Round 2, Vote 1 (HOH Top Goaltenders)

[TheDevilMadeMe]

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)

Tarheel showed in the preliminary discussion thread that the same goalies tended to consistently led the NHL in games played, regardless of quality of backup and through several coaching changes. I think that's pretty strong evidence that goalie durability is a "skill."

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?

1st Team All Star = Vezina before 1982. They don't always go to the same goalie (in 2008, the writers picked Nabokov and the GMs picked Brodeur), but they usually do.

Edit: Though TCG has a great point, that you need to take the AS voting with a grain of salt, as from 1935-1957, the 1st Team AS always led the league in GAA.

 

[quoipourquoi]

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.

I'm not saying that save percentage is perfect by any means (another factor being whether or not a goalie is comfortable playing in a shot-blocking system or needs to make the first-shot saves to get into a groove), but I also don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.


As for the career adjusted playoff save percentage, as much as I appreciate HockeyOutsider's work, I would have preferred he adjusted to the league average save percentage and not the playoff average save percentage for reasons I have expressed in that thread and elsewhere.

Also, especially when it comes to playoffs, it's not just about cumulative performance in a given Spring. We may fawn over Hasek's .940 in the 1994 playoffs, but I believe it is just as useful to recall that their were two games in that series in which Hasek put on an statistically-objective below-average performance. It's not enough to have a high cumulative number on the back of one 70-save game - it needs to be high all-across the series to advance.

Year | GP | GPA | GPB | PCT | +/- | Playoff | GP | GPA | GPB | PCT | +/-
Patrick Roy, Career | 1020 | 661 | 359 | 64.8% | 302 | | 246 | 169 | 77 | 68.7% | 92
Dominik Hasek, Career | 730 | 473 | 257 | 64.8% | 216 | | 118 | 79 | 39 | 66.9% | 40
Martin Brodeur, Career | 1186 | 672 | 514 | 56.7% | 158 | | 205 | 124 | 81 | 60.5% | 43

Year | GP | GPA | GPB | PCT | +/- | Playoff | GP | GPA | GPB | PCT | +/-
Patrick Roy, 1986 | 44 | 26 | 18 | 59.1% | 8 | | 20 | 17 | 3 | 85.0% | 14
Patrick Roy, 1987 | 46 | 29 | 17 | 63.0% | 12 | | 6 | 3 | 3 | 50.0% | 0
Patrick Roy, 1988 | 45 | 30 | 15 | 66.7% | 15 | | 7 | 4 | 3 | 57.1% | 1
Patrick Roy, 1989 | 47 | 33 | 14 | 70.2% | 19 | | 19 | 17 | 2 | 89.5% | 15
Patrick Roy, 1990 | 54 | 41 | 13 | 75.9% | 28 | | 11 | 7 | 4 | 63.6% | 3
Patrick Roy, 1991 | 48 | 32 | 16 | 66.7% | 16 | | 13 | 7 | 6 | 53.8% | 1
Patrick Roy, 1992 | 66 | 51 | 15 | 77.3% | 36 | | 11 | 5 | 6 | 45.5% | -1
Patrick Roy, 1993 | 62 | 36 | 26 | 58.1% | 10 | | 20 | 19 | 1 | 95.0% | 18
Patrick Roy, 1994 | 68 | 45 | 23 | 66.2% | 22 | | 6 | 3 | 3 | 50.0% | 0
Patrick Roy, 1995 | 43 | 23 | 20 | 53.5% | 3 | | | | | |
Patrick Roy, 1996 | 61 | 39 | 22 | 63.9% | 17 | | 22 | 15 | 7 | 68.2% | 8
Patrick Roy, 1997 | 62 | 43 | 19 | 69.4% | 24 | | 17 | 11 | 6 | 64.7% | 5
Patrick Roy, 1998 | 65 | 35 | 30 | 53.8% | 5 | | 7 | 5 | 2 | 71.4% | 3
Patrick Roy, 1999 | 61 | 39 | 22 | 63.9% | 17 | | 19 | 12 | 7 | 63.2% | 5
Patrick Roy, 2000 | 62 | 39 | 23 | 62.9% | 16 | | 17 | 12 | 5 | 70.6% | 7
Patrick Roy, 2001 | 60 | 36 | 24 | 60.0% | 12 | | 23 | 17 | 6 | 73.9% | 11
Patrick Roy, 2002 | 63 | 43 | 20 | 68.3% | 23 | | 21 | 12 | 9 | 57.1% | 3
Patrick Roy, 2003 | 63 | 41 | 22 | 65.1% | 19 | | 7 | 3 | 4 | 42.9% | -1
|||||||||||
Dominik Hasek, 1991 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 66.7% | 1 | | 3 | 2 | 1 | 66.7% | 1
Dominik Hasek, 1992 | 18 | 11 | 7 | 61.1% | 4 | | 3 | 2 | 1 | 66.7% | 1
Dominik Hasek, 1993 | 28 | 16 | 12 | 57.1% | 4 | | 1 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% | 1
Dominik Hasek, 1994 | 57 | 42 | 15 | 73.7% | 27 | | 7 | 5 | 2 | 71.4% | 3
Dominik Hasek, 1995 | 41 | 30 | 11 | 73.2% | 19 | | 5 | 1 | 4 | 20.0% | -3
Dominik Hasek, 1996 | 59 | 40 | 19 | 67.8% | 21 | | | | | |
Dominik Hasek, 1997 | 68 | 49 | 19 | 72.1% | 30 | | 3 | 2 | 1 | 66.7% | 1
Dominik Hasek, 1998 | 72 | 47 | 25 | 65.3% | 22 | | 15 | 12 | 3 | 80.0% | 9
Dominik Hasek, 1999 | 64 | 50 | 14 | 78.1% | 36 | | 19 | 14 | 5 | 73.7% | 9
Dominik Hasek, 2000 | 35 | 22 | 13 | 62.9% | 9 | | 5 | 3 | 2 | 60.0% | 1
Dominik Hasek, 2001 | 66 | 39 | 27 | 59.1% | 12 | | 12 | 9 | 3 | 75.0% | 6
Dominik Hasek, 2002 | 65 | 37 | 28 | 56.9% | 9 | | 23 | 15 | 8 | 65.2% | 7
Dominik Hasek, 2004 | 14 | 8 | 6 | 57.1% | 2 | | | | | |
Dominik Hasek, 2006 | 43 | 31 | 12 | 72.1% | 19 | | | | | |
Dominik Hasek, 2007 | 56 | 31 | 25 | 55.4% | 6 | | 18 | 11 | 7 | 61.1% | 4
Dominik Hasek, 2008 | 41 | 18 | 23 | 43.9% | -5 | | 4 | 2 | 2 | 50.0% | 0
|||||||||||
Martin Brodeur, 1992 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 50.0% | 0 | | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.0% | -1
Martin Brodeur, 1994 | 47 | 31 | 16 | 66.0% | 15 | | 17 | 14 | 3 | 82.4% | 11
Martin Brodeur, 1995 | 40 | 24 | 16 | 60.0% | 8 | | 20 | 11 | 9 | 55.0% | 2
Martin Brodeur, 1996 | 77 | 44 | 33 | 57.1% | 11 | | | | | |
Martin Brodeur, 1997 | 67 | 45 | 22 | 67.2% | 23 | | 10 | 7 | 3 | 70.0% | 4
Martin Brodeur, 1998 | 70 | 40 | 30 | 57.1% | 10 | | 6 | 5 | 1 | 83.3% | 4
Martin Brodeur, 1999 | 70 | 34 | 36 | 48.6% | -2 | | 7 | 1 | 6 | 14.3% | -5
Martin Brodeur, 2000 | 72 | 44 | 28 | 61.1% | 16 | | 23 | 15 | 8 | 65.2% | 7
Martin Brodeur, 2001 | 72 | 38 | 34 | 52.8% | 4 | | 25 | 13 | 12 | 52.0% | 1
Martin Brodeur, 2002 | 73 | 37 | 36 | 50.7% | 1 | | 6 | 5 | 1 | 83.3% | 4
Martin Brodeur, 2003 | 73 | 39 | 34 | 53.4% | 5 | | 24 | 18 | 6 | 75.0% | 12
Martin Brodeur, 2004 | 70 | 40 | 30 | 57.1% | 10 | | 5 | 2 | 3 | 40.0% | -1
Martin Brodeur, 2006 | 73 | 39 | 34 | 53.4% | 5 | | 9 | 6 | 3 | 66.7% | 3
Martin Brodeur, 2007 | 78 | 46 | 32 | 59.0% | 14 | | 11 | 6 | 5 | 54.5% | 1
Martin Brodeur, 2008 | 77 | 52 | 25 | 67.5% | 27 | | 5 | 1 | 4 | 20.0% | -3
Martin Brodeur, 2009 | 31 | 20 | 11 | 64.5% | 9 | | 7 | 5 | 2 | 71.4% | 3
Martin Brodeur, 2010 | 77 | 43 | 34 | 55.8% | 9 | | 5 | 1 | 4 | 20.0% | -3
Martin Brodeur, 2011 | 56 | 27 | 29 | 48.2% | -2 | | | | | |
Martin Brodeur, 2012 | 59 | 27 | 32 | 45.8% | -5 | | 24 | 14 | 10 | 58.3% | 4

