Round 2, Vote 7 (HOH Top Goaltenders)

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Of course when Clancy says he was the best, we discount that, right?

I take what King Clancy says as seriously as I would take the opinion of any ONE man. But realize it is just one man, and he did play with Connell for Connell's peak, and while he did win a Cup with Benedict, he also saw the worst of Benedict.

How about something to help put HoF goalies who may have played as many as 6 of their best 7 seasons before post season all-star voting existed on "level ground"?

I agree that looking at pre-1931 Hart voting is of limited use. It basically just confirms that Roy Worters was the best goalie of the late 1920s, but I wasn't even comfortable saying that for sure until seeing the GM-voted All-Star teams. Even so, I think if a goalie finished WAY ahead of everyone else in Hart voting, it probably means he was the best, but I don't think you can just go down the list of Hart voting like it was the best players.

Here is what I can say with confidence about Connell before the official All-Star Teams.

1924-25: We don't have GM All-Star games, but in Connell's first season, Ottawa's GAA went from 1st to 4th after letting Benedict go, so I doubt Connell was very good. Benedict was way ahead of all other goalies in Hart voting.
1925-26: Worters voted 1st by GMs and way ahead of other goalies in Hart voting. No records beyond that. Ottawa leads in GAA again.
1926-27: Worters voted 1st by GMs, no goalie receives significant Hart votes. Hainsworth led in GAA for the next 3 years.
1927-28: Worters voted 1st by GMs and is Hart runner up. We have full All Star voting and Worters is first in a landslide. Connell is extremely close to Hainsworth for 2nd.
1928-29: Worters voted 1st by GMs and wins the Hart. No records beyond that.
1929-30: We don't have GM All Star Teams, Gardiner led in Hart votes among goalies but we don't know by how much.


So what do we know about Connell?

• 1924-25: He probably wasn't all that great in his rookie year, as Ottawa's GAA skyrocketed, then recovered the following year. As far as I know, dumping Benedict was their biggest roster change.
• 1925-26 to 1929-30: We know with a good degree of certainty that Connell was never considered the best goalie in the league, but beyond that, we don't know anything. The only season in this five-year period for which we have votes is 1927-28, and he was a single vote out of 10 GMs from being a 2nd Team All Star over Vezina winner Hainsworth. I think it's quite possible he would have finished 2nd or 3rd in All Star voting in other seasons for which we don't have records. You can't just assume that he would not have, just because we don't have the records.
• 1930-31 and on: We have mostly complete records and the only time Connell was a factor in All-Star voting was 1934-35, when he finished 3rd.

Basically, Connell was never considered the best goalie in the league. Through 1930, he would have been voted the 2nd or 3rd best goalie between 1-5 times (your guess is as good as mine). From 1931 on, he was voted the 3rd best goalie once.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Seriously, what's that mean?

Seems like a number of voters are hellbent on proving their own lists (or is it the ATD list?) right.

The aggregate list was very similar to the ATD list, but our final list here is turning out very different from both of them.

Speaking of which...

Who were the Detroit Falcons who obtained ASTeams votes that season?

Hec Kilrea received 3 1st place and 3 2nd place votes at LW, and depending on how you count the votes, Hec was either 3rd or 4th in overall LW All-Star voting behind Busher Jackson and Aurel Joliat (Bun Cook had 2 1st place and 5 2nd place votes for LW). Ebbie Goodfellow received 3 1st Team votes at RW and 1 2nd Team Vote at LW. Doug Young (like Alec Connell) received a single 2nd Team vote for the 1931-32 AS team. He would get more votes later in his career, though.

Sorry don´t know how to quote those scanned versions.

You can't copy and paste from scanned versions. You have to manually take the time to type out what the scanned version says, which is only sometimes worth the effort.

Not a single word on CuJo.

Startling statement : CuJo will be in my Top-4 this round. Too much consistency at a high level, playing with uneven teams, in direct competition with Roy, Hasek (and, to a lesser extent, Brodeur and Belfour), a few great playoff performances, great durability.

I'm probably going to have Barrasso in my top 4 and Cujo in my "middle 4," though I do get there is a consistency case for Cujo. I actually had Cujo and Beezer right next to each other (and well below Barrasso) on my submitted list, but maybe I should have had Cujo higher.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

I'm leaving at the moment, but...

