Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 5

[Dennis Bonvie]

So we’re going to be critical of assessments that placed him above all others (most famously in 1998, which was reasserted by THN in 2010) because they may not have watched his full career as though it’s not enough that it was said of Terry Sawchuk in 1952 at his peak, 1959 after his prime, and 1970 after he died?

What exactly is the window for an acceptable year for quotes about Terry Sawchuk being better than everybody?

It seems less likely that these are a series of short-sighted or ill-informed people and more likely that we’re applying the standards of our time where we have 5 times as many goaltending jobs and ignoring the premium placed on peak level back then given how replaceable everyone was while simultaneously brushing off the point that being able to retain a job long enough to set those records and win Stanley Cups 15 years apart is the evidence of consistently playing at a high level that we’re saying he lacks.

Wow, that's some great (long) sentence!

Sawchuk was clearly better on ice than on paper.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Wow, that's some great (long) sentence!

Sawchuk was clearly better on ice than on paper.

Even just aesthetically, he’s one of the most fascinating players, and it would have been interesting to see if it had played out differently in the final 2/3rds of his career had the league (and hockey culture in general) better protected its players who faced the greatest physical danger.

 

[ImporterExporter]

So we're going to project Sawchuk having a better career had he had the proper equipment?

Beyond 1955 where is the meat?

Why was he consistently outplayed by other goalies and why were those goalies continually rewarded with league recognition?

 

[MXD]

Sorry, but if we're to project Sawchuk having a better career if he had better equipment, we also better have to project Charlie Gardiner having a better career if he had access to better medicine...

 

[ImporterExporter]

The thing is the numbers don't back up Sawchuk being a better goalie than Hall, other than 51-55. But if you don't like to use stats (never the full story anyway) you go to hardware. But then again, the hardware doesn't help Sawchuk's case either.

After 1955 Sawchuk was a postseason AS just twice. "Won" a Vezina (which did not mean what it means today) splitting time 50/50 with Bower, who had better numbers than Sawchuk btw.

Hall's was an AS 11 times after 1955, a Hart top 5 finisher 5 times with numerous other finishes beyond 5th.

Hell, Hall won a Smythe on a team that lost the Cup in 68.

I just don't see any way a person can argue Sawchuk over Hall unless we're just going to count peaks in the regular season.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Nuggets on Hall:

"Glenn's real greatness is the influence his style of play has had on the game. Glenn was able to dominate his goalkeeping position because of his unique butterfly style.

The Vezina, which used to be awarded for GAA, is now given to the goalie considered to be the best, or in fact the first AS goalie. If you extend those standards back to the 50s, Hall would have held a record seven Vezinas, whereas Sawchuk and Plante would have three each...Hall was the consummate team player, respected unconditionally by teammates and opponents, revered by his coaches.

Dave Dryden, a thoughtful and respected man who once shared the nets with Hall for the Blackhawks in Chicago, said of Mr. Goalie "He was the best I ever saw play. There's no question. He always seemed kind of tragic because he didn't get the recognition he should have."

Showing up for work 502 times in a row wasn't important to a man with the fierce pride and high standards of excellence that Hall possessed. Playing 502 games in a row as close to perfection as possible was.

"You know, when you hear so much about the greatest "this" and the best "that" of all time, it's time people knew that Glenn was really the Joe DiMaggio of our game."

To take the high road is to acknowledge that it's not so important to establish a definitive "best ever". But we are talking about goalkeeping and I am a male of the species so I can't help but stress that Hall was simply the best. After all is said and done, there was only one "Number One, Mr. Goalie".

In accordance with the original plan, Hall was in goal for Game 3 at the Garden. According to history, Hall was brilliant. The Bruins knew they were in for a formidable battle. Boston coach Harry Sinden warned the troops that Hall would be ready. Phil Esposito said, "Glenn Hall is the best goalie in the world and we know what we are up against."

The garden was uncomfortably hot, but so was Glenn. The Bruins attacked in waves, and Hall was at his acrobatic best."

Glenn Hall

"A lot of the players told me Hall was the best they saw. I thought they would go with Plante or Sawchuk.

