Round 2, Vote 1 (HOH Top Goaltenders)

[seventieslord]

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

I guess, maybe by default, but I don't see how he'd be considered any better than Roy at that point.

Obviously, that was a horrible year for top goalies getting vezina votes, for reasons we've all discussed before.

To be a bit revisionist, I'd say the best goalie was clearly Hasek. he was clearly the best goalie the season before and the season after, and he had the best save percentage as usual. **** missing the playoffs....

 

[seventieslord]

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).

Maybe I'm imagining articles I read, but I thought Hasek was practically throwing himself at the national team every chance he got the last few years...

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Maybe I'm imagining articles I read, but I thought Hasek was practically throwing himself at the national team every chance he got the last few years...

I don't remember him "throwing himself" at the team in the Olympic year that he took off for rest right after NHL retirement, but it could have happened. And upon choosing to go with Pavelec/Vokoun(/Stepanek) for those Olympics, why would they break that up to bring Hasek back in afterwards? Those guys have played just fine for the Czech Republic internationally in the "post-Hasek era".

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

It's not about "adding" anything, really. It's about supporting evidence that Hasek's final season in Detroit wasn't necessarily as much about a drop in level of play as it was being affected (and frustrated) by injuries. And since a lot of people tend to make a lot of Hasek finally losing his spot to Osgood that year, I think that's some pretty important context.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Some great info about Sawchuk and his lack of accomplishments outside of his peak/short prime. Does anyone have something that ties it all back to his previously established high all-time ranking? It seems that for a quite a while he was considered the greatest goaltender ever. The posts I've been reading have pointed out why this never should have been/only should have been for a short time (right after his peak), but why was the mistake made? What was overlooked or evaluated incorrectly that caused him to be ranked so high?

The only example I can think of is Howie Morenz vs. Eddie Shore for the greatest hockey player of the first half of the 20th century. Shore appears to be the better player, but Morenz getting the title is explained by other things...he was hockey's first superstar, beloved by fans and he died at a young age. What are these for Sawchuk?...Dying young is one...Are there others?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Some great info about Sawchuk and his lack of accomplishments outside of his peak/short prime. Does anyone have something that ties it all back to his previously established high all-time ranking? It seems that for a quite a while he was considered the greatest goaltender ever. The posts I've been reading have pointed out why this never should have been/only should have been for a short time (right after his peak), but why was the mistake made? What was overlooked or evaluated incorrectly that caused him to be ranked so high?

The only example I can think of is Howie Morenz vs. Eddie Shore for the greatest hockey player of the first half of the 20th century. Shore appears to be the better player, but Morenz getting the title is explained by other things...he was hockey's first superstar, beloved by fans and he died at a young age. What are these for Sawchuk?...Dying young is one...Are there others?

Well first of all, I actually rank Morenz above Shore, but that's nether here not there.

The thing about Sawchuk is that he held both the records for most wins and most shutouts for decades before Roy then Brodeur broke most wins and Brodeur broke most shutouts. So those two records plus people who saw his awesome 1951-1955 peak equals best goalie?

But more than half of Sawchuk's shutouts came between 1951-1955 and he actually has a losing record after 1955.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Well first of all, I actually rank Morenz above Shore, but that's nether here not there.

The thing about Sawchuk is that he held both the records for most wins and most shutouts for decades before Roy then Brodeur broke most wins and Brodeur broke most shutouts. So those two records plus people who saw his awesome 1951-1955 peak equals best goalie?

But more than half of Sawchuk's shutouts came between 1951-1955 and he actually has a losing record after 1955.

I could have used more of you in the last ATD

On a more serious note...thanks for the info, this helps, and I would appreciate hearing more from others

 

[sajmae]

Maybe I'm imagining articles I read, but I thought Hasek was practically throwing himself at the national team every chance he got the last few years...

It is not like Hašek was without chance, he still was arguably best Czech goalie in Europe, but without a doubt Vokoun/Pavelec were better and who would want 45year old backup on WHC. And yeah, he wanted to go, but "practically throwing himself at the national team" is exaggeration IMO.

