Round 2, Vote 1 (HOH Top Goaltenders)

[overpass]

Glenn Hall could conceivably be ranked as high as 1 or as low as 7, and much of this will depend on how his playoff record is evaluated. I think it's important that his record is examined thoroughly.

I'm starting a boxscore based analysis of his playoff performance. Here's what I have for 1956, when Hall played 10 games - 5 against Toronto and 5 against Detroit.

First periods - 88 shots against, 8 goals against. GAA of 2.40, SV% of 0.909. While his average numbers were solid he allowed the first goal of the game 6 times in the first period and 2 times in the second period for a total of 8/10 games where he allowed the first goal.

Second periods - 105 shots against, 10 goals against. GAA of 3.00, SV% of 0.905.
When Detroit was leading after 1 - 2 games, 25 shots, 2 goals.
When Detroit was tied after 1 - 3 games, 29 shots, 3 goals.
When Detroit was trailing after 1 - 5 games, 51 shots, 5 goals.
Average performance across the board in second periods.

Third periods - 105 shots, 10 goals, GAA of 3.00, SV% of 0.909. (Same as 2nd)
When Detroit was leading after 2 - 3 GP, 35 shots, 4 GA (all in one game.) 4.00 GAA, 0.886 SV%
When Detroit was tied after 2 - 1 GP, 7 shots, 0 GA.
When Detroit trailed after 2 - 6 GP, 63 shots, 6 GA. GAA of 3.00, SV% of 0.905%.

Overtime - one game, 5 shots, no goals, one win.

Generally speaking Hall tended to allow the first goal as Detroit fell behind early. But Detroit came back to win several of these games in the third period, and Hall performed well in close games in the third. His low point was game 1 of the finals, when the Wings went into the third with a two goal lead but Montreal outshot them 18-5 and scored four goals in the first 11 minutes of the period to win the game.

I'll work on aggregating numbers like these for Hall's career. Any interest in seeing that or any comments on the methodology?

 

[kmad]

I'm really starting to come around on Brodeur lately.

In the past I've ranked him 6th behind Glenn Hall, but at the advice of a friend I'm starting to factor in his mastery with the puck and how that not only eliminated scoring chances but usually created a transition, which is unheard of with goaltenders. Brodeur is a case where we can't simply look at numbers.

Dryden is clearly 7th of this group. The rest is a crapshoot.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I'll work on aggregating numbers like these for Hall's career. Any interest in seeing that or any comments on the methodology?

IMO, this level of specificity is extremely enlightening.

I'd be happy to do it for one of the other goalies if need be. Sawchuk or Plante perhaps?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Methodology

Glenn Hall could conceivably be ranked as high as 1 or as low as 7, and much of this will depend on how his playoff record is evaluated. I think it's important that his record is examined thoroughly.

I'm starting a boxscore based analysis of his playoff performance. Here's what I have for 1956, when Hall played 10 games - 5 against Toronto and 5 against Detroit.

First periods - 88 shots against, 8 goals against. GAA of 2.40, SV% of 0.909. While his average numbers were solid he allowed the first goal of the game 6 times in the first period and 2 times in the second period for a total of 8/10 games where he allowed the first goal.

Second periods - 105 shots against, 10 goals against. GAA of 3.00, SV% of 0.905.
When Detroit was leading after 1 - 2 games, 25 shots, 2 goals.
When Detroit was tied after 1 - 3 games, 29 shots, 3 goals.
When Detroit was trailing after 1 - 5 games, 51 shots, 5 goals.
Average performance across the board in second periods.

Third periods - 105 shots, 10 goals, GAA of 3.00, SV% of 0.909. (Same as 2nd)
When Detroit was leading after 2 - 3 GP, 35 shots, 4 GA (all in one game.) 4.00 GAA, 0.886 SV%
When Detroit was tied after 2 - 1 GP, 7 shots, 0 GA.
When Detroit trailed after 2 - 6 GP, 63 shots, 6 GA. GAA of 3.00, SV% of 0.905%.

Overtime - one game, 5 shots, no goals, one win.

Generally speaking Hall tended to allow the first goal as Detroit fell behind early. But Detroit came back to win several of these games in the third period, and Hall performed well in close games in the third. His low point was game 1 of the finals, when the Wings went into the third with a two goal lead but Montreal outshot them 18-5 and scored four goals in the first 11 minutes of the period to win the game.