"Well, I think Glenn Hall was probably the best goaltender I've seen."-Garry Peters

Hall, Plante, Worsley...

"Sawchuk." What was the best goalie you saw?

"Oh, I'd have to go with Glenn Hall, I think. Sawchuk was pretty good but Glenn Hall, he was amazing, the things he could do."-John McKenzie

The Rangers, the Bruins, and the End of an Era

"Every Blackhawk game means 60 minutes of mental torture for Glenn Hall."

"In a job that is undoubtedly the most nerve-wracking, perhaps the most demanding, and among the most dangerous in sport, Glenn Henry Hall, 30 year old goaltender for the Hawks has established a record for durability that is phenomenal."

The Montreal Gazette - Google News Archive Search

The necessary momentum, they feel, was supplied last night when they dumped the Montreal Canadiens, 2-0, behind the brilliant goal tending of Glenn Hall.

Ab McDonald and Ken Wharram scored Chicago's goals in the clincher last night but Hall was the real hero. Both coach Rudy Pilous of Chicago and Toe Blake of Montreal agreed Hall's save on Dickie Moore's shot in the second period was the turning point.

Incredible piece by Sports Illustrated:
(Hall played without a mask, didn't miss a start for 500+ games)

In 15 of his 18 NHL seasons as a goalie—with the Detroit Red Wings, the Chicago Black Hawks and the St. Louis Blues—Hall played without a mask, and his mug has the scars from some 250 stitches to prove it. "Our first priority was staying alive," Hall says. "Our second was stopping the puck.

Crackkk! A direct 25-foot shot smashes off the face mask of a Flame goalie. It is one of the most terrifying sounds in sports. When it is suggested, foolishly, that a shot like that one might have sidelined him for a couple of weeks, Hall says mildly, "It would've been the end of my practice, that's for sure."

Out for a couple of weeks? Glenn Hall? For more than seven years he wasn't out for even a single game. Hall holds the record of records, a mark we will swear, on the good book of Guinness, won't ever be broken. Between the start of the 1955 season and Nov. 7, 1962, Hall played 502 consecutive complete games in goal. In truth, the number was 551, including the 49 playoff games, which the NHL does not recognize in its tabulations.

For seven complete seasons—two with Detroit and five with Chicago—the maskless Hall, who became known as Mr. Goalie, never missed a start. To put the inviolability of Hall's streak into perspective, consider that the last goalie to play every minute of every game of even one regular season was the Boston Bruins' Eddie Johnston in 1963-64. Last season Detroit's Tim Cheveldae led all goalies by appearing in 72 of the Red Wings' 80 games. "With teams carrying two goalies now," Hall modestly allows, "I'd have to say it will never be broken."

Iron Man of the Ice

https://thehockeywriters.com/the-best-of-mr-goalie-vs-the-habs-and-other-teams/

Fifty years before unfathomable Golden Knights, Glenn Hall and Scotty Bowman led expansion team to Stanley Cup Final

A visit with legendary Mr. Goalie Glenn Hall, on the farm he's called home for 50 years

 

[Canadiens1958]

Voted.

 

[ted2019]

Voted as well. Had a change in my top 4 after thinking long and hard about it.

 

[quoipourquoi]

So we're going to project Sawchuk having a better career had he had the proper equipment?

Sorry, but if we're to project Sawchuk having a better career if he had better equipment

I didn’t project anything. I said it would be interesting if.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I didn’t project anything. I said it would be interesting if.

True, but the same can be said about Hall as well. It's not like Sawchuk was the only maskless goalie.

No mask and Hall somehow managed to play 551 straight games (playoffs included). That might be the most amazing record in hockey history if not all of the 4 major sports.

 

[VanIslander]

Hall said he often played injured because there were no backup goalies back then and he - an 11-time all star -had been worried about losing his job!

A retired Hall said he didn't miss hockey and had always looked at it as a paycheque. He had other jobs in the summer but he liked the fame, of hearing fans cheer. He hated practices and avoided half of training camp some years by using the excuse that he was in the middle of a barn-painting project that needed another two weeks attention.

