the higher SV% on the road is not there.

Patrick Roy is the only one to win more than half of his road games, 63 out of 117 a significant number over the .500 level. Brodeur is at .500, Hasek is below. Even Jacques Plante during his tenure with the Canadiens did not sustain such a road performance.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

It is well known that Brodeur has had the opportunity to play behind a diciplined defence for large parts of his career. But I was surprised to see that Roy had similar support during the start of his career.

Between 85/86 and 91/92 Roy finished 14th, 5th, 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 1st in the save % race. During these seasons Montreal finished the season with the least amount of power play opportunities against 5 times and second least 2 times. Often with much lower numbers than the second least. They also ranked consistently low in power play opportunities which might also results in tougher shots against in forms of breakaways. These are the years of Roys best save % placements. It is also interesting to note that in 92/93 when Montreal finished with the 8th least PPOA Roy fell to 5th in save % again after 5 consecutive years in the top-2.

Buffalo ranked 22nd, 10th, 4th, 3rd, 3rd, 4th in most power play opportunities against during Haseks 6 consecutive save % titles. They also consistently had more power play opportunities than Roys Canadians.

This indicates that Roys save % numbers from his peak could be inflated. I know that late in his career he did rank high in even strengh save % but does anybody have his even strengh save % from these years compared to the rest of the league.

It also indicates that Haseks titles could be even more impressive than the numbers show.

This is the problem I have with Brodeur.

When Roy played in a similar situation to Brodeur's, he's first 4 times in Save % and second once. In his entire career, Brodeur has never been in the top 2.

In a similar situation in Dallas (under Ken Hitchcock), Marty Turco had 2 firsts and a 4th in Save % as well as 2 firsts and 2 thirds in Goals Against. Broduer has only led the league once Goals Against (2 seconds and 2 thirds) in his career.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

Everything you say is fair except for this, and I'm definitely going to think more about the rest of your post. Here, I was answering your question that I was ignoring domestic performance. I view major international tournaments as basically the playoffs for non-NHL Euros as they generally care more about them than domestic championships, and I think Holecek had more success there than Hasek (in more opportunities, of course). I'm not intimately familiar with their domestic playoff records, but Holecek won 6 domestic championships, so I assume he did his part.

Reading it again that comment was a bit of a cheap shot, I apologize, it's not exactly comparing apples to apples here because there is so much less information available for non-NHL goalies.

I think it's fair to equate WCs and playoffs in terms of importance and pressure. The problem is the selection effects, be the best goalie in the league during the season and you're the guy starting at the WC, but you and your team have to keep winning to advance in a playoff setting regardless of how well you played up until that point. If you're on a really bad team you might not even qualify in the first place.

Do you have a link on Holecek's domestic championships? I have multiple sources that say he never won any, although that still probably means very little since the same teams often won year after year and he didn't play on the best ones for the most part.

It find it interesting that in my research for the list I found that several of the better European goalies were highly rated while rarely playing on strong domestic teams. Holecek was one, Dzurilla and Konovalenko were two of the others that I remember offhand. As far as I can tell, none of three ever won a single domestic league championship.

I think it's pretty clear that Europeans generally tend to put less importance on team success in rating goalies. This likely accounts for at least part of the difference when there is a noticeable international gap in a goalie's rating, as there seems to be with Hasek vs. Roy for example. Whether that is correct is of course up to each individual's judgment, but as I'm sure you can tell I have more of a "European perspective" even though I happen to be North American.

I just wonder whether there were some European Billy Smiths out there who had a lot of great performances in domestic league or Cup games but rarely got the call for the national team and are therefore more or less unknown today. Maybe a guy like Miroslav Krasa, who was on six league champion teams while playing at the same time as Holecek. Obviously league titles are not directly equivalent with Stanley Cups, but it definitely seems unlikely that North Americans would rate a goalie with 6 Cups below a contemporary with none (that's Ken Dryden vs. Tony Esposito, for example, to tie it back to the current discussion in the hope that you'll forgive the brief tangent).

