HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Round 2 Voting Results (HOH Top Goaltenders)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-29-2013, 09:50 PM
  #351
quoipourquoi
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 3,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
Considering everyone has been able to watch Lundquist play, don't you think its significant that 5 voters didn't place him in the top 60?
And a sixth voter had him in 59th.

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-29-2013, 09:59 PM
  #352
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
Considering everyone has been able to watch Lundquist play, don't you think its significant that 5 voters didn't place him in the top 60?
My honest opinion? I think it shows that they didn't take the time to take a step back and view where he fits into a historical perspective. And that's fine; there were definitely players on my list that were wrongly placed if scrutinized. I think Lundqvist's greatness kind of creeped up on us, with the best season of his career barely a few months old when we started accepting lists.

I really don't see any case for Lundqvist not being at least top 50, unless you believe that we just shouldn't talk about players who aren't at least almost retired.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-29-2013, 10:11 PM
  #353
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,203
vCash: 500
Maybe...

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
My honest opinion? I think it shows that they didn't take the time to take a step back and view where he fits into a historical perspective. And that's fine; there were definitely players on my list that were wrongly placed if scrutinized. I think Lundqvist's greatness kind of creeped up on us, with the best season of his career barely a few months old when we started accepting lists.

I really don't see any case for Lundqvist not being at least top 50, unless you believe that we just shouldn't talk about players who aren't at least almost retired.
Maybe they did, recognizing the weaknesses that were admitted but downplayed in favour of "Eye Candy" stats. Same is true for Thomas, Luongo.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2013, 07:23 AM
  #354
Mike Farkas
Hockey's Future Staff
Moron!
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,098
vCash: 500
Thomas with 2 Vezinas and a Conn Smythe and "OMG stats!" including a record* breaking* save pct. - you'd think he'd be way higher than a guy that has apparently no playoff resume and only finished better than 3rd for the Vezina once in his career...and if you look at top-4 votes for Lundqvist vs. Thomas, Hank wins narrowly. Thomas got by on ancillaries...

So, you can call it minority opinion, but we'll either realize we goofballed it or we'll add Quick or Rask next year or two years from now...

I just don't get what separates Thomas from a lot of other goalies really...for instance, I know a negligible amount about Roger Crozier...but what separates him from Thomas? His '65 and '66 vs. Thomas' '09 and '11? It's that big of a gap, despite Crozier beating out Hall, Bower and Sawchuk (however, late in their careers certainly) for a 1st team AS while Thomas beat out a draft bust and the second-best Niklas Backstrom in the league...

Why is he so much better than Dave Kerr? Without looking too deep, Kerr has two elite seasons (1st and 2nd team all-stars) and what looks like an excellent performance in the 1940 playoffs PLUS several seasons of getting some notoriety...hell, he might even have 2 excellent playoffs if 1937 and 1940 are as good as the stats indicate, I don't know...what's the gap signify? Anything meaningful? Or just that Thomas is a plump, low-hanging fruit?

When a goalie gets by on 2 seasons and 1 overblown playoffs, the opportunities are there to make plenty of comparisons...it seems like an unusually lazy path chosen by the HoH board, who - as a whole - strike me as very meticulous...

Mike Farkas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2013, 07:28 AM
  #355
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,595
vCash: 500
Better to get along by 6 above-average and one good season, and crappy postseason, eh?>

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2013, 08:12 AM
  #356
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,203
vCash: 500
Era

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
Thomas with 2 Vezinas and a Conn Smythe and "OMG stats!" including a record* breaking* save pct. - you'd think he'd be way higher than a guy that has apparently no playoff resume and only finished better than 3rd for the Vezina once in his career...and if you look at top-4 votes for Lundqvist vs. Thomas, Hank wins narrowly. Thomas got by on ancillaries...

So, you can call it minority opinion, but we'll either realize we goofballed it or we'll add Quick or Rask next year or two years from now...