Joseph had a longer "relevant" career than Beezer, and aside from a 1st AST (which was, what, 1/14 of Beezer's career?! And came when the competition was not exactly strong), I fail to even see how Beezer comes close to Joseph.

Good lord, what? Beezer factored into the Vezina and all-star voting every year he played on the expansion Florida Panthers. That's a stretch from '93/94 to '97/98. Think of who he's taking votes from during that period (hint: a few of them have already been voted in during this process), and then realize that he actually has multiple years factoring into the Vezina and all-star voting in the '80s, too (including his big season in '85/86, obviously).

Joseph faced the same group of goalies, but only started taking serious amount of votes (like, Beezer mid-90s level votes) once they were all past their prime. Belfour was 33 when Joseph was Vezina runner-up and 4th in Hart voting, as were Roy and Barrasso. Hasek 34. Sure, these guys all aged pretty well (lol), but it's that version of those guys that Brodeur, Tugnutt, and Joseph were taking votes from at that point. Beezer faced those guys at their best, and while on an expansion team for a lot, if not most, of it. We can toss '85/86 and his other Vezina/all-star votes from the late 80s if you like, but look at what he did after that.

Then you have the fact that Beezer platooned for a while, something Joseph never really did.

Platooned for a while when, and which top goalies at the time were used any differently? And still, outside of Beezers first cup of coffee in '83/84, and his last season in '01/02, I think he played 50%+ of his teams' games every year for something like 17 or 18 straight years. Only Joseph has years where someone in-house played more games than him (Ranford in '95/96, Legace in '03/04), if I'm not mistaken.

I think consistency is extremely important in the Post-WHA-Merger era. Joseph gave its teams just that.

Any more than an expansion franchise not having to look for a goalie for 5 years? The only place Joseph ever spent as long as 5 years, here's the result:

St. Louis ('90/91-'94/95): 105 pts, 83 pts, 85 pts, 91 pts, 61 pts

I know what you're saying about consistency of individual performance at the position, but it's such a nebulous concept that I just don't know if you can warp it around to something that puts him above anyone at this level. Instead of consistency, I'd point to Cujo's ability to give his teams better play in the playoffs. That's what sticks out the most to me, and seems the most easily defended, as well.

And... Gerry Cheevers... really?!?!?!?!

(I just covered the possibly candidates for last spot : not tackling on Thomas, Barrasso because I don't see them as plausible "lasts", but they can be according to some metrics... I guess.)

Oh, don't get me wrong. Cheevers is exactly why it's hard to say for sure whether Joseph would be last on my (irrelevant and non-existent) list or not.

 

[vecens24]

With my last failure I accidently find this. It is probably the strongest defending speach to Connell. I too agree that these newspaperarticles are tricky because they give opinions only from here and there. Its wroted by sport columnist "The Coach" to Ottawa Citizen in 1945. I know it doesn´t sound promising but decided to give it anyway because it offers some refreshingly strong opinions. Calling some all star voters not qualified, Wilf Cude flash in a hockey pan and so on.

So Ottawa Citizen Nov 15,1945
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=za0uAAAAIBAJ&sjid=B9wFAAAAIBAJ&pg=6134,2574833&dq=beveridge+connell&hl=en

Sorry don´t know how to quote those scanned versions.

The more interesting part to me there is that another HHOFer (Lionel Conacher) said that he considered Connell to be the best goalie he ever saw (along with Worters).

Good find.

 

[Michael Farkas]

The more interesting part to me there is that another HHOFer (Lionel Conacher) said that he considered Connell to be the best goalie he ever saw (along with Worters).

Good find.

Yeah, it is an interesting piece certainly. I question a bit of it only because I did a good amount of research on the 1935 Finals. And the author states that the Leafs skated circles around the Maroons, but according to lengthy game summaries at the time (not 10 years later), that's not how it happened at all - excepting maybe the first two periods of game 2.