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

The H/R SA/60 split is pretty much the same as the regular season, but the higher SV% on the road is not there.

That's interesting. Any chance you happen to have the home/road playoff shooting percentage splits for New Jersey as well, to see what they suggest about the playoff shot counting?

 

[Canadiens1958]

WCs vs Playoff

I think it's fair to equate WCs and playoffs in terms of importance and pressure. The problem is the selection effects, be the best goalie in the league during the season and you're the guy starting at the WC, but you and your team have to keep winning to advance in a playoff setting regardless of how well you played up until that point. If you're on a really bad team you might not even qualify in the first place.

Do you have a link on Holecek's domestic championships? I have multiple sources that say he never won any, although that still probably means very little since the same teams often won year after year and he didn't play on the best ones for the most part.

It find it interesting that in my research for the list I found that several of the better European goalies were highly rated while rarely playing on strong domestic teams. Holecek was one, Dzurilla and Konovalenko were two of the others that I remember offhand. As far as I can tell, none of three ever won a single domestic league championship.

I think it's pretty clear that Europeans generally tend to put less importance on team success in rating goalies. This likely accounts for at least part of the difference when there is a noticeable international gap in a goalie's rating, as there seems to be with Hasek vs. Roy for example. Whether that is correct is of course up to each individual's judgment, but as I'm sure you can tell I have more of a "European perspective" even though I happen to be North American.

I just wonder whether there were some European Billy Smiths out there who had a lot of great performances in domestic league or Cup games but rarely got the call for the national team and are therefore more or less unknown today. Maybe a guy like Miroslav Krasa, who was on six league champion teams while playing at the same time as Holecek. Obviously league titles are not directly equivalent with Stanley Cups, but it definitely seems unlikely that North Americans would rate a goalie with 6 Cups below a contemporary with none (that's Ken Dryden vs. Tony Esposito, for example, to tie it back to the current discussion in the hope that you'll forgive the brief tangent).

Bolded presents a few items to consider.

WHCs and Olympics more often then not feature neutral site games without an in tournament travel factor of any significance. NHL playoff hockey features the home and away schedule plus travel can stretch over time zones - up to three.

The domestic European championship or league winner seems to be an after thought. The objective seemed to be the countries international success. Goalies have to be viewed in this context. Konovalenko and Holecek by facing the elite forwards/offences on the teams that funneled forwards and defensemen to the National team would be better prepared for International tournaments. Changed with Tretiak on CSKA. Still a consideration when evaluating European goalies.

In many ways this is similar to developmental approaches in North America. The NA goalies under consideration played junior for teams that ranged from weak to solid in terms of league play, getting plenty of exposure to elite offences.

The Dryden to Tony Esposito analogy is a bit more complex then the SC counting. Two key considerations would be Dryden's away record during the playoffs 34W - 20 loses, even more impressive than Patrick Roy's while Tony Esposito is 45W - 53L in playoff decisions.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/e/esposto01.html

Then you have the 1972 Summit Series, interpreting chances is one thing but it does not change facts. Tony Esposito was the goalie in the Game 5 Soviet 3rd period comeback. Ken Dryden was the goalie in the game 6 and 8 wins in road game situations, allowing zero third period games.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

This is the problem I have with Brodeur.

When Roy played in a similar situation to Brodeur's, he's first 4 times in Save % and second once. In his entire career, Brodeur has never been in the top 2.

In a similar situation in Dallas (under Ken Hitchcock), Marty Turco had 2 firsts and a 4th in Save % as well as 2 firsts and 2 thirds in Goals Against. Broduer has only led the league once Goals Against (2 seconds and 2 thirds) in his career.

Turco started 26 and 55 games in the two seasons he finished 1st in GAA. I would imagine that he started the easier 26 games in 2000-01, as Dallas still had Eddie Belfour as their starter. Any goaltending averaging stats like GAA and Save % need to take into account the number of games played, as it is easier to have really high or really low numbers in a low sample of games due to hot and cold streaks.