 

[Batis]

Since I have rewatched so many games from Fetisov's prime over the last couple of years I figured that I would give my opinion on what was his most impressive quality as a hockey player. That quality was in my opinion his poise with the puck. Even when playing shorthanded Fetisov never seemed to get stressed with the puck and he would pretty much always find a solution to bypass the forechecking of the opponents. Additionally he could also skate around with the puck in a impressive way while looking for someone to pass it to. Here are some examples of Fetisov's poise with the puck while playing shorthanded.

Here Krutov, Makarov, Fetisov and Kasatonov kill off more than 30 seconds against a powerplay unit with Gretzky, Kurri, Messier, Bourque and Wilson.



Here we have Makarov, Larionov, Fetisov and Kasatonov against Czechoslovakia during the 1987 WHC. They kill off about 25 seconds on the clock. Unfortunately the camera man decides to film Krutov on the bench for a couple of seconds so we miss the play that happens just before Fetisovs rush at the end.



Here we have Makarov, Larionov, Fetisov and Konstantinov against the Hartford Whalers during the 88/89 Super Series. They kill off about 25 seconds on the clock with puck possesion.



For many more examples of Fetisov on the penalty kill you can check out this thread. Puck possession while penalty killing- A video study of the Green Unit

And regarding Fetisov's poise with the puck at even strenght there are many examples in this thread. The greatest goals scored by the Green Unit

Unfortunately there seems to be some broken links in especially the second thread due to videos having been taken down from youtube. When I find the time to I will try to fix the broken links.

 

[Batis]

When it comes to prime Fetisov the only questionmark I find on his resume is his not overly strong voting support in the Izvestia Golden Stick voting (Best players in Europe poll).

Izvestia Golden Stick voting record of Vyacheslav Fetisov:

Voting finishes: 1st, 1st, 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 10th

Even if Fetisov is tied with Tretiak for most Izvestia golden stick awards with 3 wins I would still say that his overall voting record is at least somewhat underwhelming for a player of his quality since it seemingly was not until the 83/84 season that the Izvestia voters as a group started to really apprieciate Fetisov. Considering how highly regarded Fetisov was both in the Soviet Union and internationally during the 81/82-83/84 time frame this has always struck me as very strange and I have a hard time finding any explanation for this. I mean this is a time frame when many considered Fetisov to be the greatest defenceman in the world as evident by the quotes in Fetisovs ATD-bio yet his Izvestia voting support was weak both in 81/82 and 82/83.

As a comparison here are the voting records of Makarov and Tretiak.

Sergey Makarov

Voting finishes: 1st, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 4th, 4th, 4th, 4th, 4th and 6th

While Makarov "only" won the award 2 times he does in my opinion have the most impressive Izvestia voting record. Makarov finished top 4 in the voting 10 times and top 6 in the voting for 11 straight years. This is a consistency over time that no other player even came close to matching over the 78/79-88/89 time frame when the Izvestia golden stick was awarded. Had the award been around before 78/79 it is possible that Tretiak could have rivaled Makarovs number of seasons near the top though.

Vladislav Tretyak

Voting finishes: 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 5th and 6th

Tretyaks peak (80/81-83/84) when it comes to Izvestia voting is truly impressive. It is also possible or perhaps even likely that Tretyak would have rivaled or beat out Makarov as the player with the most impressive Izvestia voting record had the award been around before 78/79. Especially considering how well goaltenders generally did in the Izvestia voting and how well Tretyak did in the SPOTY voting pre 78/79. The only thing that may have stood in the way of this is probably if Holečeks great peak performance somewhat would have overshadowed Tretyak in the eyes of the voters as it to some extent probably did when it comes to the WHC All-Star team selections over that time frame.

