Top-200 Hockey Players of All-Time - Preliminary Discussion Thread

[Michael Farkas]

Well, yeah, he had the lowest GAA of any goalie since the 30's...if he was doing that routinely, he'd already be on the list haha...

The difference is is that Kipper had more than two seasons - he had a very respectable peak/prime - and did it across multiple situations, showing his adaptability - and above all, talent. Which that actual two-season goalie had very little of. That Calgary team was not all that good, and Kipper slammed the door in a year where no goalies were...we talk a lot about Jagr getting robbed by the Thornton trade, but man, how about Kiprusoff too...who knows how much of the West vote he would have gotten if Thornton didn't drag the Sharks out of last and made a third liner forever etched in history...

 

[wetcoast]

The issues I have with Housley that if he was a forward, then I could overlook some of his major defensive flaws, but he wasn't a forward and playing defense should've been his main concern. I find this part interesting, he was a top 5 Norris contender 4 times ( 5th place in 83-84, 5th in 89-90, 91-92 3rd, 92-93 5th). The great +/- stat that no one really has time for , states that he was the following in those seasons (+1, +11, -5,-14) Out of the 4 seasons that he was a Norris contender, there were only 33 players that received Norris votes in those 4 seasons, Only 5 other players, Coffey, Iafrate, Leetch, Suter, K. Hatcher were ever a - player ( lead by Paul Coffey's -25 in 1989-90 season). Why did Housley do so well despite those stats? Also, he are his Post Season AS selections for those 4 years (5,5,2,6). I'm a bit baffled by Housley.

Phil Housley is a tough one as his strength is offense and he hit the ground running as an 18 year old and was an elite offensive performer for his first 14 years in the NHL then dipping to merely a pretty good one for two more then finishing 6th and 4th again in Dman scoring in his 17th and 18th NHL seasons.

I haven't run the numbers but exactly how many Dmen in NHL history have more top 10 scoring finishes among their fellow Dmen than Housley?

I bet it's less than a dozen and might only be a handfull.

Even with his defensive faults he is a top 200 player IMO and for comparison is Jan Suchy a demonstrably much better defensive Dman than Housley was?

 

[wetcoast]

For those trying to decide on where to put goalies in this project, here are several great studies that Hockey Outsider did.
Adjusted-Save-Percentage-Regular-Season-1956-2020.
Goalies-Adjusted-Playoff-Save-Percentage-1984-2020
Career Adjusted-Save-Percentage
Special-Teams-Adjusted-Goaltending-Statistics
Goaltender-game-by-game-logs-1965-66-to-present
Goalie-analysis-2009-2012-wins-added
Strength-of-opposition-for-goaltenders
Historical-goalie-data 1927 to current

I'm going to have a long look at these links and listen to others before slotting my goalies into my top 200-220 list as they are the most difficult guys to evaluate IMO.

 

[wetcoast]

You have Luongo ranked HIGHER than Bower?

Johnny started NHL hockey three months before his 30th birthday but then went on to SIX times lead the league in save percentage, four times win the Stanley Cup.

Roberto played a long 19-year NHL career but never led the league in save percentage and never won the cup. Heck, Luongo was never 1st or 2nd in save percentage; he wasn't even ever a 1st team all star!

There is a clear gap between Bower and Luongo on any sane non-homer list.

While a agree with you in having bower ahead of Lou (perhaps due to my being a Canucks fan and being disappointed in him when it counted and his big mouth)the Leafs in front of Bower had excellent Dmen and played a system that would make most goalies look out of this world right?

 

[Professor What]

Well, yeah, he had the lowest GAA of any goalie since the 30's...if he was doing that routinely, he'd already be on the list haha...

The difference is is that Kipper had more than two seasons - he had a very respectable peak/prime - and did it across multiple situations, showing his adaptability - and above all, talent. Which that actual two-season goalie had very little of. That Calgary team was not all that good, and Kipper slammed the door in a year where no goalies were...we talk a lot about Jagr getting robbed by the Thornton trade, but man, how about Kiprusoff too...who knows how much of the West vote he would have gotten if Thornton didn't drag the Sharks out of last and made a third liner forever etched in history...

Outside of the historically great stats, while Kiprusoff was good, he wasn't elite. I mean, if I look at a goalie with a 2.40 goals against average, I see a good stat, but I'm not wetting my pants over it, at least not in the dead puck era. Goalies with stats like that aren't exactly a dime a dozen, but they're also not uber rare. I'd tend to fall more on the side of saying that if he hadn't had those two elite seasons, he wouldn't have even been mentioned here.

 

[quoipourquoi]

qpq: Did I read you right that you have Luongo ranked ahead of Lundqvist? In the sense that you find Lundqvist to be worse? That's an interesting one for me...I don't think it's insane, mind you, just a little unexpected I think...