Edit: Just to be clear, I do think Roy peaked higher than Brodeur.

That's interesting. Any chance you happen to have the home/road playoff shooting percentage splits for New Jersey as well, to see what they suggest about the playoff shot counting?

It is interesting. Those playoff splits in NJ look typical of anywhere. Strange. Maybe they brought in better shot recorders for the playoffs

 

[Sanf]

Reading it again that comment was a bit of a cheap shot, I apologize, it's not exactly comparing apples to apples here because there is so much less information available for non-NHL goalies.

I think it's fair to equate WCs and playoffs in terms of importance and pressure. The problem is the selection effects, be the best goalie in the league during the season and you're the guy starting at the WC, but you and your team have to keep winning to advance in a playoff setting regardless of how well you played up until that point. If you're on a really bad team you might not even qualify in the first place.

Do you have a link on Holecek's domestic championships? I have multiple sources that say he never won any, although that still probably means very little since the same teams often won year after year and he didn't play on the best ones for the most part.

It find it interesting that in my research for the list I found that several of the better European goalies were highly rated while rarely playing on strong domestic teams. Holecek was one, Dzurilla and Konovalenko were two of the others that I remember offhand. As far as I can tell, none of three ever won a single domestic league championship.

I think it's pretty clear that Europeans generally tend to put less importance on team success in rating goalies. This likely accounts for at least part of the difference when there is a noticeable international gap in a goalie's rating, as there seems to be with Hasek vs. Roy for example. Whether that is correct is of course up to each individual's judgment, but as I'm sure you can tell I have more of a "European perspective" even though I happen to be North American.

I just wonder whether there were some European Billy Smiths out there who had a lot of great performances in domestic league or Cup games but rarely got the call for the national team and are therefore more or less unknown today. Maybe a guy like Miroslav Krasa, who was on six league champion teams while playing at the same time as Holecek. Obviously league titles are not directly equivalent with Stanley Cups, but it definitely seems unlikely that North Americans would rate a goalie with 6 Cups below a contemporary with none (that's Ken Dryden vs. Tony Esposito, for example, to tie it back to the current discussion in the hope that you'll forgive the brief tangent).

Thats true. Holecek and Dzurilla has zero championships.Still Holecek was the leagues all star goalie from 71 to 76 and 78. There were lot of good goalies in CSSR league in 70´s. CSSR championship was often won with tandems like Krasa and Miroslav Termer.

Konovalenko refused to move to strong Moscow club and that hurted his chance to win USSR championship.

I could try to write (if I have time) something about Holeceks and Dzurillas career to the stickied topic tomorrow because here its offtopic at this time.

 

[seventieslord]

Konovalenko refused to move to strong Moscow club and that hurted his chance to win USSR championship.

How did he even have the choice?

 

[Sanf]

How did he even have the choice?

Good question. Maybe he was so much superior to other Soviet goalies that he had power to control his career? Truth is that he played his career in Torpedo Gorky.

At that time Victor Konovalenko emerged and was the Soviet goalie steadily from 1963 to 1971, when he retired, or was retired. Konovalenko was calm and serious on the ice, but his calmness was not ‘it’ either – he was thought rather indifferent to the play and not caring for the result. And from this – not really developing further his game. How true were the accusations is difficult to say – his stubborn refusal to move to Moscow club ‘in the interests of the national team’ probably fueled and distorted the accusations.

from
http://erunsmagazine.com/?rq=page&artid=515
I recommend

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Patrick Roy has the best playoff resume of any goalie, and it isn't all that close

First off, I'll talk about what I've seen. I have never seen an goalie consistently have an aura about him in the playoffs as Patrick Roy. After 1993, there was already conversation that Roy might be the "most clutch" goalie of all time, and when he was traded to Colorado in 1996, there was a sense that Colorado would have an advantage in goal no matter who they played (on paper at least). As a Devils' fan, I still can't get over how Roy neutered the best offense in the dead puck era in the 2001 finals.