10 Best Seasons - Quality Games Percentage
1. Hasek, 1999; 50-14 (78.1%)
2. Roy, 1992; 51-15 (77.3%)
3. Roy, 1990; 41-13 (75.9%)
4. Hasek, 1994; 42-15 (73.7%)
5. Hasek, 1995; 30-11 (73.2%)
6. Hasek, 2006; 31-12 (72.1%)
7. Hasek, 1997; 49-19 (72.1%)
8. Roy, 1989; 33-14 (70.2%)
9. Roy, 1997; 43-19 (69.4%)
10. Roy, 2002; 43-20 (68.3%)

10 Best Seasons - Net Quality Games
1. Hasek, 1999; 50-14 (36)
1. Roy, 1992; 51-15 (36)
3. Hasek, 1997; 49-19 (30)
4. Roy, 1990; 41-13 (28)
5. Hasek, 1994; 42-15 (27)
5. Brodeur, 2008; 52-25 (27)
7. Roy, 1997; 43-19 (24)
8. Roy, 2002; 43-20 (23)
8. Brodeur, 1997; 45-22 (23)
10. Roy, 1994; 45-23 (22)
10. Hasek, 1998; 47-25 (22)


10 Best Playoffs - Quality Games Percentage
1. Roy, 1993; 19-1 (95.0%)
2. Roy, 1989; 17-2 (89.5%)
3. Roy, 1986; 17-3 (85.0%)
4. Brodeur, 1998; 5-1 (83.3%)
4. Brodeur, 2002; 5-1 (83.3%)
6. Brodeur, 1994; 14-3 (82.4%)
7. Hasek, 1998; 12-3 (80.0%)
8. Brodeur, 2003; 18-6 (75.0%)
8. Hasek, 2001; 9-3 (75.0%)
10. Roy, 2001; 17-6 (73.9%)

10 Best Playoffs - Net Quality Games
1. Roy, 1993; 19-1 (18)
2. Roy, 1989; 17-2 (15)
3. Roy, 1986; 17-3 (14)
4. Brodeur, 2003; 18-6 (12)
5. Brodeur, 1994; 14-3 (11)
5. Roy, 2001; 17-6 (11)
7. Hasek, 1998; 12-3 (9)
7. Hasek, 1999; 14-5 (9)
9. Roy, 1996; 15-7 (8)
10. Roy, 2000; 12-5 (7)
10. Brodeur, 2000; 15-8 (7)
10. Hasek, 2002; 15-8 (7)

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

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?