Quotes from Alois Hadamczik, NT coach and my not really good translation
http://sport.ihned.cz/hokej/c1-49717290-nestarnouci-hasek-je-pred-ms-ve-hre-potvrdil-hadamczik-ted-ho-ale-do-tymu-nevzal
February 2011
"Hats down before Dominik and his performance in Spartak, but i didn't change my mind. I won't take him to Euro Hockey Tour, that is for young goalies with future. I will nominate him or not later.(nominate on WHC)"
"What Vokoun showed at OG and WHC last year makes him goalie number one."
http://hokej.idnes.cz/s-haskem-nepocitam-vzkazal-hadamczik-jednickou-pro-ms-bude-vokoun-p9x-/reprezentace.aspx?c=A110302_164106_reprezentace_cig
March 2011
"Vokoun is my number one, I am glad that he wasn't traded. He wants to come. If he will be healthy and not in playoffs, he is number one."
"Dominik lost in playoffs and he wouldn't play competetive match for two months, that is not ideal. Plus it wouldn't be fair for him to leave him uncertain for so long."
"I won't take two older goalies, I believe Vokoun will come, so I leave Hašek be."

http://www.sport.cz/hokej/reprezentace/clanek/185297-pavelec-prevzal-roli-za-vokouna-varianta-s-haskem-me-ani-nenapadla-rekl-hadamczik.html
And finally April 2011
Vokoun said that he is not coming and Pavelec became number one.
"I didn't think about it. He is an older goalie and needs his time and rest. Plus he was out three weeks. If we were out of goalies, I would take him, but not now.(about Hašek)"

I'll try to write some summary about Hašek's non-NHL career later today.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

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

'96-Brodeur did not disrupt his team by demanding a trade. Better save %, GAA and 3 times as many shutouts on weaker teams.

'99-Roy's season was mediocre, and Brodeur was a workhorse. Hasek was the no brainer winner and Dafoe had a great on paper season.

'00-Another year where neither was a standout. But Brodeur at least led the league in wins.

'01-Weird year, another one where Brodeur simply playing more gives him the edge. Amazing statistical parity.

 

[Sturminator]

You guys are starting to convince me that I have overrated Terry Sawchuk. I, too, once carried the received wisdom that Sawchuk was the best goalie of all time, but I am really wondering now why people believed that for so long. I think I'm going to have to move Plante up to #4 on my personal list. I'm not sure yet whether I think Sawchuk should fall past Brodeur and Dryden.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Im curious, though, how everyone would rank the top 7 in terms of playoff performers.

I used to have Hasek towards the top of my playoff list near Roy until I realized that his quality start percentage dropped from 66.9% in the playoffs to 53.6% as soon as his team was trailing in the series, whereas Roy's increased from 68.7% to 77.7% when his team was trailing in the series.

Hasek (RS Career): 473-257; 64.8%
Hasek (Playoff Career): 79-39; 66.9%
Hasek (Playoff Trailing): 15-13; 53.6%

Roy (RS Career): 661-359; 64.8%
Roy (Playoff Career): 169-77; 68.7%
Roy (Playoff Trailing): 35-10; 77.7%

Between that and the injuries preventing him from competing on three occasions (including one in a Hart season), I'd probably slot him behind Dryden and Plante, above Brodeur and Hall, and near Sawchuk. I'd be open to an argument to move Brodeur upward.

'99-Roy's season was mediocre.

He was 6th in save percentage among goaltenders with at least half their team's starts and tied for 3rd in even strength save percentage among that same group (Colorado had a below-average penalty kill; 17th of 27). What was it about that season that struck you as mediocre?

I'm not going to pretend that Brodeur was having a bad year, but I don't feel comfortable giving him a check-mark for being a Top-Five goalie that year (4th) and subsequently using that 13-10-7 lead over Roy and Hasek in Top-Five Vezina years as an useful tool for evaluation. Both Roy and Hasek have seasons as the save percentage leader in which they were not voted a Top-Five Vezina goaltender - and yet this season in which Brodeur was 16th among starters in a 27-team league is one of his 13?


I will say this about Brodeur, if the Vezina votes are conducted after the playoffs instead of immediately prior, does he not move up in certain years? 1997 and 1995 in particular?