Enough about "what I saw," here are the stats

I. The "Wins-based" argument

A. No other goalie in history was a Top 2 playoff performer on 4 Cup winning teams

I honestly think this is the most important argument to be made for Roy. It's not just the 3 Conn Smythes (1986, 1993, 2001). Anyone who remembers the 1996 playoffs remembers that Roy was clearly the 2nd most important Avalanche behind Joe Sakic and ahead of a young Peter Forsberg.

Roy was a Top 2 player in the playoffs on 4 Cup winning teams, spread out across 16 years. I don't think there is any goalie in history who can even come close to that. And the facts that Roy never played for a dynasty, and won his Cups in a 21-30 team league where it is harder to repeat as a Cup winner makes it even more impressive.

And this is before getting into the fact that Roy was the Smythe-favorite if Montreal beat Calgary in the 1989 finals.

B. Career Playoff wins

1. Patrick Roy 151
2. Martin Brodeur 113
3. Grant Fuhr 92
4. Ed Belfour 88
5. Billy Smith 88
6. Ken Dryden 80
7. Mike Vernon 77
8. Chris Osgood 74
9. Jacques Plante 71
10. Andy Moog 68
11. Dominik Hasek 65

I realize this is mostly a team stat, but I think when you are that far ahead of the opposition, it is meaningful. Only the top 7 have even half of Roy's total. 2nd place Martin Brodeur could win the next two Stanley Cups, and he'd still fall short of Roy's total.

C. Roy was as likely to win the Stanley Cup as he was to lose a series in less than 7 games

Here are how Roy's playoff seasons ended:

Stanley Cups: 4
Lose in 7 games: 7
Lose in 6 games: 2
Lose in 5 games: 1
Lose in 4 games: 1
Split starts (early in his career in Montreal): 2

(thanks to quoipourquoi for making this easy to calculate)

II. The "Save percentage based" argument

I’m using Hockey Outsider’s adjusted save percentage numbers. I’m using Tom Awad’s Goals-Versus Threshold numbers from puckprospectus.

A. Save Percentage Adjusted to Era - no matter which adjustment you use, Roy is the career leader among goalies who faced close to his number of shots

Career Playoffs Save Percentage Adjusted to regular season scoring - minimum 1,000 shots

Goalie|Shots|Saves|Sv%
Patrick Roy* | 7218 | 6646 | 92.1%
Olaf Kolzig | 1446 | 1328 | 91.9%
Ken Wregget | 1767 | 1624 | 91.9%
Tim Thomas | 1524 | 1399 | 91.8%
Mike Liut | 1064 | 977 | 91.8%
John Vanbiesbrouck | 2039 | 1872 | 91.8%
Dominik Hasek | 3422 | 3140 | 91.7%
Ed Belfour* | 4641 | 4250 | 91.6%
Jean-Sebastien Giguere | 1546 | 1416 | 91.6%
Patrick Lalime | 1105 | 1011 | 91.5%
Kirk McLean | 2099 | 1916 | 91.3%
Grant Fuhr* | 3966 | 3618 | 91.2%
Curtis Joseph | 4044 | 3689 | 91.2%
Felix Potvin | 2186 | 1993 | 91.1%
Mike Richter | 2182 | 1988 | 91.1%
Miikka Kiprusoff | 1679 | 1529 | 91.1%
Martin Brodeur | 5439 | 4950 | 91%
Cam Ward | 1137 | 1034 | 91%
Tom Barrasso | 3521 | 3199 | 90.9%
Bill Ranford | 1536 | 1396 | 90.9%

Career Playoffs Save Percentage Adjusted to playoff scoring - minimum 1,000 shots