I'll work on aggregating numbers like these for Hall's career. Any interest in seeing that or any comments on the methodology?

Love the methodology and appreciate the additional effort it requires. Tweak the games and periods to reflect home and away and you pretty well have things covered.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Jacques Plante

IMO, this level of specificity is extremely enlightening.

I'd be happy to do it for one of the other goalies if need be. Sawchuk or Plante perhaps?

Jacques Plante is done with additional considerations included. Question of ducks aligning before letting them swim.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Jacques Plante is done with additional considerations included.

Excellent. I'll take Sawchuk then.

Question of ducks aligning before letting them swim.

I don't follow...

 

[pappyline]

Everybody may not agree, but I'm fairly certain that Hasek will end up the top goalie here. To me, the interesting part starts at #2. I've got Glenn Hall as the second greatest goalie of all time, narrowly above Roy and Sawchuk. I think Hall gets knocked too much for the playoff failures of his team. Simply put, he is the most dominant regular season goalie in history, and he has a Conn-Smythe trophy for the one Cup that he did win.

Hey, we think alike. I had Hall/Hasek as 1/2. Unfortunately I don't have a vote since they rejected my list. Claimed I had 2 non-goalies on my list but refused to tell me who they were so I withdrew my list.

I think one was steve thomas and it is obvious I meant tim thomas. I have no idea who the other one was.

 

[amnesiac]

Which goalies benefited the most from the defence/system in front of them? If you were to rank....

I think Id say:

1. Brodeur
2. Dryden
3. Plante
4. Roy
5. Hasek
7. Sawchuk
6. Hall

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

I'll work on aggregating numbers like these for Hall's career. Any interest in seeing that or any comments on the methodology?

I fully agree with you that it is important to examine playoff records in detail rather than making conclusions based primarily on team results.

I have a method that is similarly based on box scores that predicts a goalie's save percentage based on the game score. It estimates the number of shots faced by each goalie between goals based on the time elapsed and the shots during that period, and uses that to calculate his save percentage.

For example if Detroit and Montreal are playing, and the first period shots are 10-6 for Montreal, and the Habs score a goal at the exact halfway point, the Wings goalie would get 4/5 with the score tied and 5/5 while trailing by a goal, while the Montreal goalie would get 3/3 for both. In actual fact the shots might have been something like 6-2 at the time of the goal and 4-4 afterwards, but the assumption is that the variance will even out over a larger sample.

The estimated numbers for Hall's 1956 postseason are the following:

Down by 4: 0 GA, 0.4 SA, 1.000 SV%
Down by 3: 1 GA, 17.2 SA, .942 SV%
Down by 2: 4 GA, 55.9 SA, .928 SV%
Down by 1: 8 GA, 75.9 SA, .895 SV%
Game tied: 10 GA, 93.0 SA, .892 SV%
Up by 1: 4 GA, 46.1 SA, .914 SV%
Up by 2: 1 GA, 16.5 SA, .940 SV%

Trailing by 2 or more: 5 GA, 73.5 SA, .932 SV%
Score within one goal: 22 GA, 215.0 SA, .898 SV%
Leading by 2 or more: 1 GA, 16.5 SA, .940 SV%

Presented like this, the numbers make it look like Hall was almost the very opposite of clutch during the 1956 playoffs.

I think the period-by-period breakdown is useful because many view the third period and OT as a higher leverage situation. Combining that with a score-based outlook should paint a pretty good picture, I would think, although there probably are some differences in how much teams adjust their defensive play to the game score. I would for sure be willing to help aggregate these stats however people want to see them put together.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Which goalies benefited the most from the defence/system in front of them? If you were to rank....

I think Id say:

1. Brodeur
2. Dryden
3. Plante
4. Roy
5. Hasek
7. Sawchuk
6. Hall

I'm almost starting to believe that Brodeur's "system" in front of him is actually hurting him too much here. His save percentage suffered as a result of the Devils (his GAA was aided, of course) but this perception that he was a "system goalie" is flawed. Definitely flawed. But it's difficult to illustrate it with statistics because the stats only tell a tiny bit of the story. As we'll likely figure out with the goalies of the 1990's and forward...

I really want to find a way to drum up a case for Brodeur...I don't want us to get to #6 on this list without naming him, that would be rather disappointing...

 

[Sentinel]

I seriously can't believe the omission of Tretiak.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

Which goalies benefited the most from the defence/system in front of them? If you were to rank....