 

[quoipourquoi]

Some great info about Sawchuk and his lack of accomplishments outside of his peak/short prime. Does anyone have something that ties it all back to his previously established high all-time ranking? It seems that for a quite a while he was considered the greatest goaltender ever. The posts I've been reading have pointed out why this never should have been/only should have been for a short time (right after his peak), but why was the mistake made? What was overlooked or evaluated incorrectly that caused him to be ranked so high?

The only example I can think of is Howie Morenz vs. Eddie Shore for the greatest hockey player of the first half of the 20th century. Shore appears to be the better player, but Morenz getting the title is explained by other things...he was hockey's first superstar, beloved by fans and he died at a young age. What are these for Sawchuk?...Dying young is one...Are there others?

Is it necessarily a mistake? It always strikes me funny the amount of emphasis we place on Top-Five and Top-Ten voting records in these debates - only to call into question the cumulative perception of the hockey media when a goaltender is anointed the best of all-time. The same people who voted Hasek as the best goaltender six times are the same people who consistently rate him below Martin Brodeur - we'll trust them to evaluate a single season, but once they add up the careers, we'll call their judgment a "mistake."

I guess that's what I was trying to get out of that personal voting record thread. It's not enough for me to hear about Brodeur's nine nominations, Roy's seven nominations, and Hasek's six nominations - any more than it's enough to hear that Scott Burnside changed his mind as to which goaltender is the best of all-time... again - because I've watched enough to toss Roy and Hasek their extra nods for 1988 and 1996 respectively and to take out a few of those Brodeur head-scratchers (2001 and 2006 being at the top of the list).


We got some time; I say we break these seven goaltenders down year-by-year a la tarheel's Shore discussion and talk about what went right and what went wrong every year. That's the best way to break out of this trap where we use voting records but not the widespread perception that people have had of Sawchuk and Brodeur that should be just as meaningful.

 

[quoipourquoi]

The Golden Hockey Stick Voting Records are consistent with the idea that Hasek was likely capable of being a good NHL starter beginning in 1986 at the age of 21, about the same age Roy and Brodeur got their starts in the NHL. By 1987 at the age of 22, he may have been capable of being a star in the NHL once he adjusted to the different style.

Here's one where I struggle with the international-to-NHL transition. First of all, I agree that Hasek could have been a good starter had he came over in 1987. But how severe is the adjustment "to the different style"? Is there something that a Roman Cechmanek did in his first season that Dominik Hasek did not - despite having some experience on North American ice? Because the inability to seize Jimmy Waite's job in 1990 (that went to Belfour) or Ed Belfour's job in 1991 during the contract holdout (that went to Waite) and the subsequent sulking in the IHL suggests to me that he didn't react well to competition at his position in his youth.

Again, I think he was good enough to start somewhere without a logjam on the depth chart, but how much of his early-NHL struggle is the adjustment "to the different style" and how much of it is his own deficiencies? I don't mean to bring him up so much, but Ed Belfour is the same age, and he wasn't a star player in 1987, so just because one other 1965-born goaltender was an NHL star in 1987 does not necessarily dictate that every 1965-born goaltender was ready to be an NHL star in 1987. If Hasek was star-ready, wouldn't he have been hungrier in 1990 and 1991? Wouldn't he have severely out-dueled Daren Puppa in 1992-93 to the point that they wouldn't seek out a HOF goalie at the deadline? That's my reservation about saying Hasek was ready to be an NHL star in 1987.

 

[MXD]

If we have to make a list of which player was the most "advantaged" by defense/system, I think it would kindof intellectually dishonest not to put Terry Sawchuck at the top or very near to the top, considering the fact that, without his dynasty Wings years, he'd get highly considered... for top-40.

If Sawchuck's dynasty years are to be weighted so heavily, then he same would have to be done when evaluating his defense.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Terry Sawchuk

The thing about Sawchuk is that he held both the records for most wins and most shutouts for decades before Roy then Brodeur broke most wins and Brodeur broke most shutouts. So those two records plus people who saw his awesome 1951-1955 peak equals best goalie?

But more than half of Sawchuk's shutouts came between 1951-1955 and he actually has a losing record after 1955.