Fetisov clearly has the weakest voting record of the 3 when we consider that the award not was around until 78/79 (which of course hurts Tretiak). Some of it can perhaps be explained with a bias against defencemen in the voting but considering that 83/84 was the first time that Fetisov was first among defencemen in the voting it is not the whole explanation either. And considering that Vasiliev finished 2nd in 78/79 and 3rd in 79/80 I don't even know if it would be accurate to suggest that such a bias, to any major degree, existed among the Izvestia voters

Now I would personally trust the SPOTY voting more than the Izvestia voting but I still think that it holds some value. But as I said his Izvestia voting record is probably the only questionmark when it comes to the resume of prime Fetisov. Well perhaps his downperiod in 78/79-80/81 when he did not recieve any votes in the SPOTY voting for 3 straight years also could be considered a questionmark. But considering that it is his pre 83/84 Izvestia voting record that is underwhelming those two problems are somewhat related to each other.

Anyway Fetisov is amazing and I had him top 3 in this vote but it would sure be interesting to know the reasons for his lack of voting support in the 81/82 and 82/83 Izvestia Golden Stick polls considering that many considered Fetisov the best defenceman in the world around that time as evident by the quotes TDMM posted on page 1 in this thread.

 

[VMBM]

Now I would personally trust the SPOTY voting more than the Izvestia voting but I still think that it holds some value. But as I said his Izvestia voting record is probably the only questionmark when it comes to the resume of prime Fetisov. Well perhaps his downperiod in 78/79-80/81 when he did not recieve any votes in the SPOTY voting for 3 straight years also could be considered a questionmark. But considering that it is his pre 83/84 Izvestia voting record that is underwhelming those two problems are somewhat related to each other.

I would just like to say that he was injured and missed a fair bit of the 1978-79 season (including The Challenge Cup and the 1979 WHC). His lack of SPOTY votes in 1979-80 and 1980-81 is somewhat puzzling indeed, especially considering that many old superstars were past their prime or had quit (Mikhailov, Kharlamov, Petrov).

 

[Michael Farkas]

Two players who will feature prominently for me, and I think should have already been on the map...

Slava Fetisov - Batis just nailed it. Fetisov is a complete package. His accolades are on merit. Just because you accrue accolades in a "weaker" talent pool, doesn't mean they're completely invalidated. This is where the eye test comes in. Fetisov is every bit as good as Ray Bourque...Fetisov had better hands and was probably just a little better defensively even. Bourque a better puck rusher, more physical and he lasted longer, of course. I talked about it with Doug Harvey about the thing that doesn't show up on the scoresheet...and Fetisov has this quality too and it's almost Harvey level...he could draw multiple forecheckers to him and make a silky outlet pass right on the tape OR into an area where an attacker could pick the puck up with speed. This is one of those plays that doesn't accrue assists, especially with the Soviet weaving attack...which, coincidentally, I have taught large chunks of to my players at the university level...so I am quite familiar with it, and what sold me on the idea was that I ended up with a player who had the patience, poise and hands of a smaller Fetisov that makes the engine run...Makarov is a hell of a talent, I'm excited for him to come up for voting, but Fetisov is the engine that makes this thing go...I'm quite sure he is my #1 this round. If you were cool with at least 3 of 4 of Harvey, Bourque, Potvin and Lidstrom, then Fetisov is a lock for your top-3 this round. Like I said, I don't see a case that knocks him from my #1 spot and frankly, the gap is pretty well crystallized.

I was going to put together some video on Fetisov, but two things came up unfortunately...A) I got called to go on a NCAA scouting trip tonight somewhat unexpectedly and B) someone already kind of did the work...



Martin Brodeur - I learned more about the goaltending position and maybe even the game as a whole from Martin Brodeur than any other player. From watching him (I've seen more Devils games live than any other team...despite hating them with a fiery passion), to listening to him talk about the game, to reading his book...I owe a lot of my hockey knowledge to Brodeur. This is the smartest or second smartest goaltender in the history of the game (Plante). You show me a goalie with good anticipation and I'll show you a good goalie...well, that applies in spades here.

Defensive systems at the time focused on lines and shots against. Shots against were the enemy for much of goaltending history because of the inefficiencies of the position. The Devils prevented shots for a good chunk of his tenure. They protected against clean zone entries, forced dump-ins and then the intelligent, strong puck handler, Brodeur would go back and play it to not-Ken-Daneyko and start the break out. Brodeur has probably the best rebound control I've ever seen. He can direct pucks, as part of his save selection, right to his players to start breakouts. I saw him field a 45 foot, low wrist shot one time, wind up and kick it right on the tape to Brian Gionta outside the defending blue line for a rush chance against another team's change...that's so crazy talented, we've never seen anything like that before or after.