I just don't get what separates Thomas from a lot of other goalies really...for instance, I know a negligible amount about Roger Crozier...but what separates him from Thomas? His '65 and '66 vs. Thomas' '09 and '11? It's that big of a gap, despite Crozier beating out Hall, Bower and Sawchuk (however, late in their careers certainly) for a 1st team AS while Thomas beat out a draft bust and the second-best Niklas Backstrom in the league...

Why is he so much better than Dave Kerr? Without looking too deep, Kerr has two elite seasons (1st and 2nd team all-stars) and what looks like an excellent performance in the 1940 playoffs PLUS several seasons of getting some notoriety...hell, he might even have 2 excellent playoffs if 1937 and 1940 are as good as the stats indicate, I don't know...what's the gap signify? Anything meaningful? Or just that Thomas is a plump, low-hanging fruit?

When a goalie gets by on 2 seasons and 1 overblown playoffs, the opportunities are there to make plenty of comparisons...it seems like an unusually lazy path chosen by the HoH board, who - as a whole - strike me as very meticulous..
.
Pandering to an era or criteria is a major factor in all this. O6/post 1967 era is very well represented as was the pre O6 / post consolidation era. So the Connell.Kerr, Crozier types draw the short straw while someone like Thomas who for the first ten seasons of his pro career was not even close to top 100 goalies worldwide, bouncing around hoping to get 40 games in a season combined amongst a few teams gets an easy ride.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2013, 11:28 AM
  #357
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Maybe they did, recognizing the weaknesses that were admitted but downplayed in favour of "Eye Candy" stats. Same is true for Thomas, Luongo.
Oh yeah, totally, any modern goalie who's built any kind of all-time resume.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2013, 05:52 PM
  #358
Mike Farkas
Hockey's Future Staff
Moron!
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,098
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Pandering to an era or criteria is a major factor in all this. O6/post 1967 era is very well represented as was the pre O6 / post consolidation era. So the Connell.Kerr, Crozier types draw the short straw while someone like Thomas who for the first ten seasons of his pro career was not even close to top 100 goalies worldwide, bouncing around hoping to get 40 games in a season combined amongst a few teams gets an easy ride.
I'll ask you directly, C1958 because maybe you'll spin your hockey rolodex of memories and come up with something.

Is there any goalie on the board that was one shot away from not making this list? I'll just pick one at random as it doesn't matter, Andrei Kostitsyn takes a long wrist shot that Thomas burbs up into the slot at the 2:29 mark of OT in game 7 of the 2011 Eastern Conference Quarterfinals that nearly caroms in off of Seidenberg (as he's not expecting such a bad rebound). If that goes in, there's zero chance Thomas is on this list...he might get mentioned in passing because he has two Vezina's and they just happened, but he's not a serious contender...

Can you spot a goalie where reasonably (no butterfly effect stuff) he is one shot from being on or off this list? I don't know the answer to this, it's an honest question...I just would hope that most of these goalies (the best 40 of all time, as it were) are not hanging on by such a fragile thread...

Mike Farkas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2013, 06:10 PM
  #359
Crease
Registered User
 
Crease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,833
vCash: 500
MF, I know you're not directing this to me, but one that comes to mind for me is Mike Richter's penalty shot save in Game 4 of the '94 Finals. Now Richter didn't make the top 40 but he was involved in discussions along the way. That save preserved the lead/win for the Rangers in a game that would have tied up the series at 2-2. Butterfly Effect comes into play here because the premise to this is that without the Cup in '94, Richter doesn't get consideration in this project.

Crease is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2013, 06:15 PM
  #360
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crease View Post
MF, I know you're not directing this to me, but one that comes to mind for me is Mike Richter's penalty shot save in Game 4 of the '94 Finals. Now Richter didn't make the top 40 but he was involved in discussions along the way. That save preserved the lead/win for the Rangers in a game that would have tied up the series at 2-2. Butterfly Effect comes into play here because the premise to this is that without the Cup in '94, Richter doesn't get consideration in this project.
Good one. And without that Cup, does Richter get a shot to start in the 1996 World Cup, which is where he cemented his reputation as a "clutch" goalie?