Also interesting that a manager valued Dave Kerr, Normie Smith and Alec Connell the same at one point. I've kind of wondered if we should be talking about Dave Kerr at this point, seems to have maybe gotten lost in the shuffle, no? I'm not really sure to be honest. I've never done that much research on him.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

The more interesting part to me there is that another HHOFer (Lionel Conacher) said that he considered Connell to be the best goalie he ever saw (along with Worters).

Good find.

The exact quote is "Lionel Conacher, who played in front of Connell and Worters, could never separate this pair, but he did think they were the greatest of them all."

It's always good to find corroborating quotes, but this one by itself is really just Conacher praising his teammates, right? Conacher played in front of Charlie Gardiner for a season in 1933-34, but Connell and Worters are the only HHOFers he played in front of for more than a season, aren't they?

 

[vecens24]

The exact quote is "Lionel Conacher, who played in front of Connell and Worters, could never separate this pair, but he did think they were the greatest of them all."

It's always good to find corroborating quotes, but this one by itself is really just Conacher praising his teammates, right? Conacher played in front of Charlie Gardiner for a season in 1933-34, but Connell and Worters are the only HHOFers he played in front of for more than a season, aren't they?

I think you're scrutinizing this one a little too heavily. Within the context of the rest of the article, it seems as if Conacher is saying that he found those two the best. That would certainly include Gardiner who he played with.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I was going to say something about that wording, but I thought I'd look like an anti-Connell propagandist...but yeah, I'm of the opinion that there was ample time in all these game summaries and articles and manager votings and all that to praise Connell and outside of some small patches here and there, it doesn't really happen. His best friend and a former teammate saying that he was better than Benedict at the end of his career and as good as Worters isn't going to be quite enough evidence to be labeled as any more than anecdotal for me personally.

When you read those old articles, they use a lot of superlatives to describe the best players and they do it often...am I incorrect in that? Is that just confirmation bias? Connell just doesn't get that type of praise...it might not be much, but it's noticeable...

He's no schlub...he belongs, just not now...

 

[vecens24]

I was going to say something about that wording, but I thought I'd look like an anti-Connell propagandist...but yeah, I'm of the opinion that there was ample time in all these game summaries and articles and manager votings and all that to praise Connell and outside of some small patches here and there, it doesn't really happen. His best friend and a former teammate saying that he was better than Benedict at the end of his career and as good as Worters isn't going to be quite enough evidence to be labeled as any more than anecdotal for me personally.

When you read those old articles, they use a lot of superlatives to describe the best players and they do it often...am I incorrect in that? Is that just confirmation bias? Connell just doesn't get that type of praise...it might not be much, but it's noticeable...

He's no schlub...he belongs, just not now...

Oh by no means could you consider me something of a Connell apologist here. I was of the opinion for a while that he was overrated for a while in the ATD and I think i had him in the 40s in my original list. I just wanted to point out that quote that I think is something at least.

 

[BraveCanadian]

- Osgood was poor compared to his contemporaries in terms of talent and technical ability. League GMs believed in him early, as he fit in better earlier. Pre-1994 goalie in a post-1994 world, so to speak. Very evident in his limitations. As time went on, Osgood did not improve, fell well behind his contemporaries. GMs took notice, were not fooled.

Osgood completely rebuilt his game during the lockout and played very, very well in back to back Finals runs after that.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Just a random thought - what makes Hap Holmes better than Alec Connell?

Both are fairly low-end but legit HHOFers.

Holmes was the 4th best of his generation, but a clear step down from the top 3 (if you put stock into Lehman seeming to have been much more highly thought of than Holmes by contemporaries). Connell seems like the 5th best of his generation (after Gardiner, Worters, and Thompson/Hainsworth).

 

[seventieslord]

How about something to help put HoF goalies who may have played as many as 6 of their best 7 seasons before post season all-star voting existed on "level ground"?

Worters played most of his best seasons prior to "official" all-star voting too, so I don't know what you're talking about.

Could you have possibly read what TDMM posted and still questioned why Worters should be ahead of Connell?

Just a random thought - what makes Hap Holmes better than Alec Connell?

Both are fairly low-end but legit HHOFers.