Two paragraphs that form an excellent base to examine Terry Sawchuk. Will let Tarheels do the micro analysis but will submit the following.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/s/sawchte01.html

1955 Terry Sawchuk was traded to the re-building Boston Bruins from the SC Champion Detroit Red Wings.

1955-56 Bruins struggled. Aging Bill Quackenbush - last season, injured Fleming Mackell, adjusting Vic Stasiuk. Team did not make the playoffs.

1955-56 Detroit Red Wings. Promoted Glenn Hall - future HHOFer to replace Sawchuck, and future HHOF forwards in Norm Ullman and John Bucyk, plus very serviceable skaters - Ed Sandford, Real Chevrefils, Warren Godfrey in the Sawchuk trade. Very solid additions to a strong SC Championship core led by Gordie Howe, Ted Lindsay, Alex Delvecchio, Red Kelly, Marcel Pronovost and a string of established role players. Yet the 1955-56 Red Wings dropped from 95 to 76 regular season points and lost in five in the SC Final. Raising the question of how important or valuable was Terry Sawchuck to the Red Wings 1951-55 success.? Rather valuable and important?

1956-57 Bruins. Injury free Mackell, add the very under appreciated Allan Stanley, young players mature, Real Chevrefils is brought back:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/BOS/1957.html

ailing/conflicted Terry Sawchuk contributes to a 18-10-6 start before being shut down. Norm De Felice 3-5-2 and Don Simmons 13-9-4 finish a 21 point improvement season. Simmons outplays Glenn Hall in a semi-final upset of the Wings, solid in the finals loss to the Canadiens. So what is the value of Terry Sawchuk vs his respective replacements - Glenn Hall, Don Simmons, Norm De Felice?

Simply Sawchuk's total wins and total shutouts records endured for decades because he was that good and that hard to replace. Just like Roy and Brodeur recently.

Post 1957 Sawchuk later.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Two paragraphs that form an excellent base to examine Terry Sawchuk. Will let Tarheels do the micro analysis but will submit the following.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/s/sawchte01.html

1955 Terry Sawchuk was traded to the re-building Boston Bruins from the SC Champion Detroit Red Wings.

1955-56 Bruins struggled. Aging Bill Quackenbush - last season, injured Fleming Mackell, adjusting Vic Stasiuk. Team did not make the playoffs.

1955-56 Detroit Red Wings. Promoted Glenn Hall - future HHOFer to replace Sawchuck, and future HHOF forwards in Norm Ullman and John Bucyk, plus very serviceable skaters - Ed Sandford, Real Chevrefils, Warren Godfrey in the Sawchuk trade. Very solid additions to a strong SC Championship core led by Gordie Howe, Ted Lindsay, Alex Delvecchio, Red Kelly, Marcel Pronovost and a string of established role players. Yet the 1955-56 Red Wings dropped from 95 to 76 regular season points and lost in five in the SC Final. Raising the question of how important or valuable was Terry Sawchuck to the Red Wings 1951-55 success.? Rather valuable and important?

1956-57 Bruins. Injury free Mackell, add the very under appreciated Allan Stanley, young players mature, Real Chevrefils is brought back:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/BOS/1957.html

ailing/conflicted Terry Sawchuk contributes to a 18-10-6 start before being shut down. Norm De Felice 3-5-2 and Don Simmons 13-9-4 finish a 21 point improvement season. Simmons outplays Glenn Hall in a semi-final upset of the Wings, solid in the finals loss to the Canadiens. So what is the value of Terry Sawchuk vs his respective replacements - Glenn Hall, Don Simmons, Norm De Felice?

Simply Sawchuk's total wins and total shutouts records endured for decades because he was that good and that hard to replace. Just like Roy and Brodeur recently.

Post 1957 Sawchuk later.

Hall was named 2nd Team All Star for the 55-56 season, which suggests that he played well, but as you pointed out the Wings had a large drop in points. Is there an explanation for this? Was there some other factor? Maybe since it was Hall's first season as a starter he had an adjustment period in the beginning of the season, but was strong in the second half? Just throwing out guesses...