When I use mediocre in this context, I mean it in the context of being among the best of the best.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Longevity as an NHL calibre goalie

Terry Sawchuk = NHL starter or member of platoon from age 21-38 = 18 years
Jacques Plante = NHL starter or member of platoon from age 26-44 = 19 years
Glenn Hall = NHL starter or member of a platoon from age 24-37 & age 39 = 15 years

Patrick Roy = NHL starter from age 20-37 = 18 years
Martin Brodeur = NHL starter from age 21-39 = 18-19 years (depending on whether you give him credit for 2004-05)
Dominik Hasek = star in Europe from age 21-25*; NHL starter from 29-37 & 41-43 = 16 years

*See post 30

Ken Dryden = NHL starter from age 24-25 & 27-31 = 7 years

Only Ken Dryden is an outlier when it comes to longevity. Sawchuk, Plante, Roy, and Brodeur have all played either 18 or 19 years. Hasek is at 19 years if you give him full credit for his transition years before becoming an NHL starter, he's at 16 otherwise. Glenn Hall is slightly behind the others with a 15 year NHL career, though I'm sure the ironman streak (502 starts in a row) didn't help his longevity later in life.

 

[quoipourquoi]

When I use mediocre in this context, I mean it in the context of being among the best of the best.

Fair enough, but I don't want us losing perspective when we're discussing a goaltender who only left the top-ten in regular season save percentage in 1986, 1995, and 2001. He didn't exactly have mediocre seasons - and two of the three times that he wasn't an elite starter in a 21/30-team league, he had a Conn Smythe playoff instead.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I find the "quality games" metric that quoipourquoi uses to be very useful. One of the main criticisms of cumulative save percentage is that it is an averaging stat, so good games and bad games are averaged together. So one really good game or one really bad game can skew the overall average.

Whereas in reality, a goalie just needs to be "good enough to win" or "good enough not to lose" in any given game. "Quality games" is useful in that it determines the number of games when a goalie had a save percentage above or below average. Whereas one really good or one really bad game could skew cumulative save percentage.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Interesting that looking at "quality games" fits the "conventional wisdom" in the playoffs that Roy was clearly ahead of Brodeur, who was clearly ahead of Hasek.

And it shows the same thing as adjusted save percentage about the regular season - Hasek was slightly above Roy, and Brodeur was a step down.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I find the "quality games" metric that quoipourquoi uses to be very useful. One of the main criticisms of cumulative save percentage is that it is an averaging stat, so good games and bad games are averaged together. So one really good game or one really bad game can skew the overall average.

Whereas in reality, a goalie just needs to be "good enough to win" or "good enough not to lose" in any given game. "Quality games" is useful in that it determines the number of games when a goalie had a save percentage above or below average. Whereas one really good or one really bad game could skew cumulative save percentage.

The one area where it is flawed is that it doesn't differentiate between a barely-above average performance and a 70-save shutout. I mostly use it to measure consistency or as a short-hand tool to see where goalies lost composure in playoff series - which means a lot, in my opinion (think Giguere in the 2003 Finals).

I almost feel guilty doing the chart with Brodeur, because for all of the reasons that save percentage is unfair to him, when you look at a binary good game or bad game evaluation, he has a lesser margin of error than Hasek and Roy.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

The one area where it is flawed is that it doesn't differentiate between a barely-above average performance and a 70-save shutout. I mostly use it to measure consistency or as a short-hand tool to see where goalies lost composure in playoff series - which means a lot, in my opinion (think Giguere in the 2003 Finals).

Yeah, it doesn't replace cumulative save percentage, but definitely adds something to it. Whereas cumulative save percentage would show a goalie with 5 above average games to be the same as a goalie with 3 amazing games and 2 awful games, quality starts would have the first one at 5-0 and the second one at 3-2.

I almost feel guilty doing the chart with Brodeur, because for all of the reasons that save percentage is unfair to him, when you look at a binary good game or bad game evaluation, he has a lesser margin of error than Hasek and Roy.

Right. When you face few shots, one single shot is much more likely to push you below or above average.

(It also doesn't take into account Brodeur's weird home/road situation or puckhandling, etc, but you know that).

 

[quoipourquoi]

Right. When you face few shots, one single shot is much more likely to push you below or above average.

Exactly.


I casually alluded to it earlier, but I'll state it more bluntly now: Looking at the 1996-97 regular season and playoffs together, if the voting was held in June, does Martin Brodeur get named the best goalie of the year?

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

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%.

Do you have evidence of over counting in Colorado? Roy's stats there don't look too far out of the ordinary at first glance: .920 save percentage and 26.52 SA/60 at home, .917 save percentage and 28.41 SA/60 on the road from '96-97 to '02-03.

One other thing about Roy is that he faced slightly more shots per game than his backups did, even despite his significant home/road split. There are two factors that may account for this, at least to some extent (quality of competition is usually higher for the starter and backups often come in as replacements in blowout scenarios when shot rates usually drop), but it's still quite possible that Roy was a bit of an anti-Brodeur that he may have "created" around half a shot per game.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

The one area where it is flawed is that it doesn't differentiate between a barely-above average performance and a 70-save shutout. I mostly use it to measure consistency or as a short-hand tool to see where goalies lost composure in playoff series - which means a lot, in my opinion (think Giguere in the 2003 Finals).