Goalie|Shots|Saves|SP%
Tim Thomas | 1524 | 1408 | 92.4%
Olaf Kolzig | 1446 | 1330 | 92%
Patrick Roy* | 7218 | 6638 | 92%
Ken Wregget | 1767 | 1622 | 91.8%
Dominik Hasek | 3422 | 3140 | 91.7%
Ed Belfour* | 4641 | 4256 | 91.7%
Jean-Sebastien Giguere | 1546 | 1416 | 91.6%
John Vanbiesbrouck | 2039 | 1865 | 91.4%
Kirk McLean | 2099 | 1918 | 91.4%
Patrick Lalime | 1105 | 1010 | 91.4%
Cam Ward | 1137 | 1038 | 91.3%
Dwayne Roloson | 1478 | 1348 | 91.2%
Felix Potvin | 2186 | 1992 | 91.1%
Curtis Joseph | 4044 | 3685 | 91.1%
Martin Brodeur | 5439 | 4953 | 91.1%
Grant Fuhr* | 3966 | 3610 | 91%
Ryan Miller | 1448 | 1317 | 91%
Mike Liut | 1064 | 968 | 91%
Mike Richter | 2182 | 1985 | 91%
Miikka Kiprusoff | 1679 | 1527 | 90.9%

B. Roy has 3 of the top 7 and 4 of the top 16 playoff runs by a goalie since save percentage became an officially recorded stat. No other goalie appears more than once in the top 20! The only other goalies to appear more than once in the top 30 are Brodeur (3 times) and Belfour (2 times).

Top Thirty Playoffs – minimum 1,000 minutes

Player|Cup?|Smythe?|Year|Team|GP|Win|Loss|Mins|SA|Sv|Sv%
Martin Brodeur | Yes | | 1995 | NJD | 20 | 16 | 4 | 1222 | 475 | 448 | 94.4%
Patrick Roy* | Yes | Yes | 1993 | MTL | 20 | 16 | 4 | 1293 | 611 | 577 | 94.3%
Pelle Lindbergh | | | 1985 | PHI | 18 | 12 | 6 | 1008 | 468 | 441 | 94.3%
Ed Belfour* | | | 1995 | CHI | 16 | 9 | 7 | 1014 | 491 | 462 | 93.9%
Patrick Roy* | Yes | Yes | 1986 | MTL | 20 | 15 | 5 | 1218 | 489 | 458 | 93.7%
Jean-Sebastien Giguere | | Yes | 2003 | MDA | 21 | 15 | 6 | 1407 | 760 | 711 | 93.6%
Patrick Roy* | | | 1989 | MTL | 19 | 13 | 6 | 1206 | 521 | 488 | 93.6%
Reggie Lemelin | | | 1988 | BOS | 17 | 11 | 6 | 1027 | 442 | 414 | 93.5%
Olaf Kolzig | | | 1998 | WSH | 21 | 12 | 9 | 1351 | 770 | 720 | 93.5%
John Vanbiesbrouck | | | 1996 | FLA | 22 | 12 | 10 | 1332 | 720 | 672 | 93.4%
Tim Thomas | Yes | Yes | 2011 | BOS | 25 | 16 | 9 | 1542 | 789 | 736 | 93.3%
Jonathan Quick | Yes | Yes | 2012 | LAK | 20 | 16 | 4 | 1238 | 546 | 509 | 93.2%
Dominik Hasek | | | 1999 | BUF | 19 | 13 | 6 | 1217 | 616 | 574 | 93.2%
Tom Barrasso | Yes | | 1991 | PIT | 20 | 12 | 7 | 1175 | 600 | 559 | 93.2%
Bill Ranford | Yes | Yes | 1990 | EDM | 22 | 16 | 6 | 1401 | 676 | 629 | 93.2%
Patrick Roy* | Yes | Yes | 2001 | COL | 23 | 16 | 7 | 1451 | 693 | 645 | 93%
Mike Smith | | | 2012 | PHX | 16 | 9 | 7 | 1027 | 611 | 568 | 93%
Dwayne Roloson | | | 2006 | EDM | 18 | 12 | 5 | 1160 | 625 | 581 | 92.9%
Sean Burke | | | 1988 | NJD | 17 | 9 | 8 | 1001 | 530 | 492 | 92.9%
Kirk McLean | | | 1994 | VAN | 24 | 15 | 9 | 1544 | 813 | 755 | 92.8%
Martin Brodeur | | | 1994 | NJD | 17 | 8 | 9 | 1171 | 526 | 488 | 92.7%
Andy Moog | | | 1990 | BOS | 20 | 13 | 7 | 1195 | 489 | 453 | 92.7%
Arturs Irbe | | | 2002 | CAR | 18 | 10 | 8 | 1078 | 511 | 474 | 92.7%
Marc-Andre Fleury | | | 2008 | PIT | 20 | 14 | 6 | 1251 | 603 | 559 | 92.6%
Alain Chevrier | | | 1989 | CHI | 16 | 9 | 7 | 1013 | 478 | 441 | 92.3%
Ed Belfour* | Yes | | 1999 | DAL | 23 | 16 | 7 | 1544 | 648 | 597 | 92.3%
Martin Brodeur | Yes | | 2003 | NJD | 24 | 16 | 8 | 1491 | 678 | 626 | 92.2%
Chris Osgood | Yes | | 2008 | DET | 19 | 14 | 4 | 1160 | 425 | 392 | 92.2%
Jaroslav Halak | | | 2010 | MTL | 18 | 9 | 9 | 1013 | 535 | 494 | 92.2%
Grant Fuhr* | Yes | | 1988 | EDM | 19 | 16 | 2 | 1136 | 485 | 446 | 92.1%