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2013, 06:25 PM
  #361
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 8,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
Thomas with 2 Vezinas and a Conn Smythe and "OMG stats!" including a record* breaking* save pct. - you'd think he'd be way higher than a guy that has apparently no playoff resume and only finished better than 3rd for the Vezina once in his career...and if you look at top-4 votes for Lundqvist vs. Thomas, Hank wins narrowly. Thomas got by on ancillaries...

So, you can call it minority opinion, but we'll either realize we goofballed it or we'll add Quick or Rask next year or two years from now...

I just don't get what separates Thomas from a lot of other goalies really...for instance, I know a negligible amount about Roger Crozier...but what separates him from Thomas? His '65 and '66 vs. Thomas' '09 and '11? It's that big of a gap, despite Crozier beating out Hall, Bower and Sawchuk (however, late in their careers certainly) for a 1st team AS while Thomas beat out a draft bust and the second-best Niklas Backstrom in the league...

Why is he so much better than Dave Kerr? Without looking too deep, Kerr has two elite seasons (1st and 2nd team all-stars) and what looks like an excellent performance in the 1940 playoffs PLUS several seasons of getting some notoriety...hell, he might even have 2 excellent playoffs if 1937 and 1940 are as good as the stats indicate, I don't know...what's the gap signify? Anything meaningful? Or just that Thomas is a plump, low-hanging fruit?

When a goalie gets by on 2 seasons and 1 overblown playoffs, the opportunities are there to make plenty of comparisons...it seems like an unusually lazy path chosen by the HoH board, who - as a whole - strike me as very meticulous...
Who says he is?

On the aggregate list Thomas was 35th and Kerr 41st, both being on everyone's list.
I had Kerr ahead of Thomas, but Kerr generated little positive feedback and his not being in the HHOF seemed a bone of contention (though being in didn't help Cheevers). This led me to believe I had overrated him.

And yes, laziness must be the reason some of us couldn't see this your way.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2013, 06:30 PM
  #362
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,979
vCash: 500
Our only laziness IMO was not even talking about Dzurilla because it was "too hard." And I'm including myself in that - after a lot of debate with myself, I couldn't bring myself to bump anyone from my top 8 for him without more discussion.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2013, 06:35 PM
  #363
Doctor No
Mod Supervisor
Retired?
 
Doctor No's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 23,708
vCash: 500
"Laziness" does come off as more than a bit of a shot.

This project was difficult. Did we miss some things? Almost surely. Was it because of laziness? Definitely not.

The fact that we don't agree with you doesn't make us lazy.

Doctor No is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2013, 06:37 PM
  #364
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 8,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
I'll ask you directly, C1958 because maybe you'll spin your hockey rolodex of memories and come up with something.

Is there any goalie on the board that was one shot away from not making this list? I'll just pick one at random as it doesn't matter, Andrei Kostitsyn takes a long wrist shot that Thomas burbs up into the slot at the 2:29 mark of OT in game 7 of the 2011 Eastern Conference Quarterfinals that nearly caroms in off of Seidenberg (as he's not expecting such a bad rebound). If that goes in, there's zero chance Thomas is on this list...he might get mentioned in passing because he has two Vezina's and they just happened, but he's not a serious contender...

Can you spot a goalie where reasonably (no butterfly effect stuff) he is one shot from being on or off this list? I don't know the answer to this, it's an honest question...I just would hope that most of these goalies (the best 40 of all time, as it were) are not hanging on by such a fragile thread...
Isn't the consensus that's its harder to win a Vezina now than ever before?

I don't know of any other 2 time Vezina winners not making the list (Charlie Hodge, but he shared one as a backup).