I agree that these are the drawbacks of the stat. However, if you want to look at whether goalies lost composure, shouldn't you be looking at bad starts? Letting in three goals on 25 shots, as Giguere did twice in the '03 Finals, isn't really evidence of a lack of composure, in my opinion, at least not on its own.

Is your quality starts stat based solely on comparing to league average, or do you include the 2 or fewer goals against at or above replacement level that Rob Vollman includes in his number? Just wanted to clarify as I've seen a few different versions of the stat, and your numbers aren't lining up with some of the others.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Is your quality starts stat based solely on comparing to league average, or do you include the 2 or fewer goals against at or above replacement level that Rob Vollman includes in his number? Just wanted to clarify as I've seen a few different versions of the stat, and your numbers aren't lining up with some of the others.

I don't include the 2 or fewer goals rule. I do league-average, and I remove meaningless shutout relief performances.

When I first presented the statistic, I did it as a focus on below-average games. Once someone told me how similar it was to quality starts, the name started to stick.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1220987

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Hasek's 1997 playoffs and offseason

Exactly.


I casually alluded to it earlier, but I'll state it more bluntly now: Looking at the 1996-97 regular season and playoffs together, if the voting was held in June, does Martin Brodeur get named the best goalie of the year?

I think Brodeur definitely gets named the best goalie of the year, but I don't need stats to tell me that. Hasek was absolutely brutalized in the press for how he handled himself in the 1997 playoffs.

I think the media storm surrounding Hasek's 1997 playoffs was justified at first, but when he proceeded to not play nice with the media, they probably took it too far.

For those who don't remember, here's are excerpts from an article by Michael Farber entitled, Headed for Trouble? The behavior of Dominik Hasek, Buffalo's star goalie, added a bizarre twist to the playoffs:

Hasek is such a spectacular talent—"best goaltender on the planet" is attached to his name so casually that it seems more a title than a description—that only he could dominate a game from his couch. The Sabres, behind the impeccable play of Hasek's understudy, Steve Shields, beat the Senators 3-0 at Ottawa's Corel Centre to tie their first-round playoff series at three games and force Game 7 on Tuesday. But it was the absence of Hasek, who had mildly sprained the medial collateral ligament in his right knee in Game 3, that was the talk of the series and, in fact, the entire NHL. Hasek, who is expected to become the first goalie since Jacques Plante in 1962 to be named the league's Most Valuable Player, had picked up the Sabres by the scruff of their rough necks and carried them to first place in the Northeast Division. Now he had become a different kind of MVP: Mystifying, Vanishing, Peculiar.
...
•During warmups before Game 3 in Ottawa, Hasek, who had played well in the Sabres' 3-1 opening-game victory and 3-1 Game 2 defeat, grew agitated when he repeatedly failed to stop the puck. At one point he whirled and smashed his stick against the crossbar. Hasek then skated out of his crease, and a posse of his teammates formed a wall and gently directed him hack to the net to continue practicing. As the arena lights dimmed for pregame festivities at the first home playoff match in the Senators' five-year history, Shields remained on the ice, taking shots in the dark from teammates so he could be ready to play if needed.

•When forward Sergei Zholtok scored Ottawa's first goal at 15:33 of the second period of Game 3, Hasek was leaning back on his knees in the crease. The goalie kicked out his left leg, then his right. He gave no indication that he had been injured. He did not wave a trainer onto the ice. He did not test the leg after scrambling to his skates. He simply skated to the bench and then headed down the tunnel to the dressing room with left wing Brad May in pursuit.

"I was in shock when I saw Dominik come off the ice," May says. "I was just following him into the room because maybe a skate or a strap in his pads had broken. I le says he's hurt, and you get that lump in your throat. "

•Early in the third period of that game, Hasek, who had been examined by the team doctor, returned to the bench in street clothes. He was smiling and talking with teammates. He had neither crutches nor a cane, nor did he have an ice pack on his knee. After the game, a 3-2 Buffalo win, the Sabres called his status "day-to-day." Hasek made his own assessment. "My feeling is I won't be back until the end of the series," he said.

Hasek's pronouncement proved to be accurate, but it didn't jibe with the way NHL players usually go about their business. In the postseason, players take the ice even if they're hurt. The only medical excuse for sitting out is a note from the coroner. If a player can't perform, he is expected to at least make a conspicuous effort to get back into the lineup. Consider the case of two-time playoff MVP Patrick Roy of the Colorado Avalanche, who while playing for the Montreal Canadiens in 1993 suffered a bruised shoulder in the second period of Game 5 of a first-round series against the Quebec Nordiques and had to leave the game. He took a shot of a painkiller and returned for the third period. (The following year Roy played a first-round series against the Boston Bruins with appendicitis.) One of Hasek's teammates, forward Matthew Barnaby, provided a sterling example of the playoff ethos last week, returning for Game 5 in Buffalo on Friday despite having suffered a knee sprain on April 1 that was supposed to have sidelined him for six weeks

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1010020/index.htm

Steve Shields would win Game 7 against Ottawa but would lose in 5 to Philly in the next round.