I think Id say:

1. Brodeur
2. Dryden
3. Plante
4. Roy
5. Hasek
7. Sawchuk
6. Hall

There's no way anybody but Dryden takes the top spot on that list. If you want some numbers to prove the point, Denis Herron, Phil Myre, Rogie Vachon, Michel Plasse, Wayne Thomas and Bunny Larocque combined for a .902 save percentage while playing in Montreal during the 1970s. Their average save percentage on other teams was just .885.

My ranking of how much each goalie benefited from their defence would probably go something like:

1. Dryden
2. Plante
3. Brodeur
4. Sawchuk
5. Roy
6. Hasek
7. Hall

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

One thought I have is that one of the difficulties is the difference between great goaltending and good goaltending in a great circumstance.

Take the discussion on Sawchuk. Outside him playing on a super team, his career is not top ten worthy. So was the years on a super team his peak/prime, or was it artificially inflating his standing?

Dryden may have been the missing link on a super team, but it also was a super team. The last four cups would have been at least three with a reasonable (Don Edwards maybe?) replacement.

But they also accomplished so much that it seems like we could easily go way too far punishing them.

That said, I'm not sure they are clearly better than Brimsek, Benedict (Another hard one to judge as his best years were behind one of the best defensive teams ever, but the '28 cup speaks volumes for him.) and Vezina (For about 15 seasons he was viewed as arguably the best in the word and played behind porous defenses without poor playoff showings.)

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

There's no way anybody but Dryden takes the top spot on that list. If you want some numbers to prove the point, Denis Herron, Phil Myre, Rogie Vachon, Michel Plasse, Wayne Thomas and Bunny Larocque combined for a .902 save percentage while playing in Montreal during the 1970s. Their average save percentage on other teams was just .885.

Doesn't that prove just how much of a boon playing behind that team was?

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

Doesn't that prove just how much of a boon playing behind that team was?

Yes. To be clear, I meant Dryden deserves top spot on intylerwetrust's list of goalie's benefiting the most from the defence/system in front of them. It was not my ranking of the goalies.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Brodeur was the Devils' starting goalie from midway through 1993-94 to present 2011-12. 17.5 seasons, because of the lockout. Stevens left after 2002-03, Niedermayer after 2003-04.

Brodeur has spent 9.5 seasons as starter behind Scott Stevens, 8 without him. 10.5 seasons with Niedermayer (though really only 1 with prime Niedermayer), 7 without him. If Broduer plays just 2 more seasons (unlikely with the damn lockout), he'll have played the majority of his career without Stevens

I more or less agree with TCG's order for "most helped by his defense."

Plante was actually hurt in awards voting by playin behind Harvey, I think. Only a 1st Teamer twice through leading the league in GAA 5 straight times. Then Harvey gets traded and Plante is immediately the Hart Trophy winner as the writers realize he wasn't a product of Harvey

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

Yes. To be clear, I meant Dryden deserves top spot on intylerwetrust's list of goalie's benefiting the most from the defence/system in front of them. It was not my ranking of the goalies.

Gotcha. My bad.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

Another thought:
Patrick Roy vs Martin Brodeur once Brodeur is a starter.
93-94:
Vezina:
Roy: 3rd 34 (3-3-10)
Brodeur: 8th 5 (0-1-2)
All-Star:
Roy: 3rd 86 (7-13-12)
Brodeur: 6th 5 (0-1-2)

94-95:
Vezina:
Roy: N/A
Brodeur: 8th 7 (0-2-1)
All-Star:
Roy: N/A
Brodeur: N/A

95-96:
Vezina:
Roy: 9th 5 (1-0-0)
Brodeur: 4th 31 (4-3-2)
All-Star:
Roy: 10th 1 (0-0-1)
Brodeur: 3rd 84 (12-6-6)

96-97:
Vezina:
Roy: 3rd 25 (1-3-11)
Brodeur: 2nd 73 (3-18-4)
All-Star:
Roy: 3rd 47 (0-5-32)
Brodeur: 2nd 174 (13-35-4)

97-98:
Vezina:
Roy: 5th 5 (0-1-2)
Brodeur: 2nd 57 (2-14-5)
All-Star:
Roy: 6th 1 (0-0-1)
Brodeur: 159 (3-47-3)