And again, the what if argument. Perhaps we should start a what if list. I'm sure you know where that will lead us.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2013, 06:42 PM
  #365
Doctor No
Mod Supervisor
Retired?
 
Doctor No's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 23,708
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
Isn't the consensus that's its harder to win a Vezina now than ever before?

I don't know of any other 2 time Vezina winners not making the list (Charlie Hodge, but he shared one as a backup).
Hodge's would have been won under the old system (most prevalent goaltender on team with fewest goals against). Other than stature, the best comparable (before the past 30 years) is first-team all-star selections.

Doctor No is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2013, 06:47 PM
  #366
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,203
vCash: 500
One Start

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
I'll ask you directly, C1958 because maybe you'll spin your hockey rolodex of memories and come up with something.

Is there any goalie on the board that was one shot away from not making this list? I'll just pick one at random as it doesn't matter, Andrei Kostitsyn takes a long wrist shot that Thomas burbs up into the slot at the 2:29 mark of OT in game 7 of the 2011 Eastern Conference Quarterfinals that nearly caroms in off of Seidenberg (as he's not expecting such a bad rebound). If that goes in, there's zero chance Thomas is on this list...he might get mentioned in passing because he has two Vezina's and they just happened, but he's not a serious contender...

Can you spot a goalie where reasonably (no butterfly effect stuff) he is one shot from being on or off this list? I don't know the answer to this, it's an honest question...I just would hope that most of these goalies (the best 40 of all time, as it were) are not hanging on by such a fragile thread...
One shot or one start? Basically the same.

Billy Smith / Chico Resch:

http://www.flyershistory.com/cgi-bin....cgi?O19800012

Arbour started the 1980 playoffs alternating his two goalies. Smith played in game 1 a 8 - 1 rout. Resch gave up 4 goals in the first period of game two and never saw significant playoff work with the Islanders afterwards, much to Billy Smith's benefit. Chances are, no HHOF for Smith, no top 40.

Johnny Bower, 1959 Leafs incredible run to make the playoffs. Overlooked is the fact that in the last two Sunday games Bower gave up five and four goals well <.900 yet the Leafs scored six in each and won. Team does not bail-out Bower, they do not make the playoffs and Ed Chadwick comes back in the picture. No HHOF or top 40 Bower.

Similar analogies for Worsley in 1965, Tretiak in 1972.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2013, 07:28 PM
  #367
Mike Farkas
Hockey's Future Staff
Moron!
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,098
vCash: 500
Lazy was a poor choice of words, especially in light of the work that went into the project. I shouldn't have commented on it in such a fashion, my apologies.

My point - behind my obtuse use of language - was that it seems that it was a matter of two seasons happening in the past three years being selected over 2 (or more) seasons happening 50 years ago. Which normally the HoH board is pretty keen on preventing. But in this case, it felt kind of glossed over. Which, in no small part, was I a part of the glossing due to time constraints...

Yes, my use of the term lazy here was reckless, but I'd still like to the point to be evaluated even in retrospect. I'm legitimately surprised by how much of a surge Thomas got towards the top of the final poll...so that's why I'm asking, is there really this gap that exists between his two seasons and Kerr's two? Crozier's two? (for instance)

@DB - it's not so much the "what if" part that I'm interested in. It's the "we put a goalie in the upper reaches of historical fame, but his entire resume crumbles into the sea if Andrei Kostitsyn scored a goal on him in a first round series" - it's just hard to find on the list and harder to justify. That's the worry that I have when you put a goalie with such a weak resume on the board: you have to put other goalies with weak resumes on the board too or else it lends itself to inconsistency. The "what if" game is Resch over Smith, or the Rangers keeping Vanbiesbrouck over Richter or something like that...I mean, at a microlevel, maybe if that controversial goal from the '04 Finals counted and Kiprusoff won the Cup, he probably gets more than a passing glance. Personally, I'd put him on the list ahead of Thomas, but that's probably not a surprise to many. But with Kipper, there's no single shot that takes him from 36th to 86th...or where ever it drops him...