The short version:

Hasek left a playoff game against Ottawa with a suspicious injury and did not return, but he was well enough to accost writer Jim Kelley.

http://letsgosabres.outlastmedia.net/pressbox/fullstory.php?newsid=10080

Hasek then proceeded to get coach Ted Nolan fired:

BUFFALO, N.Y. - As if the Buffalo Sabres didn't have enough problems, now all-world goalie Dominik Hasek has said he has had enough of all-league coach Ted Nolan.
Hasek, named the NHL's Most Valuable Player and top goalie last week, said Tuesday that he has no respect for Nolan and would rather not see the Coach of the Year behind the bench next season.
Hasek, however, would return to the Sabres even if Nolan is rehired. Nolan's contract expires on Monday.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/sports/article/Hasek-wants-Nolan-to-leave-Sabres-3113180.php#ixzz296rBMRW6

Some of Hasek's teammates were not happy with him:

WHEATFIELD, N.Y. (AP) -- Goaltender Dominik Hasek will be ready for any confrontation with forward Matthew Barnaby -- whether it means talking out their problems or handling them on the ice.
In an offseason interview with The Hockey News, Barnaby addressed rumors that he and one of his Buffalo Sabres teammates placed a wager on who would be the first to run Hasek after the goalie criticized former coach Ted Nolan.
"No doubt," Barnaby said, "it'll be me."

http://www.canoe.ca/HockeyBuffaloArchive/sep8_hasek.html

This article has the years wrong dates (it was the 1997-98 season when Hasek was booed and the 1997 playoffs when he was accused of quitting on his team), but summarizes the media perception quite well:

Dominik Hasek is perhaps the most beloved player in Sabres history. But at one point he was the subject of much vitriol from the fans in Buffalo. At the beginning of the 1997 season, Hasek was booed vociferously by the home crowd. This is especially surprising given that Hasek won the Vezina trophy the previous season as the league's top goalie. The reason for the resentment had nothing to do with his play but rather his lack of playing.

During the 1996 playoffs, in Game 3 against the Senators, Hasek left with an apparent injury. He skated right off the ice and straight into the trainer’s room without even looking at head coach Ted Nolan. The two had not been getting along and many feel Hasek faked or at least exaggerated the injury. Hasek was cleared to play in the next round but refused to do so.

On the day Hasek was presented with the Vezina Trophy he said "it would be better for him" if Nolan didn't return as coach the following season. That same day Nolan won the Coach of the Year award. The Sabres offered Nolan a one-year deal clearly knowing he would reject it. With Nolan gone, the Sabres signed Lindy Ruff, who is still coaching in Buffalo even though Hasek moved on after the 2000 season.

http://www.realclearsports.com/lists/coach_killers/dominik_hasek_ted_nolan.html

Yes, as the above article indicated, you had the strange situations where Buffalo's home fans booed Hasek, the defending Hart winner, for the first few months of the 1997-98 season, based on his actions in the 1997 playoffs and the subsequent offseason.

From 10/8/1997: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/587514/Hasek-booed-by-fans-stomped-by-Stars.html?pg=all
From 11/16/1997: http://www.nytimes.com/1997/11/16/sports/nhl-last-night-new-jersey-tops-hasek.html

By the second half of 1997-98, the boos turned to cheers again as Hasek was on his way to capture his second consecutive Hart. Edit: The 1998 Winter Olympics was probably the turning point that brought the media back to Hasek's side.

 

[Canadiens1958]

The Habs Effect

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.

This is an interesting idea but not supported. 1955 Red Wings with Sawchuk played the Canadiens even 7W/7L. The swing that you attribute to the Habs effect comes down to the 1956 Habs scoring 6 fewer goals than the 1955 Habs but reducing their GA by 27. The 1955 Red Wings saw their GF drop by 21 vs 6 for the Habs but their GA increased by 14 versus the Habs drop of 27.

Habs changed coaches, made Plante the undisputed #1 goalie, added four rookies - Provost, H.Richard, Talbot, Turner.The Wings basically replaced Sawchuk with Hall, getting an established defenseman Warren Godfrey in the trade, while adding two rookie forwards Bucyk and Ullman.

Hall has to share in the defensive differential somehow. Either Plante is significantly better than Hall and/or Sawchuk was more important to the Red Wings than claimed. The non-goalie changes alone do not produce a 41 GA swing( Canadiens -27 / Detroit plus 14)

 

[quoipourquoi]

Yes, as the above article indicated, you had the strange situations where Buffalo's home fans booed Hasek, the defending Hart winner, for the first few months of the 1997-98 season, based on his actions in the 1997 playoffs and the subsequent offseason.

He also had a particularly slow start to the season in 1997-98.

Through 20 games: 6-10-3, 3.12 GAA, .898 SPCT, 1 SO, 8-12 (40%) Quality Games

It's one of those seasons where the results of the trophy voting would have been interesting in a 1st-Half, 2nd-Half context. It's a decent amount of baggage for two Hart trophy seasons.

 

[BM67]

Do you have evidence of over counting in Colorado? Roy's stats there don't look too far out of the ordinary at first glance: .920 save percentage and 26.52 SA/60 at home, .917 save percentage and 28.41 SA/60 on the road from '96-97 to '02-03.

One other thing about Roy is that he faced slightly more shots per game than his backups did, even despite his significant home/road split. There are two factors that may account for this, at least to some extent (quality of competition is usually higher for the starter and backups often come in as replacements in blowout scenarios when shot rates usually drop), but it's still quite possible that Roy was a bit of an anti-Brodeur that he may have "created" around half a shot per game.

I haven't worked the numbers for the teams, but here is a season by season breakdown for Roy. (I've compiled Roy's full career splits, but haven't added them to the chart which I'm just copying from another thread.)