Holmes was the 4th best of his generation, but a clear step down from the top 3 (if you put stock into Lehman seeming to have been much more highly thought of than Holmes by contemporaries). Connell seems like the 5th best of his generation (after Gardiner, Worters, and Thompson/Hainsworth).

or just Mickey Ion?

 

[MXD]

Yeah, it is an interesting piece certainly. I question a bit of it only because I did a good amount of research on the 1935 Finals. And the author states that the Leafs skated circles around the Maroons, but according to lengthy game summaries at the time (not 10 years later), that's not how it happened at all - excepting maybe the first two periods of game 2.

Also interesting that a manager valued Dave Kerr, Normie Smith and Alec Connell the same at one point. I've kind of wondered if we should be talking about Dave Kerr at this point, seems to have maybe gotten lost in the shuffle, no? I'm not really sure to be honest. I've never done that much research on him.

I had Dave Kerr ahead of Alec Connell in my original list.

I had Smith in (but lower...)

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

or just Mickey Ion?

I'm not sure if this is sarcasm or not, but you just don't see a variety of media sources calling Holmes "the best goalie of them all" or "the best goalie in the West." I've honestly yet to see a single contemporary who compared Holmes favorably to Vezina, Benedict, or Lehman, but that doesn't mean there weren't any.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Worters played most of his best seasons prior to "official" all-star voting too, so I don't know what you're talking about.

Could you have possibly read what TDMM posted and still questioned why Worters should be ahead of Connell?

I'm pretty sure I've never questioned why Worters should be ahead of Connell, so I don't know what you're talking about.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Joseph had a longer "relevant" career than Beezer, and aside from a 1st AST (which was, what, 1/14 of Beezer's career?! And came when the competition was not exactly strong), I fail to even see how Beezer comes close to Joseph.

I have Joseph ahead of Vanbiesbrouck, but what Vanbiesbrouck did in 1993-94 should not be brushed off that easily just because he lost the 1st Team, Vezina, and Hart in the final stretch of the season. It's not as if 1985-86 is the sole highlight of his career, so I suggest you not treat it as such.

 

[seventieslord]

I'm pretty sure I've never questioned why Worters should be ahead of Connell, so I don't know what you're talking about.

OK, my bad. But you seem to be one of Connell's two biggest advocates right now, mainly because of GAA, and you seem to be perhaps the only one questioning why Worters is already on the list. So given where we are in this process it's not a completely outlandish "accusation" to make, either.

Would you put Worters ahead of Connell?

 

[MXD]

I have Joseph ahead of Vanbiesbrouck, but what Vanbiesbrouck did in 1993-94 should not be brushed off that easily just because he lost the 1st Team, Vezina, and Hart in the final stretch of the season. It's not as if 1985-86 is the sole highlight of his career, so I suggest you not treat it as such.

I'll take a few minutes (okay, 20 to 30 minutes) to peruse once against Beezer's career.
But you're assertion is completely right -- Beezer's "eliteness" isn't restricted to a lone season, and I was wrong to treat it such.

I still think he's in the "lower tier" group -- however, Cheevers is probably a tier in himself, below the lower-tier...

 

[MXD]

Yeah, it is an interesting piece certainly. I question a bit of it only because I did a good amount of research on the 1935 Finals. And the author states that the Leafs skated circles around the Maroons, but according to lengthy game summaries at the time (not 10 years later), that's not how it happened at all - excepting maybe the first two periods of game 2.

Also interesting that a manager valued Dave Kerr, Normie Smith and Alec Connell the same at one point. I've kind of wondered if we should be talking about Dave Kerr at this point, seems to have maybe gotten lost in the shuffle, no? I'm not really sure to be honest. I've never done that much research on him.

Plus... Normie Smith's career is extremely short. When he was good, he was good. But that was two seasons, and his career was basically done after 37-38 (in which he was apparently not that great) -- after three seasons and two half seasons. Basically, Smith is Top-60 material goalie for a whopping two seasons and one half of season, and replacement level player for another year and a half season.

No doubt that he was very good AT SOME POINT. But Normie Smith is a guy I had a my list that a regret a bit about whom i have some regrets. Actually, a very good comparable for Normie Smith is Pelle Lindberg.