Yeah, not by much or anything. The thing with Luongo is that he got to play just 12 playoff games in his 20s, and I think he was a better player younger, so a lot was left on the table. Consider 2004:

16-0-4 when he had a .960 or better
7-3-5 when he had a .959-.935
2-30-5 when he had a .934 or lower

If he could have at least snuck into a playoff on the Panthers, maybe the offense heats up a little and he can actually show off in a pressure game (like he got to in 2007). Instead, he had to wait until he was on the decline - and even then he was only really shown up by the 3x finalists in the decade in Boston and Chicago. Otherwise, I thought old Luongo ranged from good to at least competent.

Lundqvist, to me, was actively mediocre in the playoffs in the first half of his career (his quality starts through 2012 were roughly 50/50 if I recall; the table has since been lost). Second-half was awesome. Totally redeemed himself. I’ll take Lundqvist in his early-30s all day.

I don’t think it was enough to catch-up. Luongo was still able to throw out some great seasons while he was winding down. Lundqvist’s last appearance on a Vezina ballot was in 2015 at 33; Luongo finished 4th in voting in 2016 despite being 37.

 

[quoipourquoi]

While a agree with you in having bower ahead of Lou (perhaps due to my being a Canucks fan and being disappointed in him when it counted and his big mouth)the Leafs in front of Bower had excellent Dmen and played a system that would make most goalies look out of this world right?

While it’s hard to get a read on his first three save percentage titles (because Bower took a vast majority of starts), his fourth, fifth, and sixth save percentage titles came with .009, .027, and .008 margins over Terry Sawchuk.

In 1964, Bower’s league-leading .932 (24-15-11) was well above Don Simmons’ .894 (9-10-1). Simmons’ record knocked them back to 3rd place in the standings. I don’t know if they win their third-straight Cup that year without Bower matching his level from the regular season.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Luongo: He's a bit Brodeur-like in my opinion. He played at a high level for a long time, while not having the peak level of his contemporaries. Of course, he didn't play quite as much as Brodeur did, he didn't have Hasek and Roy as contemporaries, and he didn't have the same peak level as Brodeur. In the end though, I see enough of a similarity to give Luongo a boost, and I suspect he'll make my list, and I certainly see him as a worthy Hall-of-Famer.

I mean... maybe? All things considered, I don’t know that any hockey player had a better 1996-97 than Martin Brodeur, but I wouldn’t rule out that 2003-04 Roberto Luongo was essentially as good.

 

[wetcoast]

While it’s hard to get a read on his first three save percentage titles (because Bower took a vast majority of starts), his fourth, fifth, and sixth save percentage titles came with .009, .027, and .008 margins over Terry Sawchuk.

In 1964, Bower’s league-leading .932 (24-15-11) was well above Don Simmons’ .894 (9-10-1). Simmons’ record knocked them back to 3rd place in the standings. I don’t know if they win their third-straight Cup that year without Bower matching his level from the regular season.

Fair enough but wasn't Sawchuck a different goalie later in his career than in his peak?

Like I said upthread I have an extremely difficult time evaluating goalies and I think Lou is over rated at times.

I might just be lazy and look at the top goalies list and use it for slotting with some room for moving guys around a bit.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Johnny started NHL hockey three months before his 30th birthday but then went on to SIX times lead the league in save percentage, four times win the Stanley Cup.

And not for lack of ability; he was starting goaltender for the Calder Cup winner twice in the three seasons before the call-up. They don’t make goalies like Bower wait for a job in the post-expansion era.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Fair enough but wasn't Sawchuck a different goalie later in his career than in his peak?

Sure, but it’s still capable-of-winning-the-Stanley-Cup Terry Sawchuk. There’s worse goaltenders to put distance between.


How was the opposition strength between the two when they shared the net?

 

[Michael Farkas]

Outside of the historically great stats, while Kiprusoff was good, he wasn't elite. I mean, if I look at a goalie with a 2.40 goals against average, I see a good stat, but I'm not wetting my pants over it, at least not in the dead puck era. Goalies with stats like that aren't exactly a dime a dozen, but they're also not uber rare. I'd tend to fall more on the side of saying that if he hadn't had those two elite seasons, he wouldn't have even been mentioned here.

I'm not sure what to make of this to be honest...it reads like an over-reliance on an averaging stat, but then I can't contextualize it because Kipper only really started for one season in the dead puck era and he set the "modern" record for GAA...

He was hot in 2004, and then carried it over for the next several years...but in '04, he allowed...

4+ goals: 3 times
3 goals: 3 times
2 goals or less: 32 times

He lost every game where he gave up even a third goal because the Flames had, uhhh, mostly Kiprusoff and he wasn't scoring a goal any time soon with that stickhandling...