Year|H Min%|H SV%|R SV%|H SOG/60|R SOG/60|H Saves/60|R Save/60|SOG Dif|Save Dif|SOG Dif%|Save Dif%
87-88|52.90%|.904|.896|27.88|30.19|25.20|27.04|2.31|1.84|8.29%|7.30%
88-89|65.60%|.912|.902|24.60|31.02|22.43|27.97|6.42|5.54|26.10%|24.70%
89-90|57.42%|.911|.913|27.43|30.60|24.99|27.93|3.17|2.94|11.56%|11.76%
90-91|60.00%|.905|.908|26.98|31.59|24.41|28.68|4.61|4.27|17.09%|17.49%
91-92|55.93%|.920|.908|25.62|29.97|23.58|27.20|4.35|3.62|16.98%|15.35%
92-93|54.28%|.886|.903|28.91|31.90|25.62|28.80|2.99|3.18|10.34%|12.41%
93-94|58.65%|.914|.923|29.10|32.12|26.59|29.64|3.02|3.05|10.38%|11.47%
94-95|56.45%|.919|.892|30.20|33.70|27.75|30.07|3.50|2.32|11.59%|8.36%
95-96|55.09%|.903|.914|29.54|31.11|26.67|28.44|1.57|1.77|5.31%|6.64%
96-97|55.54%|.914|.934|28.86|31.86|26.38|29.74|3.00|3.36|10.40%|12.74%
97-98|51.76%|.917|.915|26.60|30.65|24.39|28.05|4.05|3.66|15.23%|15.01%
98-99|55.84%|.921|.912|27.22|27.90|25.07|25.44|0.68|0.37|2.50%|1.48%
99-00|53.86%|.925|.902|25.68|27.59|23.76|24.88|1.91|1.12|7.44%|4.71%
00-01|56.51%|.913|.913|24.76|26.06|22.60|23.78|1.30|1.18|5.25%|5.22%
01-02|57.86%|.924|.927|24.46|27.89|22.59|25.85|3.43|3.26|14.02%|14.43%
02-03|54.57%|.925|.914|28.13|26.60|26.02|24.32|-1.53|-1.70|-5.44%|-6.53%

For the years I've worked the league numbers the H-R SOG/60 difference ranges from 1.73 to 3.18 or 5.93% to 11.19%.

Using the H/R split data from HockeyReference here is the league average SOGA/60 for
1988-89: Home: 28.42 Road: 31.60 Dif: 3.18 or 11.19%
1989-90: Home: 28.52 Road: 31.26 Dif: 2.74 or 9.61%.
1990-91: Home: 28.11 Road: 30.74 Dif: 2.63 or 9.36%.
2006-07: Home: 28.22 Road: 30.24 Dif: 2.02 or 7.16%.
2007-08: Home: 27.54 Road: 29.92 Dif: 2.38 or 8.64%.
2008-09: Home: 28.81 Road: 30.90 Dif: 2.09 or 7.25%.
2009-10: Home: 28.98 Road: 30.87 Dif: 1.89 or 6.52%.
2010-11: Home: 29.15 Road: 30.88 Dif: 1.73 or 5.93%.
2011-12: Home: 28.37 Road: 30.33 Dif: 1.96 or 6.91%.

One would need to study both teams shots to determine under/over counting, but allowing more shots at home is probably a good indication of over counting.

Hasek

Year|H Min%|H SV%|R SV%|H SOG/60|R SOG/60|H Saves/60|R Save/60|SOG Dif|Save Dif|SOG Dif%|Save Dif%
93-94|50.92%|.926|.933|26.56|28.95|24.60|27.02|2.39|2.42|9.00%|9.84%
94-95|48.11%|.939|.922|29.83|30.77|28.03|28.37|0.94|0.34|3.15%|1.21%
95-96|51.30%|.933|.907|34.33|36.35|32.04|32.96|2.02|0.92|5.88%|2.87%
96-97|54.27%|.925|.935|31.47|33.41|29.11|31.24|1.94|2.13|6.16%|7.32%
97-98|55.60%|.938|.923|30.77|30.30|28.87|27.96|-0.47|-0.91|-1.53%|-3.15%
98-99|47.81%|.932|.941|29.49|29.52|27.48|27.77|0.03|0.29|0.10%|1.06%
99-00|51.05%|.911|.926|24.97|29.53|22.75|27.33|4.56|4.58|18.26%|20.13%
00-01|57.36%|.926|.914|27.01|25.87|25.00|23.64|-1.14|-1.36|-4.22%|-5.44%
01-02|51.77%|.910|.921|25.62|25.65|23.32|23.62|0.03|0.30|0.12%|1.29%
03-04|39.93%|.931|.888|26.69|21.90|24.85|19.45|-4.79|-5.40|-17.95%|-21.73%
05-06|48.88%|.935|.916|28.31|27.52|26.46|25.21|-0.79|-1.25|-2.79%|-4.72%
06-07|60.13%|.923|.899|22.88|24.46|21.11|21.98|1.58|0.87|6.91%|4.12%
07-08|55.80%|.916|.886|20.59|23.39|18.86|20.73|2.80|1.87|13.60%|9.92%

Here are the Devils home/road GF and GA and SOG over the last 12 seasons.

Year|H GF|H GA|H SF|H SA|R GF|R GA|R SF|R SA
1998-99|123|102|1309|947|125|94|1256|1079
1999-00|133|92|1365|1003|118|111|1352|1098
2000-01|145|92|1288|956|150|103|1302|1068
2001-02|112|88|1131|892|93|99|1314|1008
2002-03|121|85|1301|904|95|81|1298|1031
2003-04|107|87|1180|921|106|77|1255|1078
2005-06|121|104|1156|1122|112|121|1244|1276
2006-07|101|93|1133|1063|105|100|1221|1269
2007-08|104|93|1190|1078|94|100|1172|1179
2008-09|134|97|1324|1152|104|110|1374|1263
2009-10|123|87|1179|1026|93|99|1280|1187
2010-11|92|100|1173|1074|79|107|1171|1110
2011-12|111|102|1134|1074|105|103|1119|1125
Total|1527|1222|15863|13212|1379|1305|16358|14771
T/GP|2.86|2.29|29.76|24.79|2.59|2.45|30.69|27.71

SV% are higher for both teams in Devils' road games with an additional 3.85 shots per game over the Devils' home average.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Sometime during the previous Top 100 projects (2008 and 2009), some of you made pretty convincing arguments that Plante should be ranked over Sawchuk and Hall. Can someone give a refresher?