For those that use save pct. as a crutch, the Devils system and Brodeur's style of play hurts his save pct. figures. If the Devils (ignoring potential under-counting of shots, which Doc Emrick alluded often on telecasts) give up 18 shots a game and other teams are giving up 26 or 28, that doesn't make Brodeur any worse of a player. As I always say here...every goalie gives up 2. What difference does it make how many shots you face in the process? If you give up 3, no one cares about you and if you give up 1, there is no debate...

As defensive systems and goaltending evolved...we come to find that shots are no longer the enemy, but high quality chances are...like most goalies under Claude Julien, Brodeur's save pct. ballooned under him...because Julien doesn't protect lines or against shots...he promotes shots, if anything, and protects the net...this is a save pct. inflater...more shots, from less dangerous areas = high save pct. Generally, you give up the same amount of high danger chances in a game across the board...whether 6 of 18 are tough stops, or 6 of 30 are tough stops, you're gonna be challenged in a similar way...I don't reward players for facing additional easy shots that for some goalies, their d-men stop for them...in the same way that I wouldn't find it interesting if Buzz Armstrong flew a commercial flight from New York to Atlanta because he flew to the ******* moon already...it just doesn't register. If I flew a commercial plane, ok, that's different...I have no flying experience, I've never been to space...it's a cool story for me...it's not at all interesting for Buzz, because he went to ******* space! Which is infinite, but yet only like 16 people have ever been there...or whatever. Same deal with the add-on shots that Brodeur didn't have the luxury of facing.

Brodeur was renowned for not giving up weak goals and for not giving up leads in the playoffs...him and Plante are two of the most reliable in history for that because they're so reliable, consistent and technically skilled...those tables can be found here: Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Preliminary Discussion Thread (Revenge of Michael Myers)

Brodeur also crossed eras...grew up in the firewagon days and came in towards the end of it (won the Calder and went to OT of game 7 of the ECF as a rookie...not a big deal)...dominated in the dead puck era...and then in the new wide-open era that shrugged away a lot of older players, he finished top-3 in Vezina voting in 4 of 4 full seasons he played...all the way up to the age of 37. At age 39, he is significant part of a not-defensive team (they were an aggressive forechecking team, who cycled and stretched their defense well beyond their means) that went to the SCF in 2012...the only team that even gave the Kings something to think about...a 2012 team that brought in this guy as an improvement to their top pair...

 

[Michael Farkas]

I don't see a good case for Lafleur or Sawchuk at this time...they have superior players in this list that would need to go ahead of them I think...

I still want to watch more of Mikita and Clarke before I decide on their placement...I should have time to do that on Sunday...

Nighbor, and to my surprise, Messier are ripe for picking I think...like I said in my prelim, I've never had ranked Messier so high in my life...he was sliding for years in my mind, and then I went back and watched him in those Smythe Division Series...hatchi matchi...

 

[MXD]

Actually, for me, it's the opposite : While I'm convinced Fetisov probably became available at the right time, I have a hard time seeing him being better than anyone in this group (other than Sawchuk, of course). That... Mostly hinges on longevity, mind you. Becoming a very secondary piece at 30, for any D-Men, is a HUGE red flag, at least this point. Yes, he had to adapt to a new life, but there were signs of decline even before moving to NA.

I'm not quite sure yet, but it looks like I'll have both goalies at the very top for this round.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Wasn't he pretty much a wagon from 1978 to 1991 though? Then closed out his late 30's and 40 year old seasons with 3 trips to the SCF in 4 years, winning two? Given the circumstances, I struggle to fault him...though I am aware of how tenuous the situation is and ripe for interpretation because of those very circumstances...