 

[steve141]

Adding info from some great studies by Hockey Outsider:

Career Adjusted Regular Season Save Percentage 1983-2009 (min 400 games)

Goalie|Save Percentage
Dominik Hasek | 92.5% Patrick Roy | 92.0%
Roberto Luongo | 91.7%
Martin Brodeur | 91.3%
Tomas Vokoun | 91.3%
John Vanbiesbrouck | 91.3%
Guy Hebert | 91.2%
Jean-Sebastien Giguere | 91.2%
Ed Belfour | 91.2%
Andy Moog | 91.1%

Best Adjusted Regular Season Peak (best five years)

Goalie|Save percentage
Dominik Hasek | 93.3% Patrick Roy | 93.1%
John Vanbiesbrouck | 92.4%
Curtis Joseph | 92.2%
Ed Belfour | 92.2%
Tom Barrasso | 92.1%
Martin Brodeur | 92.1%
Roberto Luongo | 92.1%
Kelly Hrudey | 91.9%
Tomas Vokoun | 91.8%

Career Adjusted Playoff Save Percentage - minimum 1,000 shots

Goalie|Shots|Saves|SP%
Tim Thomas | 1314 | 1218 | 92.7%
Olaf Kolzig | 1446 | 1330 | 92.0%
Patrick Roy | 7218 | 6638 | 92.0%
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%
Martin Brodeur | 4801 | 4378 | 91.2%

Sources:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=718221
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1185967


For me the biggest take-aways from this are:

* Roy gets too litte credit for his regular season play. He has nearly as good peak numbers as Hasek.

* Hasek's playoff numbers are better than he usually gets credit for, i.e. not far from Roy's.

* Hasek's regular season career averages really are a significant step above the others'. 0.5 percentage points is a huge difference.

* The common perception that Brodeur was consistently good, but one level below Hasek and Roy is supported by these studies.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Regular Season

Hall was named 2nd Team All Star for the 55-56 season, which suggests that he played well, but as you pointed out the Wings had a large drop in points. Is there an explanation for this? Was there some other factor? Maybe since it was Hall's first season as a starter he had an adjustment period in the beginning of the season, but was strong in the second half? Just throwing out guesses...

Regular season,1955-56, Detroit GF went down 21, GA went up 14. AST is regular season based or biased.

Playoffs, 1955 Sawchuk 2.36 GAA vs 1956 Hall 2.78 GAA. Hall was weaker against the same playoff opponent. Red Wings playing Toronto then Montreal both years. Took longer, giving up more goals to eliminate a weaker Toronto team. In the finals Montreal's revamped defence and clearly defined goaltending, Blake had picked Plante as the undisputed #1, dominated just as they did during the regular season - 26 GA improvement.

 

[seventieslord]

'96-Brodeur did not disrupt his team by demanding a trade. Better save %, GAA and 3 times as many shutouts on weaker teams.

'99-Roy's season was mediocre, and Brodeur was a workhorse. Hasek was the no brainer winner and Dafoe had a great on paper season.

'00-Another year where neither was a standout. But Brodeur at least led the league in wins.

'01-Weird year, another one where Brodeur simply playing more gives him the edge. Amazing statistical parity.

In 1996, Roy's save% was just as impressive once special teams considerations are taken into effect. (Brodeur faced the fewest PPs, Roy faced more than average). I agree the team factors could have played a part though.

1999 - .917 is mediocre? What does that say about .906? And Roy faced 19% more power plays.

2000 - Roy wasn't a standout. Looking back it's hard to conclude he was definitely better (9.14 to .910 despite facing 7% more power plays) but even harder to conclude that Brodeur was better.

2001 - There's no excuse for this one... .913 to .906, despite facing 7% more power plays.

The thing about playing more games may not even be valid. Do we even know that there is a threshold of games played that for some reason only Brodeur's legendary endurance has been able to breach? Or does his team have something figured out that other teams haven't? (certainly they have the part about not taking penalties figured out)

 

[steve141]

Postseason All Star Teams

name|1st Team|2nd Team|total
Glenn Hall|7|4|11
Terry Sawchuk|3|4|7
Jacques Plante|3|4|7
Martin Brodeur|3|4|7
Dominik Hasek|6|0|6
Ken Dryden|5|1|6
Patrick Roy|4|2|6

Is it correct to say that the All Star selections are the closest thing to the modern Vezina trophy for the pre-1982 period? This table would be a strong argument for Glenn Hall in that case.