98-99:
Vezina:
Roy: 9th 1 (0-0-1)
Brodeur: 4th 17 (1-1-9)
All-Star:
Roy: 8th 4 (0-1-1)
Brodeur: 6th 21 (3-0-6)

99-00:
Vezina:
Roy: 7th5 (0-1-2)
Brodeur: 5th 8 (0-1-5)
All-Star:
Roy: N/A
Brodeur: 3rd 48 (2-9-11)

00-01:
Vezina:
Roy: 5th 19 (2-1-6)
Brodeur: 3rd 42 (7-2-1)
All-Star:
Roy: 4th 46 (3-7-10)
Brodeur: 3rd 143 (18-15-8)

01-02:
Vezina:
Roy: 2nd 105 (12-15-0)
Brodeur: 5th 7 (1-0-2)
All-Star:
Roy: 1st 226 (30-24-4)
Brodeur: 5th 6 (0-1-3)

02-03:
Vezina:
Roy: 4th 17 (1-2-6)
Brodeur: 1st 131 (24-3-2)
All-Star:
Roy: 6th 12 (1-1-4)
Brodeur: 1st 243 (39-14-6)

 

[Canadiens1958]

1961-62 Hart

Brodeur was the Devils' starting goalie from midway through 1993-94 to present 2011-12. 17.5 seasons, because of the lockout. Stevens left after 2002-03, Niedermayer after 2003-04.

Brodeur has spent 9.5 seasons as starter behind Scott Stevens, 8 without him. 10.5 seasons with Niedermayer (though really only 1 with prime Niedermayer), 7 without him. If Broduer plays just 2 more seasons (unlikely with the damn lockout), he'll have played the majority of his career without Stevens

I more or less agree with TCG's order for "most helped by his defense."

Plante was actually hurt in awards voting by playin behind Harvey, I think. Only a 1st Teamer twice through leading the league in GAA 5 straight times. Then Harvey gets traded and Plante is immediately the Hart Trophy winner as the writers realize he wasn't a product of Harvey

Plus Jean Beliveau and Henri Richard miss 27 and 16 games respectively playing behind a defence of Jean Guy Talbot, Tom Johnson, J. C. Tremblay, Lou Fontinato and Al McNeill.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Proof

There's no way anybody but Dryden takes the top spot on that list. If you want some numbers to prove the point, Denis Herron, Phil Myre, Rogie Vachon, Michel Plasse, Wayne Thomas and Bunny Larocque combined for a .902 save percentage while playing in Montreal during the 1970s. Their average save percentage on other teams was just .885.

My ranking of how much each goalie benefited from their defence would probably go something like:

1. Dryden
2. Plante
3. Brodeur
4. Sawchuk
5. Roy
6. Hasek
7. Hall

You are blending three distinct systems that the Canadiens featured during Ken Dryden's tenure during the 1970's.

Pre Scotty Bowman anchored by Jean Beliveau and Henri Richard at center.

Early Scotty Bowman, anchored by Henri Richard and Jacques Lemaire at center.

Late Scotty Bowman, anchored around Jacques Lemaire at center and Bob Gainey at LW.

As for the SV% averaged on other teams how many systems are involved and what was the SV% of the respective goalie teammates?

 

[seventieslord]

He only played more than 43 games once since 2001-02, that being 56 games in 2006-07. In his final NHL season (2007-08), he played 41 games with a 0.902 save percentage and lost his job to Osgood very early in the playoffs.

I remember it quite well. In my mind, he was starting to "lose it" early that season, and he picked it up near the end enough to cement his starter status for the playoffs, but lost it, deservedly following games 3 and 4 vs. nashville.

 

[seventieslord]

Another thought:
Patrick Roy vs Martin Brodeur once Brodeur is a starter.
93-94:
Vezina:
Roy: 3rd 34 (3-3-10)
Brodeur: 8th 5 (0-1-2)
All-Star:
Roy: 3rd 86 (7-13-12)
Brodeur: 6th 5 (0-1-2)

94-95:
Vezina:
Roy: N/A
Brodeur: 8th 7 (0-2-1)
All-Star:
Roy: N/A
Brodeur: N/A

95-96:
Vezina:
Roy: 9th 5 (1-0-0)
Brodeur: 4th 31 (4-3-2)
All-Star:
Roy: 10th 1 (0-0-1)
Brodeur: 3rd 84 (12-6-6)