 

[MXD]

Wasn't he pretty much a wagon from 1978 to 1991 though? Then closed out his late 30's and 40 year old seasons with 3 trips to the SCF in 4 years, winning two? Given the circumstances, I struggle to fault him...though I am aware of how tenuous the situation is and ripe for interpretation because of those very circumstances...

More like 1979 to 1988.
Oh, and of course, he did well with Detroit, but not to a level that does much at this point. To me at least. Standards are a bit different for D-Men.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Fair enough. I just think that we're getting to that point (quick) where we're out of 15-year monster players...so it's ok to settle for 10 or 12 if the peak is there...I mean, who are we holding back at this point that eats Fetisov alive? I don't think there's anyone close to him available in terms of d-men...until you get to the Robinson/Chelios/Park zone...and they're a tier below Fetisov in my eyes...

The two long-term, hyper-dominant we're missing right now are Fetisov and Brodeur for me...though I get that that's not the most popular phrasing...

 

[sr edler]

Wasn't he pretty much a wagon from 1978 to 1991 though?

Wheels fell off the wagon when Mats Sundin blew by him.

 

[VanIslander]

No Nighbor talk this round?

The guy ain't inducted yet.

Hope we're not overlooking him.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Two players who will feature prominently for me, and I think should have already been on the map...

Slava Fetisov - Batis just nailed it. Fetisov is a complete package. His accolades are on merit. Just because you accrue accolades in a "weaker" talent pool, doesn't mean they're completely invalidated. This is where the eye test comes in. Fetisov is every bit as good as Ray Bourque...Fetisov had better hands and was probably just a little better defensively even. Bourque a better puck rusher, more physical and he lasted longer, of course. I talked about it with Doug Harvey about the thing that doesn't show up on the scoresheet...and Fetisov has this quality too and it's almost Harvey level...he could draw multiple forecheckers to him and make a silky outlet pass right on the tape OR into an area where an attacker could pick the puck up with speed. This is one of those plays that doesn't accrue assists, especially with the Soviet weaving attack...which, coincidentally, I have taught large chunks of to my players at the university level...so I am quite familiar with it, and what sold me on the idea was that I ended up with a player who had the patience, poise and hands of a smaller Fetisov that makes the engine run...Makarov is a hell of a talent, I'm excited for him to come up for voting, but Fetisov is the engine that makes this thing go...I'm quite sure he is my #1 this round. If you were cool with at least 3 of 4 of Harvey, Bourque, Potvin and Lidstrom, then Fetisov is a lock for your top-3 this round. Like I said, I don't see a case that knocks him from my #1 spot and frankly, the gap is pretty well crystallized.

I was going to put together some video on Fetisov, but two things came up unfortunately...A) I got called to go on a NCAA scouting trip tonight somewhat unexpectedly and B) someone already kind of did the work...



Martin Brodeur - I learned more about the goaltending position and maybe even the game as a whole from Martin Brodeur than any other player. From watching him (I've seen more Devils games live than any other team...despite hating them with a fiery passion), to listening to him talk about the game, to reading his book...I owe a lot of my hockey knowledge to Brodeur. This is the smartest or second smartest goaltender in the history of the game (Plante). You show me a goalie with good anticipation and I'll show you a good goalie...well, that applies in spades here.

Defensive systems at the time focused on lines and shots against. Shots against were the enemy for much of goaltending history because of the inefficiencies of the position. The Devils prevented shots for a good chunk of his tenure. They protected against clean zone entries, forced dump-ins and then the intelligent, strong puck handler, Brodeur would go back and play it to not-Ken-Daneyko and start the break out. Brodeur has probably the best rebound control I've ever seen. He can direct pucks, as part of his save selection, right to his players to start breakouts. I saw him field a 45 foot, low wrist shot one time, wind up and kick it right on the tape to Brian Gionta outside the defending blue line for a rush chance against another team's change...that's so crazy talented, we've never seen anything like that before or after.

For those that use save pct. as a crutch, the Devils system and Brodeur's style of play hurts his save pct. figures. If the Devils (ignoring potential under-counting of shots, which Doc Emrick alluded often on telecasts) give up 18 shots a game and other teams are giving up 26 or 28, that doesn't make Brodeur any worse of a player. As I always say here...every goalie gives up 2. What difference does it make how many shots you face in the process? If you give up 3, no one cares about you and if you give up 1, there is no debate...