Have we done any comprehensive retro-Vezina study for the period when the Vezina was awarded to the goalie with lowest GAA?

 

[nik jr]

Hall was named 2nd Team All Star for the 55-56 season, which suggests that he played well, but as you pointed out the Wings had a large drop in points. Is there an explanation for this? Was there some other factor? Maybe since it was Hall's first season as a starter he had an adjustment period in the beginning of the season, but was strong in the second half? Just throwing out guesses...

sawchuk was also 2nd AS in '54 and '55, after harry lumley. at the 1/2 mark of '57, sawchuk was the leader in AS voting, but then retired due to "nerves." his numbers seem to have been fairly mediocre until increasing again in mid '60s.

interesting, though, is that sawchuk was 2nd AS in '59, when DRW were the worst team.



from hockeydb.com:
'55 sawchuk: .926, 1.94 -- (25.58 shots against per game)
'56 hall: .922, 2.10 ------- (26.81 shots against per game)

someone may know shots for numbers to give us an idea of possession.


'55 DRW: 204 GF, 134 GA ---- +70
'56 DRW: 183 GF, 148 GA ---- +35


'56 DRW lost some depth. leswick, skov, bonin, johnny wilson, woit and stasiuk were traded after '55, and their replacements played and scored much less. top players generally scored more in '56, but DRW had only 7 players with 10+ goals in '56 compared to 11 players in '55.


........


probably also important is '56 habs, who totally dominated the season, and could be argued as the best team of all time. '56 DRW had to play them 14 times (4-8-2 record vs habs).


nature of a 6 team league, playing each opponent 14 times, could have a fairly large effect on a goalies' numbers.

peak/prime sawchuk not only played behind the best team, but also did not have to play against them 14 times. same could be said of plante with habs.

both early '50s DRW and beliveau/harvey habs were great defensive teams who were also setting new standards in the transition game and in offense (including offense from d-men).


that effect would be even bigger in the 4 team league of the early NHL.

 

[BM67]

Adding info from some great studies by Hockey Outsider:

Career Adjusted Regular Season Save Percentage 1983-2009 (min 400 games)

Goalie|Save Percentage
Dominik Hasek | 92.5% Patrick Roy | 92.0%
Roberto Luongo | 91.7%
Martin Brodeur | 91.3%
Tomas Vokoun | 91.3%
John Vanbiesbrouck | 91.3%
Guy Hebert | 91.2%
Jean-Sebastien Giguere | 91.2%
Ed Belfour | 91.2%
Andy Moog | 91.1%

Best Adjusted Regular Season Peak (best five years)

Goalie|Save percentage
Dominik Hasek | 93.3% Patrick Roy | 93.1%
John Vanbiesbrouck | 92.4%
Curtis Joseph | 92.2%
Ed Belfour | 92.2%
Tom Barrasso | 92.1%
Martin Brodeur | 92.1%
Roberto Luongo | 92.1%
Kelly Hrudey | 91.9%
Tomas Vokoun | 91.8%

Career Adjusted Playoff Save Percentage - minimum 1,000 shots

Goalie|Shots|Saves|SP%
Tim Thomas | 1314 | 1218 | 92.7%
Olaf Kolzig | 1446 | 1330 | 92.0%
Patrick Roy | 7218 | 6638 | 92.0%
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%
Martin Brodeur | 4801 | 4378 | 91.2%

Sources:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=718221
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1185967


For me the biggest take-aways from this are:

* Roy gets too litte credit for his regular season play. He has nearly as good peak numbers as Hasek.
* Hasek's career averages really are a significant step above the others'.
* Hasek's playoff numbers are better than he usually gets credit for, i.e. not far from Roy's.
* The common perception that Brodeur was consistently good, but one level below Hasek and Roy is supported by these studies.

There are a number of factors that have to be adjusted for, not just one or two.