He comes back in '06 and in a league that had scoring balloon, it's Kipper that shut the door with 10 shutouts...in the two "no touching" seasons when power plays were all the rage...

Shutouts:
Kiprusoff 17
Brodeur 17
Hasek 13
[Generic Red Wings goalie] 12
Everyone else 9 or less

I don't know, I feel like I'm missing something here...this guy was a terrific talent, and one of the few goalies (look at those names) that really handled the change over well because of how gosh darn good he was...

I don't always love the "look at the backups" argument, and it's a little unfair because of how poor quality they were...but you couldn't hit any of them with a bowling ball in those seasons...that's why Kipper got a bunch of Hart votes...

He got put to work too because he was usually their only chance to win...

From 2006 to 2012 games started:
Kipper 510
Lundqvist 462
Luongo 456
Brodeur 447

I don't think it's crazy to say that those teams really only had a shot when their guy was in net because of how those teams were built...no surprise to see them at the top...and Kipper is way, way above them...and he willed that team to the playoffs for five straight years, once to game 7 of the Cup Final, of course...

 

[quoipourquoi]

I might just be lazy and look at the top goalies list and use it for slotting with some room for moving guys around a bit.

I actually wouldn’t recommend people do this for goaltenders. The widespread availability of 1956-1983 statistics occurred 5 years after the goaltender project.

 

[ted2019]

I think I’m a little sympathetic because he lost a season right in the middle of being probably the second-best player on the planet. He definitely fell off a cliff well before the Vezina votes stopped trickling in. He’s more on the Thomas side of things - two very good seasons doing most of the talking.

Vokoun is one that is statistically quite strong (arena effects play something of a role, though he had better road numbers in three of his five-best seasons) and thankfully has a full sample-size (unlike, say, a Carey Price).

Vokoun's adjusted numbers are a lot better then I anticipated. Might have to check a bit farther on him.

 

[ted2019]

You have Luongo ranked HIGHER than Bower?

Johnny started NHL hockey three months before his 30th birthday but then went on to SIX times lead the league in save percentage, four times win the Stanley Cup.

Roberto played a long 19-year NHL career but never led the league in save percentage and never won the cup. Heck, Luongo was never 1st or 2nd in save percentage; he wasn't even ever a 1st team all star!

There is a clear gap between Bower and Luongo on any sane non-homer list.

Not a homer on Bobby Lou check out Adjusted-Save-Percentage-Regular-Season-1956-2020. and he's in the upper tier of goalies.

 

[wetcoast]

Sure, but it’s still capable-of-winning-the-Stanley-Cup Terry Sawchuk. There’s worse goaltenders to put distance between.


How was the opposition strength between the two when they shared the net?

These are things that I don't know.

The thing is that I look at all players on my lists through both the positive Joe Pelletier type of view and the critical one and then try to come to a decision on every player.

I'm less concerned with Bower "making the NHL" at a late age than I would be for a position player who peaks later than expected.

Also for goalies I'm going to listen more and learn and you are a very good evaluator for the discussion on goalies IMO.

 

[VanIslander]

And not for lack of ability; he was starting goaltender for the Calder Cup winner twice in the three seasons before the call-up. They don’t make goalies like Bower wait for a job in the post-expansion era.

Leafs coach Punch Imlach THREATENED to make sure near 30-year-old Bower would be benched in the AHL if he didn't finally accept an NHL job after turning it down countless times (remember: back then the money wasn't much different; he was content in the AHL: three-time league MVP, four-time champion, six time 1st-team all star).

You can't cite some adjusted save percentage stat (against a 21st century above regular non top star Luongo) to rub his entire career accomplishments out. That would be myopic and unjust.

 

[wetcoast]

I actually wouldn’t recommend people do this for goaltenders. The widespread availability of 1956-1983 statistics occurred 5 years after the goaltender project.

Fair enough let me expand on what I mean though.

I'm going to use the list as a starting point then after looking at the Links that Ted2019 in Philly provided upthread that is where the moving around will take place.

Also as a side not his avatar of Clarke was my favorite player going up as I though all effort heart and soul type of players but IMO Gritty has passed him as a Philly icon.

 

[Professor What]

I mean... maybe? All things considered, I don’t know that any hockey player had a better 1996-97 than Martin Brodeur, but I wouldn’t rule out that 2003-04 Roberto Luongo was essentially as good.

For an individual season here and there, maybe, but Brodeur had more seasons that stand out than Luongo, in my opinion, though I admit that his incredible workhorse ability might contribute to that since, as I've said before, that's the argument that I see to be made most in favor of Brodeur.