C. Roy is #1 in playoff Goals Versus Threshold among goalies, with a score almost as much as #2 and #3 combined.

Goals versus threshold (GVT) is a stat that basically tries to show how many goals a player creates or prevents relative to an average player. For goalies, it is mostly composed of save percentage and minutes played. Some of the criticisms of save percentage are still there, but GVT removes one of them - it is a cumulative stat, is not an averaging stat like save %.

In other words, if save % is like points-per-game for goalies, GVT is like points.

Here are the career playoff GVT leaders among goalies:

1. Patrick Roy 119.3
2. Ed Belfour 71.2
3. Billy Smith 59.5
4. Ken Dryden 57.4
5. Martin Brodeur 56.9 (as of 2011, my guess is 2012 bumped him to #3)
6. Dominik Hasek 56.3
7. Jacques Plante 49.4
8. Curtis Joseph 42.6
9. Grant Fuhr 33.6
10. Johnny Bower 31.3
11. Bernie Parent 31.1
12. Tom Barrasso 25.7
13. Chris Osgood 25.1
14. Tony Esposito 24.2
15. J.S Giguere 24.0
16. Olaf Kolzig 23.8
17. Felix Potvin 22.7
18. Mike Richter 22.0
_______
Glenn Hall 13.8
Terry Sawchuk -3.8

Like playoff wins, playoff GVT tends to favor goalies who played post-expansion, when there were more rounds. GVT is only available starting in 1950-51.

(On a side note, Plante's numbers are very impressive, considering the big disadvantage that pre-expansion goalies are at when it comes to accumulating playoff numbers)

 

[seventieslord]

That's really compelling.

When you add in that he was clearly the #2 regular season goalie of his era (and I don't think anyone's close, apologies to Brodeur) it makes it really tough to select anyone else as #1.

 

[pluppe]

That's really compelling.

When you add in that he was clearly the #2 regular season goalie of his era (and I don't think anyone's close, apologies to Brodeur) it makes it really tough to select anyone else as #1.

Then of course you must consider the gap to #1.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I want to respond to something stated in the other thread that I believe marks the largest difference between the way the media and half of HFBoards rate Patrick Roy and the way a smaller percentage of the media and half of HFBoards rate Dominik Hasek.