In the case of Brodeur, we have: Shot under counting at home (lower SV%), the low number of PP faced (higher SV%), his non puck stopping skills (stick handling, rebound control, poke checking) impact on the game (lower SV%, fewer SOG, ??? unknowns like impact of fewer faceoffs)

Here's one factor that is across the board, home vs road split.

Player|H Min%|R Min %
Brodeur|50.90%|49.10%
Hasek|52.22%|47.78%
Roy|55.50%|44.50%

Brodeur has played 7584 more career road minutes than Roy, but only 2218 more home minutes.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

Is it correct to say that the All Star selections are the closest thing to the modern Vezina trophy for the pre-1982 period? This table would be a strong argument for Glenn Hall in that case.

Have we done any comprehensive retro-Vezina study for the period when the Vezina was awarded to the goalie with lowest GAA?

I guess First Team All Star selections would have to be considered the closest thing, but I am not convinced that they were all that similar to Vezina voting, particularly modern-day Vezina voting which is strongly influenced by save percentage rather than GAA and wins.

From 1935 to 1970 you can determine the First Team All-Star over 80% of the time by taking the GAA leader among all goalies who played in at least 75% of their team's games. The only two goalies who ever bucked the trend in that period were Gump Worsley in 1968, when he led the league in GAA but did not play in 75% of the games, and Glenn Hall, who did it five times (1957, 1958, 1960, 1964, 1968, 1969).

On top of that, from 1971 to 1979 the First All-Star goalie was the goalie with the most games played on the team that allowed the fewest goals against, making four and a half decades of results heavily biased by goals against average.

I think the First Team All Star results can be used to make a case for Glenn Hall, given the unique way he was able to break through the systemic bias, but I'm not sure they are that meaningful otherwise. I largely ignore All Star voting in my rankings, both because they are unreliable and team dependent and affected by other factors like narratives and games played, but also because I'm not convinced they are terribly useful for goalies given the high degree of random statistical variation from season to season. In short, it's far from easy to tell if you are picking out the best goalie season or the luckiest goalie season or the goalie who got the most help from his teammates. I think it's more useful to look at multiple seasons of play when rating goalies as the sample size becomes more meaningful.

 

[JaymzB]

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.

While I agree that Dryden should be #1 in benefiting from the team in front of him, I think the above #'s might be misleading. A guy like Larocque played against the weaker teams in the league during his time in Montreal. When he became the starter elsewhere, his competition improved, as his team in front of him got worse.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

While I agree that Dryden should be #1 in benefiting from the team in front of him, I think the above #'s might be misleading. A guy like Larocque played against the weaker teams in the league during his time in Montreal. When he became the starter elsewhere, his competition improved, as his team in front of him got worse.

Sure, it's just a ballpark figure that I had easily available, a complete analysis would probably look at quality of competition and compare the non-Montreal save percentages of the various goalies to their teammates in those other cities as well. I'll try to take a more detailed look at this at some point, although it's not highest on my priority list for this round as I doubt many people have Dryden in their top four.

 

[BM67]

In 1996, Roy's save% was just as impressive once special teams considerations are taken into effect. (Brodeur faced the fewest PPs, Roy faced more than average). I agree the team factors could have played a part though.

1999 - .917 is mediocre? What does that say about .906? And Roy faced 19% more power plays.

2000 - Roy wasn't a standout. Looking back it's hard to conclude he was definitely better (9.14 to .910 despite facing 7% more power plays) but even harder to conclude that Brodeur was better.

2001 - There's no excuse for this one... .913 to .906, despite facing 7% more power plays.

The thing about playing more games may not even be valid. Do we even know that there is a threshold of games played that for some reason only Brodeur's legendary endurance has been able to breach? Or does his team have something figured out that other teams haven't? (certainly they have the part about not taking penalties figured out)

The fewer PPs faced is at least off set by the home shot under counting in NJ. Then factor in that Roy plays the majority of his minutes at home, and that there was generally shot over counting in Colorado, two factors that inflate his SV%.

You have stated in the past that NJ's special team advantage is off set by the home under counting, so why do you keep pointing out the PP difference as if it's the only factor to consider?