I feel that we've had a lot of good conversation here, but nobody has really been talking about Plante.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

Fair enough, but I don't want us losing perspective when we're discussing a goaltender who only left the top-ten in regular season save percentage in 1986, 1995, and 2001. He didn't exactly have mediocre seasons - and two of the three times that he wasn't an elite starter in a 21/30-team league, he had a Conn Smythe playoff instead.

Honestly, when we are talking about the greatest of all time, top 10 finishes aren't on my radar. Outside of top 3 finishes barely interest me.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Honestly, when we are talking about the greatest of all time, top 10 finishes aren't on my radar. Outside of top 3 finishes barely interest me.

Then may I ask how Brodeur has caught your interest enough outside of 1997 (3rd) and 2007 (3rd) for you to have cited the head-to-head Vezina voting record?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Weaknesses in Ken Dryden's resume

Why I had Dryden 7th of these 7 on my submitted list - he has 2 weaknesses on his resume the other 6 do not.

Until recently, I used to rank Dryden over Hall, based on playoffs. I didn't this time. Part of that is a newfound respect for Hall (who I had over Sawchuk on my list; though I'm willing to listen to arguments to the contrary). But part of it is because of two issues with Dryden's career that don't affect the other six.

1. Longevity. See Post 104. Dryden dominated the NHL for 7 seasons, but every other goalie up for consideration this round played at a fairly high level between 15-19 seasons. Count me among those who thinks Terry Sawchuk wasn't playing at an all-time great level after his first 5 seasons, but something is to be said for just keeping an NHL starter's job in a 6 team league.

2. Dryden was not as good against the European East/West game as he was against the traditional North American game.

In the Summit Series:

Ken Dryden was the top goalie of the 1970s...

However Dryden seemed to struggle against international competition, namely the Soviets. Phil Esposito once called a Ken Dryden a "damn octopus" because of his hulking size and quick arms and legs. For much of the series Dryden looked like a fish on land. He was clearly outplayed by Tretiak and at times his partner Tony Esposito.

Dryden had the unfortunate task of playing game one against the Soviets. His goaltending style was to cut down the angles by challenging the shooter and making the most of his immense size. But the Soviets used their cute offense consisting of sudden criss-crossing passes and shifty movement to make Dryden move around and lose his angles, and thus make him look silly at times. Backup Tony Esposito benefited from his bird's eye view on the bench to notice this and he was able to make adjustments to his game when he got the call in games 2 and 3, and stayed further back in his net and avoided challenging the shooter.

http://www.1972summitseries.com/dryden.html

Dryden was stylistically the converse of Jiri Holecek. Holecek stayed deep in his net and gave the Soviets more trouble than any other goalie they faced, but stuggled in a very limited number of games against Canada.

Dryden had a 4.75 GAA in 4 games in the 1972 Summit Series and a 3.50 GAA in 2 games in the 1979 Challenge Cup (when the NHL All Stars lost 2-1 to the Soviet All Stars). He also played a fairly significant number of games for the Canadiens against touring Soviet clubs, and while he didn't play poorly, he didn't play quite up to his NHL standards. The Flyers (and Bernie Parent) tended to do better against the Soviet touring clubs than the Canadiens did.

Given the fact that from about the 1980s onward, the NHL became a combination of the traditional North/South North American game and the East/West European game, I don't think we should completely gloss over Dryden's struggles against the East/West game just because it is such a small part of his resume.

I think Dryden is without a doubt a top 10 goalie of all time, but when we are talking about the best of the best, he does have a couple of weak spots on his resume that the other 6 guys here don't have.

Thoughts?

 

[quoipourquoi]

I think Dryden is without a doubt a top 10 goalie of all time, but when we are talking about the best of the best, he does have a couple of weak spots on his resume that the other 6 guys here don't have.

Thoughts?

I find that the longevity definitely played a factor in him being towards the lesser-end of my Top-Seven. I don't hold the international performances as strongly against him as others do, though if any international series has caught my interest with its sample size, it's most certainly the Summit Series.

The longevity is a weak-spot for sure, but on the other hand, who gets punished less on our lists: Dryden for retiring or Sawchuk for being a lesser goalie after his prime? Does being there add more to a career than leaving on top?

 

[BM67]

Sawchuk-Plante-Hall Era

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

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

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

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

Of note that Hall never finished 3rd in all-star voting, admittedly with some missing data.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Here's the first entry in my overpass-style analysis of Sawchuk's playoffs. These numbers are from 1950-51, when the Wings dropped their first-round series to Montreal in 6 games. The Habs finished 36 points behind the first-place Wings in the regular season, so it was a notable upset.

The game summaries do not include period-by-period shot counts for the OT games. If anyone knows where they might exist, please share and I will add them to the numbers below. Otherwise, all italicized numbers below are data from Games 3-6 only.

1: = 42
2: = 42
3: 5-11-8 = 24
4: 6-11-6 = 23
5: 7-9-9 = 25
6: 9-10-7 = 26

First periods - 1 goals against, GAA of 0.50; 28 shots against, 0 goals, sv% of 1.000
Remarkably, Sawchuk's only first-period goal was allowed in Game 1. This was by far his best period.
He never allowed the first goal of the game in the first or second period; he allowed the first goal one time in the 3rd and one time in the 3rd OT for a total of 2/6 games where he allowed the first goal.

