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
Notices

The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Teams used to carry 3 goalies... why?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-06-2012, 12:53 AM
  #26
SealsFan
Registered User
 
SealsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 1,117
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
...pretty much. Take yer Seals for example.
over 10years saw a parade through the crease;

Lyle Carter
Bob Champoux
Marv Edwards
Charlie Hodge
Gary Kurt
Gilles Meloche
Gary Simmons
Gary Smith
Bob Sneddon
Ted Tucker
and Chris Worthy,
Maybe not the best example. Gary Smith was the starter the first 4 seasons with Charlie Hodge backing him up mostly, with Worthy backup for one season. Once Meloche came aboard he was the starter, and apart from his rookie year with Kurt and Carter backing him up, it was Meloche/Edwards, then Meloche/Simmons. 73/74 was an anomaly because both Meloche and Edwards got injured and career minor-leaguers Champoux and Tucker were called up. But I don't see where the Seals were rotating three goalies to try to find one who would stick, unlike some of the other teams mentioned. They were pretty much a 2-goalie team unless injuries forced more into the picture.

SealsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2012, 02:20 AM
  #27
Hoser
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,371
vCash: 500
Maybe not the best example of a team that carried three goalies who shared started duties relatively equally, but they often carried three goalies. The starter stayed relatively constant (Hodge in '67-'68, Smith from '68 to '71, Meloche from '71 to the Barons-North Stars merger of '78) but the backup position was a revolving door of mostly minor-leaguers until Gary Simmons was acquired in '74.

The backup in '67-'68 was Smith.

The backups in '68-'69 were Hodge and Chris Worthy. Fred Glover believed bigger = better and poor Charlie Hodge was a paltry 5'6", 150 lbs. They carried all three goalies until later in the season when Hodge was demoted to the Canucks of the WHL.

Hodge was backup in '69-'70; Worthy made one appearance.

In 1970 Hodge was selected in the expansion draft by the Canucks so Worthy got the job, but he had to battle with farmhand Bob Sneddon for it.

In '71 they got rid of both Sneddon and Worthy and brought in Gary Kurt and Lyle Carter. Neither asserted themselves and were gone: Carter was demoted and Kurt defected to the WHA. They brought in Marv Edwards in 1972; by then he was 37 years old.

Edwards played backup in '72-'73 and '73-'74, and yes, when both he and Meloche were injured Ted Tucker and Bob Champoux were pressed into action in the latter season. Otherwise Meloche and Edwards were the top two goalies.

In '74 they acquired Gary Simmons but they kept Marv Edwards on the roster. He didn't see any playing time and retired in '75 to take over coaching the Seals' farm team in '75-'76 and '76-'77, taking over for new Seals coach Jack Evans.

Simmons and Meloche were the only two goalies used until the team moved to Cleveland. In the first season in Cleveland Simmons was dealt to L.A. and Gary Edwards came in return. Edwards and Meloche played out the rest of the team's time in Cleveland (and the two of them took Pete LoPresti and Paul Harrison's jobs in Minnesota when the teams merged!).

Hoser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2012, 10:15 AM
  #28
DJ Man
Registered User
 
DJ Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: East Central Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 446
vCash: 500
Chicago had a lot of trouble getting a decent backup for Esposito, and he was usually overworked. Had they dumped Smith and Desjardins and kept Meloche, the Hawks would have had an impressive tandem for several years and a ready successor.

DJ Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2012, 02:22 PM
  #29
Hoser
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,371
vCash: 500
Smith was pretty good; he and Esposito shared the Vezina Trophy in '72. They might have fared better had they held on to either one of Smith or Desjardins but they were willing to give up Smith for Dale Tallon (then a 23-year-old who had played in two All-Star games entering only his fourth year) and lost Desjardins (who was also pretty good; you might recall he was the goalie who led the Sabres to the finals in 1975, not Roger Crozier) in the '72 Expansion Draft. It's quite conceivable they could have lost Meloche in '72 too if not for having moved him to California a year earlier.

I don't think the Hawks had troubles getting good backups for Esposito: they had trouble keeping them.


Last edited by Hoser: 05-06-2012 at 02:29 PM.
Hoser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2012, 10:44 PM
  #30
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 17,491
vCash: 500
The reason for carrying 3 goalies is simple: because it could be done.

The reason no one does it any more is also simple: because the 1994-95 lockout saw a reduction in the active roster from 25 to 24, then down to 23 in time for the 1999-00 season. Given the choice between carrying three goalies or being able to have a spare defenseman or forward, everyone chose the latter.