I'm not sure what to make of this to be honest...it reads like an over-reliance on an averaging stat, but then I can't contextualize it because Kipper only really started for one season in the dead puck era and he set the "modern" record for GAA...

He was hot in 2004, and then carried it over for the next several years...but in '04, he allowed...

4+ goals: 3 times
3 goals: 3 times
2 goals or less: 32 times

He lost every game where he gave up even a third goal because the Flames had, uhhh, mostly Kiprusoff and he wasn't scoring a goal any time soon with that stickhandling...

He comes back in '06 and in a league that had scoring balloon, it's Kipper that shut the door with 10 shutouts...in the two "no touching" seasons when power plays were all the rage...

Shutouts:
Kiprusoff 17
Brodeur 17
Hasek 13
[Generic Red Wings goalie] 12
Everyone else 9 or less

I don't know, I feel like I'm missing something here...this guy was a terrific talent, and one of the few goalies (look at those names) that really handled the change over well because of how gosh darn good he was...

I don't always love the "look at the backups" argument, and it's a little unfair because of how poor quality they were...but you couldn't hit any of them with a bowling ball in those seasons...that's why Kipper got a bunch of Hart votes...

He got put to work too because he was usually their only chance to win...

From 2006 to 2012 games started:
Kipper 510
Lundqvist 462
Luongo 456
Brodeur 447

I don't think it's crazy to say that those teams really only had a shot when their guy was in net because of how those teams were built...no surprise to see them at the top...and Kipper is way, way above them...and he willed that team to the playoffs for five straight years, once to game 7 of the Cup Final, of course...

I only referenced later goals against averages because of the fact that his record GAA was brought up as a very fair example of how good he was at his best. Sometimes, I think goalies can be unfairly maligned for having a worse than average GAA when they play for a bad team, and that only goes further to show how impressive that stat was. But, by the same token, I also think it's fair to point out when a player's stats don't suggest that he's one of the top two or three guys at his position anymore. He was easily the best for a couple of years, but after that, there were usually a small handful of guys ahead of him -- not many, but enough to notice.

I'm in no way trying to dismiss how good Kiprussoff was at his best. Very, very rarely have we seen anyone as good as a "best" Kipprusoff, and I don't think it's at all unfair to say that he played as significant of a role in dragging the Flames to the 2004 Finals as Hasek played for the 1999 Sabres. Yes, absolutely, Kipprsoff at his best was all-time all-world. I'm not trying to suggest that he wasn't good outside of those two top years. He was still a very good goaltender. I'm not even saying that he won't make my list. But, I think it does need to be recognized that there is still a noticeable gap between his top couple of seasons and the rest of his good play. I absolutely believe that superb peak needs to be considered, but I don't think it's unfair to point out that he'd probably be viewed very differently if that one small segment of his career hadn't happened. It might not be as extreme as Weiland, but I don't think drawing a parallel with Cooney Weiland, a generally very good player who had one world beater year, is an unfair comparison.

Apparently, I'm not doing a very good job at expressing myself since it seems it's coming across as that I'm bagging on him, which I'm not trying to do. The fact of the matter is, I actually like Kiprusoff a lot. He's actually one of my favorite goalies in recent years. I just can't ride him as highly in this project as it appears that others are.

 

[DN28]

Even with his defensive faults he is a top 200 player IMO and for comparison is Jan Suchy a demonstrably much better defensive Dman than Housley was?

Yes, Suchý is demostrably better defensively than Housley. Here's a link to get a read on Suchý's game.

 

[VanIslander]

Please stop with the Luongo & Kiprusoff talk.

This project should be honoring top-200 players and that clearly includes Johnny Bower, Tiny Thompson, Roy Worters, George Hainsworth, Harry Lumley, Hugh Lehman and based on their highest level of performance: Billy Smith, Grant Fuhr, Gump Worsley & Jiri Holecek! Hands down. Let's not embarrass ourselves.

That's 10 out of 100.

How many more goalies should be considered?

 

[Michael Farkas]

I'm just going to post right now just so no one thinks that's my burner account...

 

[Michael Farkas]

I will say that Hainsworth is probably a pretty good example of someone who lacks adaptability (unlike Lu, Kipper, etc.) and as I recall wasn't nearly as highly regarded as his numbers would suggest...

He's a layup no chancer for me, for those reasons and more...

 

[VanIslander]

Hainsworth 4 times led the NHL in wins, twice won the cup, 8 times was top 2 in wins.

Lu? Never was a 1st team all star, never won the cup, once in 19 years led the league in wins.

Hainsworth was inducted well before Clint Benedict and Frank Brimsek. Maybe we should read some history to find out why!

Revisionist stats-crunching re-ranking may be 21st century cool, but it seems historically hollow.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I did. See my ad in the pre-1950 goalie research thread...