As defensive systems and goaltending evolved...we come to find that shots are no longer the enemy, but high quality chances are...like most goalies under Claude Julien, Brodeur's save pct. ballooned under him...because Julien doesn't protect lines or against shots...he promotes shots, if anything, and protects the net...this is a save pct. inflater...more shots, from less dangerous areas = high save pct. Generally, you give up the same amount of high danger chances in a game across the board...whether 6 of 18 are tough stops, or 6 of 30 are tough stops, you're gonna be challenged in a similar way...I don't reward players for facing additional easy shots that for some goalies, their d-men stop for them...in the same way that I wouldn't find it interesting if Buzz Armstrong flew a commercial flight from New York to Atlanta because he flew to the ******* moon already...it just doesn't register. If I flew a commercial plane, ok, that's different...I have no flying experience, I've never been to space...it's a cool story for me...it's not at all interesting for Buzz, because he went to ******* space! Which is infinite, but yet only like 16 people have ever been there...or whatever. Same deal with the add-on shots that Brodeur didn't have the luxury of facing.

Brodeur was renowned for not giving up weak goals and for not giving up leads in the playoffs...him and Plante are two of the most reliable in history for that because they're so reliable, consistent and technically skilled...those tables can be found here: Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Preliminary Discussion Thread (Revenge of Michael Myers)

Brodeur also crossed eras...grew up in the firewagon days and came in towards the end of it (won the Calder and went to OT of game 7 of the ECF as a rookie...not a big deal)...dominated in the dead puck era...and then in the new wide-open era that shrugged away a lot of older players, he finished top-3 in Vezina voting in 4 of 4 full seasons he played...all the way up to the age of 37. At age 39, he is significant part of a not-defensive team (they were an aggressive forechecking team, who cycled and stretched their defense well beyond their means) that went to the SCF in 2012...the only team that even gave the Kings something to think about...a 2012 team that brought in this guy as an improvement to their top pair...

Agree completely on Brodeur. For some reason I think he'll get passed up this round based on a few generalized lists seen and the fact that so many either love him or hate him in an all time light. Sadly I could see some of the old guard folks having him way down the lists, along with others.

My prediction? He'll have a lot of top 4 finishes but also a lot of 9-11s.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Yeah, probably...it's so odd to read people punish Brodeur for being a "system goalie"...then not do it for many others and then also put save pct. on a pedestal...it's such a bizarre combination of things to think and it's just so not in line with the reality of the game that's played...I don't wish those people physical harm, but I do hope next time they buy a cucumber they come home with zucchini....

 

[ImporterExporter]

Yeah, probably...it's so odd to read people punish Brodeur for being a "system goalie"...then not do it for many others and then also put save pct. on a pedestal...it's such a bizarre combination of things to think and it's just so not in line with the reality of the game that's played...I don't wish those people physical harm, but I do hope next time they buy a cucumber they come home with zucchini....

I mean don't get me wrong I remember the mid 90's to early 2000's Devils very well being a Pens fan haha. There is no doubt a trap system is going to help a goalie, any goalie, to one degree or another.

With that being said there is plenty of evidence, both eye test, and data wise that shows Brodeur's, skating, puck handling ability and passing was a huge reason why that specific trap system worked so well. If someone is going to argue that Marty was a product of a system they damn well better understand how the system works and the impact a goalie like Brodeur had in making the system work in the first place.

I mean for crying out loud the league literally changed the rules on where a goalie can handle the puck, in large part, because Marty was so damn apt at it. That should matter to people when evaluating where to place a person on a list like this one.

And as I pointed out clearly, in 2006-07 he was phenomenal in winning the Vezina. That wasn't the dead puck era. He faced more shots against than all but 1 goalie that year. Great numbers, facing a high volume of shots.

His postseason record is mostly good to great. He was amazing for team Canada in literally every knock out stage game he played in.

I really hope I don't see a lot of 10's and NR's with him.