Marcel Dionne is #50 on the HoH Top-70 players of all time list...is there a single goal or assist that you can take away from Dionne that would drop him out of the top 70? Forsberg at #65...if he doesn't score that shootout goal in '94, does he drop out of the top 70? Any other goal of his?

Again, it's not the "what if" part that I'm interested in...it's the "look at how filmsy of a resume we have way up there, but it's inconsistent with previous lists and this list" part that is concerning to me...

@C1958 - Even with the Smith/Resch example, let's say Smith gets moved and Resch wins the Cups with the Isles...there's nothing certain about what Smith could do outside of Al Arbour. What if he's the missing piece in Washington or Minnesota...what if he gets to Calgary in the early 80's before Vernon surfaces...that doesn't preclude him from the list, like a single shot would do to Thomas...though your point is well taken.

I think Tretiak probably still gets similar love here, I mean, Holecek made top-20, Tretiak with or without '72 is getting recognized I have to believe.

Bower and Worsley are interesting, especially Bower.

Mike Farkas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2013, 07:52 PM
  #368
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,203
vCash: 500
Lumley / Rayner

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post

.@C1958 - Even with the Smith/Resch example, let's say Smith gets moved and Resch wins the Cups with the Isles...there's nothing certain about what Smith could do outside of Al Arbour. What if he's the missing piece in Washington or Minnesota...what if he gets to Calgary in the early 80's before Vernon surfaces...that doesn't preclude him from the list, like a single shot would do to Thomas...though your point is well taken.

I think Tretiak probably still gets similar love here, I mean, Holecek made top-20, Tretiak with or without '72 is getting recognized I have to believe.

Bower and Worsley are interesting, especially Bower.
My point about Tretiak focused on the minor positional adjustment he made in game 1 after Canada had taken a 2 - 0 lead. No adjustment and the game/series play differently.

See your swing goal point. In this project the best example would be Harry Lumley at #27, Chuck Rayner at #28. 1950 SC Final game 7 in OT. Pete Babando scores on Rayner. If the Rangers score in OT on Lumley then Rayner shoots ahead 3-5 slots while Lumley drops 5 or more slots.


Last edited by Canadiens1958: 01-30-2013 at 08:21 PM.
Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2013, 08:12 PM
  #369
Rob Scuderi
Registered User
 
Rob Scuderi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 2,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
Lazy was a poor choice of words, especially in light of the work that went into the project. I shouldn't have commented on it in such a fashion, my apologies.

My point - behind my obtuse use of language - was that it seems that it was a matter of two seasons happening in the past three years being selected over 2 (or more) seasons happening 50 years ago. Which normally the HoH board is pretty keen on preventing. But in this case, it felt kind of glossed over. Which, in no small part, was I a part of the glossing due to time constraints...

Yes, my use of the term lazy here was reckless, but I'd still like to the point to be evaluated even in retrospect. I'm legitimately surprised by how much of a surge Thomas got towards the top of the final poll...so that's why I'm asking, is there really this gap that exists between his two seasons and Kerr's two? Crozier's two? (for instance)
The answer to me, which may be unsatisfying, is what Cs58 said about pandering to eras. We wanted to give Lundqvist credit for being consistent in an era of hyper parody among goalies. Thomas's peak coming in the same era has to be given the same credit. Is being a two-time 1st teamer in that period more impressive than doing the same thing in the late 30s/early 40s? I voted Thomas ahead of Kerr so obviously my answer was yes.

Rob Scuderi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2013, 09:29 PM
  #370
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 8,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
Lazy was a poor choice of words, especially in light of the work that went into the project. I shouldn't have commented on it in such a fashion, my apologies.