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2012, 10:59 PM
  #31
MS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 19,931
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
The reason for carrying 3 goalies is simple: because it could be done.

The reason no one does it any more is also simple: because the 1994-95 lockout saw a reduction in the active roster from 25 to 24, then down to 23 in time for the 1999-00 season. Given the choice between carrying three goalies or being able to have a spare defenseman or forward, everyone chose the latter.
Bingo.

It happens the odd time (Buffalo carried Mika Noronen around for most of the 2005-06 season, Detroit carried Kevin Hodson for most of one year in the late 1990s) but when you're only allowed 3 extra bodies on the roster past the 20 you dress every night, carrying an extra goalie makes zero sense. Only time it happens if a team is really deep in net and has a prime prospect they don't want to expose to waivers.

If there was a 28 man roster limit, loads of teams would be carrying 3 goalies.

MS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2012, 09:09 AM
  #32
Beerfish
Registered User
 
Beerfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,723
vCash: 500
The threesome I remember back when I was a young and Leaf fan was Doug Favelle, Dunc Wilson and Eddie Johnston.

Beerfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2013, 01:42 PM
  #33
canuckster19
Former CDC Mod
 
canuckster19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Gothenburg Sweden
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,704
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
The reason for carrying 3 goalies is simple: because it could be done.

The reason no one does it any more is also simple: because the 1994-95 lockout saw a reduction in the active roster from 25 to 24, then down to 23 in time for the 1999-00 season. Given the choice between carrying three goalies or being able to have a spare defenseman or forward, everyone chose the latter.
Sorry to bring up an old thread but I hoped to have a sort of debate...

How common do you think it would be for teams to carry 3 goalies if a 24th roster spot was open solely for an optional third goalie?

canuckster19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2013, 01:55 PM
  #34
Bear of Bad News
Mod Supervisor
 
Bear of Bad News's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Windsor
Posts: 4,418
vCash: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by canuckster19 View Post
Sorry to bring up an old thread but I hoped to have a sort of debate...

How common do you think it would be for teams to carry 3 goalies if a 24th roster spot was open solely for an optional third goalie?
I don't think it would happen any more than it happens now.

Bear of Bad News is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2013, 01:59 PM
  #35
Killion
Registered User
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Village
Country: Wales
Posts: 29,900
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by canuckster19 View Post
How common do you think it would be for teams to carry 3 goalies if a 24th roster spot was open solely for an optional third goalie?
I think actually you might want to reconsider the premise of your question canuckster as carrying 3 goalies is problematical in as much as a good goalie requires a lot of starts & playing time in order to stay sharp, get into a groove. Back-ups can struggle and in some cases not because their inferior to the starter but because they just dont get enough consistent game after game starts. Carrying a 3rd goalie redundant, however, it was at one time, first expansion through the early 70's practised by several teams, the Blues with the ageing Hall or Plante getting strings, short bursts then rested, the Leafs as well with variously Bruce Gamble & others sandwiched in between Sawchuk & Bower, Plante again & so on. Bottom line is goalies need to play a lot, the majority of a regular seasons schedule in order to stay sharp. 3rd stringer like a 5th wheel. Better he should go somewhere & actually play.

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2013, 02:42 PM
  #36
hockeydude1
#CatsAreComing
 
hockeydude1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 3,497
vCash: 500
I don't see it happening. If your gonna pay big bucks for someone like Luongo for example. You better make him play. If you have 3 goalies playing equal time, than its a big waste. Sure you can argue that resting your goalie would be good. However, how reliable are the other two goalies going to be? And how much resting before the starter (ex: luongo) gets frustrated about not getting minutes.

hockeydude1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2013, 04:16 PM
  #37
canuckster19
Former CDC Mod
 
canuckster19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Gothenburg Sweden
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,704
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeydude1 View Post
I don't see it happening. If your gonna pay big bucks for someone like Luongo for example. You better make him play. If you have 3 goalies playing equal time, than its a big waste. Sure you can argue that resting your goalie would be good. However, how reliable are the other two goalies going to be? And how much resting before the starter (ex: luongo) gets frustrated about not getting minutes.
I'm not saying having 3 rotating goalies is the better choice, I'm wondering if there are examples of where it might be useful to some teams in todays game who maybe don't have a clear #1 goalie.

canuckster19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2013, 04:36 PM
  #38
Bear of Bad News
Mod Supervisor
 
Bear of Bad News's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Windsor
Posts: 4,418
vCash: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by canuckster19 View Post
I'm not saying having 3 rotating goalies is the better choice, I'm wondering if there are examples of where it might be useful to some teams in todays game who maybe don't have a clear #1 goalie.
You asked how common it would be.