Second periods - 4 goals, GAA of 2.00; 41 shots against, 4 goals, sv% of .902
When Detroit was leading after 1 - 2 games, 4 goals, 20 shots, sv% .800
When Detroit was tied after 1 - 4 games, 0 goals, 21 shots, sv% 1.000
When Detroit was trailing after 1 - n/a

Note that Detroit's first-period shutout streak meant they never trailed going into the second period. While Sawchuk's numbers here look ordinary, it should be noted that Montreal scored 3 times in the second period of Game 5 alone. The Gazette's summary indicates that Sawchuk was weak on two of those goals, which put Detroit on the path to a critical loss. But Sawchuk also surrendered only 1 second period goal in the other 5 games, combined with his first-period record. Aside from one nightmarish period, he was pretty close to perfect through two periods in this series.

Third periods - 6 goals, GAA of 3.00; 30 shots against, 5 goals, sv% of.833
When Detroit was leading after 2 - 2 games, , 0 goals, 6 shots, sv% 1.000
When Detroit was tied after 2 - 3 games, 4 goals, 15 shots, sv% .733
When Detroit trailed after 2 - 1 game, 2 goals, 9 shots, sv% .777

Through 4 games, Sawchuk had only let in a single 3rd-period goal. In Game 5, after his awful second period, the Red Wings opened up their attack in a rally attempt and predictably surrendered 2 more goals. In the final game, the Habs scored early in the third on a deflection and the Wings again tried to turn it into a track meet and allowed 2 more. This was his worst period, but only by means of having 2 bad ones and 4 good ones.

Overtime - Two games, 2 goals against, zero wins

OT was cruel to the young Sawchuk as he lost his first two career playoff games back-to-back in 4OT and then 3OT.



In general, for a rookie Sawchuk performed admirably in this series. In the first 4 and and one-third games he played 20 periods and allowed only 5 goals. Then the second period of Game 5 happened, and he fell to pieces. Next game he shuts out the Habs for 2 periods, then falls apart in the third.

I thought this quote from the Gazette was telling, and very very sad:

Terry Sawchuk suffered from nerves in the last two games of the series. He broke down and cried in the dressing room after each of them. Jack Adams tried to comfort the rookie goaler by saying, "Forget it, Terry. You did your best, but that's hockey."

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

He also had a particularly slow start to the season in 1997-98.

Through 20 games: 6-10-3, 3.12 GAA, .898 SPCT, 1 SO, 8-12 (40%) Quality Games

It's one of those seasons where the results of the trophy voting would have been interesting in a 1st-Half, 2nd-Half context. It's a decent amount of baggage for two Hart trophy seasons.

If a slow start was baggage for Hasek, then he had baggage virtually every season of his career. The only thing that differed in '97-98 was that it took him about 10 games longer than usual to play out of it, but he pretty much always came out of the gate slowly.

Here's an amazing stat: Hasek's career save percentage was .904 in October, and .925 from November 1 onwards including playoffs. His second-worst month was .919, and his save percentage was higher from Nov-June than October in 15 of the 16 years of his career.

1991-92: 2-1-0, 4.50, .857 in Oct, 8-3-1, 2.14, .906 rest
1992-93: 2-2-0, 3.92, .851 in Oct, 9-8-4, 3.03, .902 rest
1993-94: 0-3-0, 3.14, .896 in Oct, 30-17-6, 1.88, .932 rest
1994-95: No games played in Oct
1995-96: 3-6-0, 2.92, .913 in Oct, 19-24-6, 2.81, .921 rest
1996-97: 5-5-0, 2.71, .910 in Oct, 32-15-10, 2.20, .933 rest
1997-98: 3-6-2, 3.33, .894 in Oct, 30-17-11, 1.87, .939 rest
1998-99: 4-3-2, 2.08, .931 in Oct, 26-15-12, 1.84, .938 rest
1999-00: 1-4-1, 3.03, .901 in Oct, 14-7-5, 1.96, .925 rest
2000-01: 3-4-1, 2.53, .906 in Oct, 34-20-3, 2.04, .923 rest
2001-02: 7-2-0, 2.46, .913 in Oct, 34-13-8, 2.12, .916 rest
2003-04: 4-3-0, 2.43, .901 in Oct, 4-0-2, 1.94, .915 rest
2005-06: 6-2-0, 2.09, .927 in Oct, 22-8-4, 2.09, .925 rest
2006-07: 4-3-1, 2.24, .892 in Oct, 34-8-5, 2.02, .916 rest
2007-08: 4-2-1, 2.68, .877 in Oct, 23-8-2, 2.03, .907 rest

I think this is one of the main reasons that Hasek took some time to establish himself as an NHL goalie (of course on top of his unorthodox style, the goalie glut in Chicago, the Hawks' inability to evaluate talent, and the injury in January 1993 that derailed Hasek just as he was establishing himself as a starter in Buffalo). Hasek's two awful Octobers (and the presumably relatively mediocre training camps that likely preceded them) probably played a big role in how both the Hawks and Sabres rated him, even though his November-June numbers were great (.905 career save percentage after Nov. 1 through the end of the '93 playoffs).

I don't know if Hasek spent his summers sitting on a couch in the Czech Republic and figured he would just play himself into shape in training camp, but I wouldn't be at all surprised. In addition to the things mentioned by TDMM, Hasek also had a DUI in '95, he had a contract holdout and he had a famous off-ice altercation in the Czech Republic. Hasek was a jerk, he wasn't nice to the fans and he wasn't a great teammate. It would have been better if he wasn't all of those things, but maybe it was just part of the eccentric genius package that enabled him to become a star. If I thought he was close enough with anyone else then I can see how those things might become a tiebreaking factor, but right now I don't think anyone else comes close enough for that to matter, unless someone here is able to bring something up to seriously undermine his numbers.