My point - behind my obtuse use of language - was that it seems that it was a matter of two seasons happening in the past three years being selected over 2 (or more) seasons happening 50 years ago. Which normally the HoH board is pretty keen on preventing. But in this case, it felt kind of glossed over. Which, in no small part, was I a part of the glossing due to time constraints...

Yes, my use of the term lazy here was reckless, but I'd still like to the point to be evaluated even in retrospect. I'm legitimately surprised by how much of a surge Thomas got towards the top of the final poll...so that's why I'm asking, is there really this gap that exists between his two seasons and Kerr's two? Crozier's two? (for instance)

@DB - it's not so much the "what if" part that I'm interested in. It's the "we put a goalie in the upper reaches of historical fame, but his entire resume crumbles into the sea if Andrei Kostitsyn scored a goal on him in a first round series" - it's just hard to find on the list and harder to justify. That's the worry that I have when you put a goalie with such a weak resume on the board: you have to put other goalies with weak resumes on the board too or else it lends itself to inconsistency. The "what if" game is Resch over Smith, or the Rangers keeping Vanbiesbrouck over Richter or something like that...I mean, at a microlevel, maybe if that controversial goal from the '04 Finals counted and Kiprusoff won the Cup, he probably gets more than a passing glance. Personally, I'd put him on the list ahead of Thomas, but that's probably not a surprise to many. But with Kipper, there's no single shot that takes him from 36th to 86th...or where ever it drops him...

Marcel Dionne is #50 on the HoH Top-70 players of all time list...is there a single goal or assist that you can take away from Dionne that would drop him out of the top 70? Forsberg at #65...if he doesn't score that shootout goal in '94, does he drop out of the top 70? Any other goal of his?

Again, it's not the "what if" part that I'm interested in...it's the "look at how filmsy of a resume we have way up there, but it's inconsistent with previous lists and this list" part that is concerning to me...

@C1958 - Even with the Smith/Resch example, let's say Smith gets moved and Resch wins the Cups with the Isles...there's nothing certain about what Smith could do outside of Al Arbour. What if he's the missing piece in Washington or Minnesota...what if he gets to Calgary in the early 80's before Vernon surfaces...that doesn't preclude him from the list, like a single shot would do to Thomas...though your point is well taken.

I think Tretiak probably still gets similar love here, I mean, Holecek made top-20, Tretiak with or without '72 is getting recognized I have to believe.

Bower and Worsley are interesting, especially Bower.
How about the gap between Thomas and two-season wonder Bernie Parent? That's a big gap, no?

So how does Mr. Flimsy Resume get on all 27 voters lists?

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2013, 09:44 PM
  #371
quoipourquoi
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 3,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
it's not so much the "what if" part that I'm interested in. It's the "we put a goalie in the upper reaches of historical fame, but his entire resume crumbles into the sea if Andrei Kostitsyn scored a goal on him in a first round series" - it's just hard to find on the list and harder to justify. That's the worry that I have when you put a goalie with such a weak resume on the board: you have to put other goalies with weak resumes on the board too or else it lends itself to inconsistency. The "what if" game is Resch over Smith, or the Rangers keeping Vanbiesbrouck over Richter or something like that...I mean, at a microlevel, maybe if that controversial goal from the '04 Finals counted and Kiprusoff won the Cup, he probably gets more than a passing glance. Personally, I'd put him on the list ahead of Thomas, but that's probably not a surprise to many. But with Kipper, there's no single shot that takes him from 36th to 86th...or where ever it drops him...

Marcel Dionne is #50 on the HoH Top-70 players of all time list...is there a single goal or assist that you can take away from Dionne that would drop him out of the top 70? Forsberg at #65...if he doesn't score that shootout goal in '94, does he drop out of the top 70? Any other goal of his?