Hence my argument about Smith : there are certainly GM's that valued Lindberg as much as they valued guys like Grant Fuhr or Tom Barrasso. Actually, after 84-85, Barrasso and Lindberg were probably the two goalies with the best value in the League. But Barrasso is looking at a 30-ish spot in the list, while Lindberg is nowhere close to that for obvious reasons.

Thus, being "compared" to Smith isn't a bad thing for Connell, as much as being compared to Lindberg isn't a bad thing for Barrasso.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

OK, my bad. But you seem to be one of Connell's two biggest advocates right now, mainly because of GAA, and you seem to be perhaps the only one questioning why Worters is already on the list. So given where we are in this process it's not a completely outlandish "accusation" to make, either.

Would you put Worters ahead of Connell?

Furthering "your bad", is my repetition (tempted to go back and count exactly how many times I said it) of the claim that I'm not necessarily supporting Connell, either. If anything, this has more to do with my opinion that Lehman is among the less deserving candidates, having "proved" less imo with his all-star votes in the PCHA than Connell did competing against the actual best talent around and finishing with what I feel is a stronger resume of both regular and post season play.

So to answer your final question: almost certainly not. But I would be highly suspicious of my own list if they ended up with "too much" separation between them.

 

[seventieslord]

Furthering "your bad", is my repetition (tempted to go back and count exactly how many times I said it) of the claim that I'm not necessarily supporting Connell, either. If anything, this has more to do with my opinion that Lehman is among the less deserving candidates, having "proved" less imo with his all-star votes in the PCHA than Connell did competing against the actual best talent around and finishing with what I feel is a stronger resume of both regular and post season play.

So to answer your final question: almost certainly not. But I would be highly suspicious of my own list if they ended up with "too much" separation between them.

This all goes back to your dismissal of the PCHA, then, and I haven't seen anything that suggests that dismissal is in any way rational.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

OK, my bad. But you seem to be one of Connell's two biggest advocates right now, mainly because of GAA, and you seem to be perhaps the only one questioning why Worters is already on the list. So given where we are in this process it's not a completely outlandish "accusation" to make, either.

Would you put Worters ahead of Connell?

I suspect there must be some silent Connell advocates out there.

Considering the trashing he's getting and even his defenders saying its still not time for him, how else does he come up for this vote?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I suspect there must be some silent Connell advocates out there.

Considering the trashing he's getting and even his defenders saying its still not time for him, how else does he come up for this vote?

Unless someone really makes a case for Hap Holmes, I'm currently leaning towards having Connell in my 5-8 range, back to back with Holmes. But I did have him just a little too high on my original list because I thought "where there is smoke, there must be fire" with regards to his rushed HHOF induction. But I didn't realize that they probably just rushed to get him in before he died from his long illness.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I just had time to read Mike's long post on Connell and this quote stuck out to me:

Almost every Stanley Cup series produces a hero and a goat. There was none of the latter as the Leafs went down to gallant, but hopeless defeat at Maroons hands last night but for Maroons, great honors were won by more than one player.

Of all the Maroons, however, biggest share of the credit for the winning of the Cup went to Alex [sic] Connell, the comeback hero of the 1934-35 season; to Cy Wentworth, the hard-playing defenceman; and to Baldy Northcott and Dave Trottier, hard-shooting wingers.

Calling Connell "the comeback hero" of the 1934-35 season supports the perception that he may have been better in the late 20s when we don't have full All-Star voting records than he was in the 1930s. He received barely any All-Star recognition from 1930-31 (first year of official records) to 1933-34, then finished 3rd in 1934-35 before winning his second Cup that year.

Or am I looking too much into it?

(Edit: If it matters to anyone, the HHOF historical group awarded Cy Wentworth the Retro Conn Smythe for 1935)

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I just had time to read Mike's long post on Connell and this quote stuck out to me:



Calling Connell "the comeback hero" of the 1934-35 season supports the perception that he may have been better in the late 20s when we don't have full All-Star voting records than he was in the 1930s. He received barely any All-Star recognition from 1930-31 (first year of official records) to 1933-34, then finished 3rd in 1934-35 before winning his second Cup that year.

Or am I looking too much into it?

Connell only played 1 game the season before. Perhaps that is what the comeback reference is to.