bluesfan94
Registered User
I'm sorry, first of all, I can't believe we're talking about Tim Thomas with only 24 names on the board of "best goaltenders in hockey history" - I mean, that's just disappointing. But I just don't get what this post has to do with anything relating to this project...what other goalies are getting credit for major junior and college success? That's not serious, right?
And being the best goalie in the 4th or 5th best league in the world, super...we didn't even dip this low for Holecek...
This is a great instance where we're creating a narrative to back numbers...and it's weird because the history unfolded in front of us...but look at how hard we have to reach to reverse justify these statistics! College all-star teams, a mid-tier professional program that has import rules, the AHL (not the pinnacle AHL like it was just before expansion, certainly, the "you aren't good enough to play in the NHL" AHL)...look at the strain to try to make it work for him...why? is there a big collusion, secret club thing that I'm not aware of?
Journeyman goalie finds defensive team - posts great numbers. Loses job. Posts great numbers. Quits. ...named one of the best goalies in history. Really? That didn't take much...my goodness...can we talk about something relevant now, please...I'm sorry to be so ornery here, but it's a complete waste of time to be discussing him...at least right now...we have to decide the 25th best goalie in hockey history now and we're sifting through NCAA All-Star teams from 20 years ago...what are we doing here?
Like I said in an edit, that wasn't meant as a justification of his placement at this point on the list, nor do I necessarily think that Thomas belongs anywhere close to the top 25. That was just a little bit of an award-based backing to the assertion that Thomas had performed well, or even elite at all levels he played.
Now, to be fair to that story, it wasn't simply that he posted great numbers; he won Vezinas and Smythes. It seems unfair to him to discount the fact that he won trophies simply because he didn't have longevity. Now, to question the role the team had, the system had, and the competition had in regards to his deservedness of the Vezinas and the relative strength of the Vezinas is completely acceptable, but to disregard them entirely is silly. So, too, is simply tossing aside his stellar 2011 cup run.
If you want to judge Thomas, at least try to be objective. I wonder, not targeted at you specifically, if that'll be one of the difficulties we have in judging modern era goaltenders (to be fair, this didn't seem to be a problem with Brodeur). With Thomas, it's a lot easier to judge using bias because he is so current, he's fresh in our memories, and he's relatively controversial off of the ice. Looking back at older goaltenders, we tend to judge based on stats and awards, as well as newpaper accounts, and with these metrics, it's hard to discount Thomas on that measure.