Yes, yes, SV% is flawed, and Hasek made some saves look harder than they were. When you stop 70 of 70 shots against the #2 team in the league when facing elimination to force game 7, it doesn't really matter. When you stop 48 of 50 in a triple overtime 1-1 Stanley Cup Final and get beaten by a guy who stops 53 of 54, it doesn't matter. All three (including Belfour's '99, obviously) are examples of the exact same level of individual hockey that Patrick Roy played on his best playoff day. As good as stopping 63 of 63 against Florida in '96, as good as his 3 wins against Boston in '94 (which is one of his most comparable playoffs to the Dom Hasek experience). And better than any single performance at anytime during Roy's Smythe and Cup winning '01 playoffs, imo. If there was a measure of "level", I'm confident all 3 would appear beside/above any single game/series of Roy's if ranked.

Again, the only time Roy distinguishes himself is via more winning (if not more impressive/demanding) performances in the additional opportunities afforded by his team; not "better" ones. And that's why your tales of this untouchable "level" of Roy's is disingenuously misleading away from very real facts that his career playoff wins, winning %, and playoff hardware (all heavily team dependent) are very impressive, and that he, too, obviously has some incredibly noteworthy performances on his resume.

Unlike offensive skaters (who are measured by positive contribution, as opposed to defensive goaltenders who are measured by negative contribution), there is only so much a goaltender can do to have a great performance on a micro-analytical level. We laugh about Martin Brodeur's six-save shutout against the Toronto Maple Leafs in 2000, but there's nothing to say that he wouldn't have made 30/30, 40/40, or even 70/70 saves that night. It requires a perfect storm just to have such an opportunity; goalies cannot create saves and shots-against the way offensive skaters can create goals and assists.

To condemn any goaltender for not having a "better" single-game performance than a 70-save Hasek or a 63-save Roy or a 53-save Craig Anderson is ludicrous. Any NHL goaltender on his absolute best day can only offer one perfect thing: A shutout. That's why it's important not to look at their best days, but instead at how often and how consistently they have had great days. And even then, Jean-Sebastien Giguere had an entire playoff of great single-game performances - to the point that not too many people have had a better playoff run - and he's a stretch just to make the Top-60 because it's not enough just to prove you can do it once.

I've argued before in that overly-long 1984 Oilers at their peak vs. 2002 Red Wings at their peak that if you're having any seven-game series with any two HOF goaltenders at their peak, there won't be as much separation between them at their highest-level as there will be between respective forwards at their highest-level because that is the nature of the position.

Dominik Hasek has his .950 against the Devils. Patrick Roy has his .951 against Detroit and his .974 against Florida. Martin Brodeur has his .949 against Anaheim. We're going to find great series like these for virtually every goaltender on this list. That doesn't make them equals in terms of career value in the Stanley Cup Playoffs. We do have to look at who has done it more often.

And in the case of Patrick Roy, if we were to split him up into two separate goaltenders: Patrick Roy in Montreal (70-42) and Patrick Roy (81-52) in Colorado, we're dealing with two goaltenders who each have a playoff career equal to (and likely better than) that of the entire Dominik Hasek.

So why is it that when we take those two goaltenders with equal or better playoff careers than Dominik Hasek and combine them into this Voltron-esque playoff goalie known as Patrick Roy, we lose sight of the fact that Voltron-Roy has, in essence, double the career playoff value? And is that not enough to bridge the regular season gap?

 

[quoipourquoi]

B. Career Playoff wins

1. Patrick Roy 151
9. Jacques Plante 71

I want to give an extra nod to Jacques Plante for appearing on that list in spite of two-round playoff era. Were there any good posts made in past lists comparing him to the three more modern goaltenders in our top-seven? I feel comfortable with where I have him, but I'm willing to move him up if someone has a strong case.

 

[seventieslord]

speaking of Plante, that makes me want to know - who are the career GVT per game leaders, with a minimum of 50 games or something?