Bear of Bad News is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2013, 05:12 PM
  #39
Killion
Registered User
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Village
Country: Wales
Posts: 29,900
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by canuckster19 View Post
I'm not saying having 3 rotating goalies is the better choice, I'm wondering if there are examples of where it might be useful to some teams in todays game who maybe don't have a clear #1 goalie.
Only is as much as lets say in training camp you think youve got a number one however its fairly equal between two of them, a 3rd showing promise but not quite ready for Prime Time. You'd hope one of the top 2 wins the starting position early, not have to concern yourself thereafter. You want one guy, not 2 or God forbid 3 with a revolving door in the crease as its rather important to overall team chemistry & confidence that they can rely upon the #1 starter. Though most goalies today play the same style essentially, the difference not as dramatic as they once were requiring some adjustments by the team out front, there are enough differences, certain nuances, adjustments still being need to be made. Additionally, a good goalie will build a rapport, a certain understanding with his defenceman. That dynamic forever changing with a 3 goalie system or approach. Further, it adds extra pressure to each of the goalies if theres no clear starter. None of them feel comfortable or at ease, knowing that if they have a bad game could sit for weeks, months. Not unusual in fact for starters & backups to not exactly get along, be fast friends. Its enough of a competitive situation in some cases with 2 let alone 3 goalies. Arguable as well if theres even enough talent & coaching savvy going around to add 30 to the mix. I highly doubt that there is.

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2013, 07:47 PM
  #40
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,873
vCash: 500
Even 1969 had Vachon, Worsley and Esposito. Technically, Esposito's name is on the Cup that year, although he only played 13 games, and no postseason play.

I was going to also say that a goalie was more likely to get hurt with the shoddy equipment (or even no masks) but then remembered that in the O6 era it was common for a goalie to play every game with no back up in sight.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2013, 08:09 PM
  #41
Killion
Registered User
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Village
Country: Wales
Posts: 29,900
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
...in the O6 era it was common for a goalie to play every game with no back up in sight.
Ya, up until the early 60's. The 66-67 Stanley Cup Winning Leafs were a little unusual in that regard though, as they did have 3 mainstay goalies splitting the Regular Season & Playoffs:

Bower 27G
Sawchuk 28G
Bruce Gamble 23G
Gary Smith 2G

Gamble the following season the main starter, couple of years later when theyd acquired Plante & Parent, Bruce Gambles at 23 with Parent via trade for Gamble receiving 18, Plante 40... Murray McLachlan 2 starts before embarking on a solo music career, charting with Farmers Song and Down by the Henry Moore.

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2013, 07:30 PM
  #42
cujoflutie
Registered User
 
cujoflutie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: kitchener, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,193
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to cujoflutie Send a message via Yahoo to cujoflutie
I actually think some teams would use the 3rd goaltender more often if rules permitted. Consider this classic scenario;

team plays their #2 guy on the first of back to back nights with the intention of starting their #1 guy the next night. Team gets shelled. How often do you see them pull the #2 guy for the #1 guy? Sometimes they will if the #2 guy is playing badly and the game is within reach but rarely do you see the #1 guy sent in for mop up minutes.

Two cases I remember of backups being left out to dry; late in his Philly tenure, Ken Hitchock left Robert Esche in for a 9-0 loss (Hitch and Esche didn't get along, some people felt it was for spite). And of course the night Darryl Sittler scored 10 points, goalie Dave Reese played the entire game (his final of his career) due to the team playing the next night.


Hasek wasn't dressing for games he wasn't starting late in his career so the Wings usually had to use a 3rd goalie to backup Osgood.

I don't think a team would use a good prospect as the 3rd string in lieu of sending them to the AHL (as it is some choose to have them as #1 for the AHL team than #2 with the big club) but I could see them using some veterans as 3rd string or some guys whom they don't see starter potential.



Also to add to the discussion, Toronto did start the 2006-07 season with Raycroft, Aubin, and Tellqvist on the roster. Tellqvist played one game before being traded.

cujoflutie 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 09:54 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.