Again, it's not the "what if" part that I'm interested in...it's the "look at how filmsy of a resume we have way up there, but it's inconsistent with previous lists and this list" part that is concerning to me...
Here's my problem with your argument: the nature of the goaltending position places a higher emphasis on ONE shot than any other position. Marcel Dionne doesn't get a black mark on his statline every time he takes a shot that doesn't go in; goaltenders get one every time they miss. And saying that it's only one shot is bogus, Mike. He had three rounds of hockey that followed that save. You're taking 620 shots away from Tim Thomas in your hypothetical if-Thomas-was-a-worse-goalie-we-would-rate-him-lower scenario. 620 shots of Conn Smythe hockey. Taking away those 620 shots (of which Thomas stopped 94% - because he's a Top-40 goaltender) would knock him off the list because he's at the bottom of the list. That's not to say that one shot going the other way wouldn't make a difference for a lot of the goaltenders we've discussed.

Patrick Roy was one overtime goal away from losing in the second round of 1986 and having his run go down in history with the Braden Holtbys and Theo Fleurys of the four-round era instead of the Wayne Gretzkys and Mario Lemieuxs.

Dominik Hasek was one overtime goal away from dropping four-straight games to the Colorado Avalanche and never winning the Stanley Cup. He was also one overtime goal away from playing Finland in the Bronze Medal Game in 1998.

Ken Dryden was one goal away from giving Chicago a 3-0 lead in Game 7 and never winning the Conn Smythe.

Martin Brodeur was one overtime goal away from losing to Florida last year and having a decade of underwhelming playoff runs since Scott Stevens' left.


But like Tim Thomas, they made these saves, and they earned the trophies and reputation boosts that followed them. As for Miikka Kiprusoff, he was in a similar situation in Round 1 of 2004. One goal away from being the 36-year-old goalie from the four-round era with only 13 playoff wins and not a single series victory to hang his hat on.

No one commented on the "flimsy" resumes at the end of the project as much as you, Mike, so I don't see why it would come as a shock to you to find that towards the very bottom, every playoff round for these guys counts for something. Take away his Stanley Cup, Conn Smythe, and turn his all-time great playoff into a first-round knockout? Yeah, even a two-time Vezina winner with a short NHL career is going to feel that one. But he made the save, the resume didn't crumble, and he earned his place on our list.

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2013, 12:21 AM
  #372
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,269
vCash: 500
These examples are fun to read. Those single shots could have made a difference in the careers of these goalies. They might have even lost a spot or two on the list.

But Mike has a point when he says that Thomas was one shot away from not having a chance at this list. It's absolutely true.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2013, 12:32 AM
  #373
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,831
vCash: 500
Conversely Luongo was one more good game, or one more good game from his team away from stealing that thunder.

__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2013, 12:46 AM
  #374
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,595
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
But Mike has a point when he says that Thomas was one shot away from not having a chance at this list. It's absolutely true.
He still would've been better than Lundqvist, so apparently not.

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-31-2013, 07:14 AM
  #375
Mike Farkas
Hockey's Future Staff
Moron!
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,098
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
How about the gap between Thomas and two-season wonder Bernie Parent? That's a big gap, no?

So how does Mr. Flimsy Resume get on all 27 voters lists?
I also severely questioned Parent for the record, I held him down for a while in my voting as I recall. I remember saying something like, "I look at the rest of his resume besides 1974 and 1975 and keep wondering, 'what else?'"

I'll admit, I did make one somewhat political play in this whole thing. I included Thomas at the bottom of my list for fear of it being rejected otherwise. That was my only move that was disingenuous in the project. Even so, he gets on 26 of 27 top-60 lists, and again, he just had his 15 minutes of fame in the last hour...he's fresh in everyone's head. Not many Dave Kerr stories floating around the press these days...

qpq- That's fair. And while I don't have time to properly respond at the moment. I'll say that those goalies would not be precluded from things in such a fashion like Thomas would have been...I mean, maybe Roy goes from 1 to 3 or something...2...but Thomas wouldn't have gotten into the top-50 I wouldn't think...

Mike Farkas is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:14 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.