96-97:
Vezina:
Roy: 3rd 25 (1-3-11)
Brodeur: 2nd 73 (3-18-4)
All-Star:
Roy: 3rd 47 (0-5-32)
Brodeur: 2nd 174 (13-35-4)

97-98:
Vezina:
Roy: 5th 5 (0-1-2)
Brodeur: 2nd 57 (2-14-5)
All-Star:
Roy: 6th 1 (0-0-1)
Brodeur: 159 (3-47-3)

98-99:
Vezina:
Roy: 9th 1 (0-0-1)
Brodeur: 4th 17 (1-1-9)
All-Star:
Roy: 8th 4 (0-1-1)
Brodeur: 6th 21 (3-0-6)

99-00:
Vezina:
Roy: 7th5 (0-1-2)
Brodeur: 5th 8 (0-1-5)
All-Star:
Roy: N/A
Brodeur: 3rd 48 (2-9-11)

00-01:
Vezina:
Roy: 5th 19 (2-1-6)
Brodeur: 3rd 42 (7-2-1)
All-Star:
Roy: 4th 46 (3-7-10)
Brodeur: 3rd 143 (18-15-8)

01-02:
Vezina:
Roy: 2nd 105 (12-15-0)
Brodeur: 5th 7 (1-0-2)
All-Star:
Roy: 1st 226 (30-24-4)
Brodeur: 5th 6 (0-1-3)

02-03:
Vezina:
Roy: 4th 17 (1-2-6)
Brodeur: 1st 131 (24-3-2)
All-Star:
Roy: 6th 12 (1-1-4)
Brodeur: 1st 243 (39-14-6)

What I want to know is, why would anyone vote Brodeur ahead of Roy in 1996, 1999, 2000 or 2001?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I remember it quite well. In my mind, he was starting to "lose it" early that season, and he picked it up near the end enough to cement his starter status for the playoffs, but lost it, deservedly following games 3 and 4 vs. nashville.

Yeah, I mean, the man was in his 40s, so it sure doesn't take away from his legacy at all. I just don't buy that his post-NHL years add anything, either

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

What I want to know is, why would anyone vote Brodeur ahead of Roy in 1996, 1999, 2000 or 2001?

1996? Brodeur has a good shot at winning Vezina if his team barely made the playoffs, rater than barely missing them.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

NHL has more games per season, is faster paced, and with much better competition. I just don't see Hasek being anything more than a backup in the NHL if he stayed.

He only played more than 43 games once since 2001-02, that being 56 games in 2006-07. In his final NHL season (2007-08), he played 41 games with a 0.902 save percentage and lost his job to Osgood very early in the playoffs.

I really don't see what playing well in a lesser league adds to his resume when we saw that he was barely an NHL starter anymore when he left.

I think that people who say Hasek had less longevity than Roy or Brodeur are wrongly neglecting the time he was an international superstar from the mid 80s on. But I also think that people who say that he has more longevity are also missing the big picture. If Roy had spent 6 seasons in the AHL after leaving the NHL, does that make him a better player? I don't think so.

Hasek's KHL accomplishments are nice, but do you think the Czech Republic would ever consider him for the World Championships based on his play there? The last time he played internationally for them was 2006.

I don't think any of Roy, Brodeur, or Hasek has a significant longevity advantage over the others. We don't give Chelios a longevity advantage over Bourque just for sticking around, do we?

Dryden is the only outlier here when it comes to longevity as an NHL-calibre player IMO.

Again, back to the bolded part. How does a 1.79 GAA in an 18 game playoff run (and 2nd best regular season GAA and SO totals in the league) just 12 months before retirement = "barely an NHL starter anymore"? If you're basing your statement on your observation of the 12 months that followed that run, then, like I said... injuries that season were pretty obviously a more major factor than any significant/"permanent" drop in performance level. It was a complete outlier (especially statistically) in that he stopped a far lower percentage of shots faced than any of the 13 seasons before... except for his injury shortened '03/04.

As for Hasek being chosen for international play in his final years, well, looking at the performance of Stepanek, Pavelec, and Vokoun internationally over the past few years I don't think they ever felt forced to use Hasek anyway. And you know what, if he had actually approached them in any of those years and said he wanted to join, even if it meant as bench depth, they probably would have taken him. He took the past Olympic year off for rest, though, so the Czech hand was forced somewhat there (and Vokoun played just fine).