Patrick Roy is the obvious choice. Martin Brodeur and Dominik Hasek were innovators in their own ways.
I don't think Hasek can be called an innovator, as noone has been able to, or wanted to emulate his style. Hasek was a special case of eye/body coordination and instinct+reflexes. Probably one notch weirder than other goalies. And we all know goalies are a weird bunch to begin with.
On Roach's GAA: he had an above league average GAA every year from 21-22 to 29-30. 1930-31 was his first below average season, 1.89 vs 2.31.
It has been said several times that Connell led the league in GAA only once, but no one has said anything about how much he led the league by that year. In 1925-26 he had a 1.12 GAA while the 2nd best was 1.90, and the league average was 2.22.
It has been said several times that Connell led the league in GAA only once, but no one has said anything about how much he led the league by that year. In 1925-26 he had a 1.12 GAA while the 2nd best was 1.90, and the league average was 2.22.
We have the top 14 in Hart voting that season (thank you for your contributions to the awards voting thread) and Connell wasn't in it.
Connells teammates who finished above him:
Frank Nighbor, the best defensive forward of the era finished 3rd.
Hooley Smith, another great defensive forward, tied for 4th
King Clancy, a great two-way defenseman finished 8th.
Roy Worters, voted by GMs as the best goalie that season, was tied with Smith for 4th in Hart voting (the only goalie in the top 14, so I wouldn't hold it too much against Connell, other than to show that he wasn't considered the primary reason for Ottawa's low GAA that season).
Bower would soon retire. Sawchuk left us tragically. Plante would go on to record several more seasons of 30-40 GP until 1975, Worsley had a few years of 12-34 GP until 1974, and Hall would have another season of 32 GP.
The active-by-year goaltenders list makes it seem like an over-represented era, when in fact it was an era in which both expansion and the prevalent use of a two-goalie system allowed for the extended careers of many of our top goaltenders of all-time. These older players were not Cheevers' true NHL contemporaries, and their continued presence as tandem goaltenders in a recently expanded league should not alone be cause to leave off a goaltender 11-16 years younger than them.
Bower would soon retire. Sawchuk left us tragically. Plante would go on to record several more seasons of 30-40 GP until 1975, Worsley had a few years of 12-34 GP until 1974, and Hall would have another season of 32 GP.
The active-by-year goaltenders list makes it seem like an over-represented era, when in fact it was an era in which both expansion and the prevalent use of a two-goalie system allowed for the extended careers of many of our top goaltenders of all-time. These older players were not Cheevers' true NHL contemporaries, and their continued presence as tandem goaltenders in a recently expanded league should not alone be cause to leave off a goaltender 11-16 years younger than them.
But those older players were basically out by the early 70s, and our overrepresentation basically continues througout the 1970s, which is when Cheevers did most of his damage
I think it's because we've been taking the NHL accomplishments of 70s goalies at face value, without taking into account the talent that was in Europe or the WHA at the time. (Though Gerry Cheevers himself might have been the best WHA goaltender).
Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 01-23-2013 at 04:25 PM.
Reason: clarification
Bower would soon retire. Sawchuk left us tragically. Plante would go on to record several more seasons of 30-40 GP until 1975, Worsley had a few years of 12-34 GP until 1974, and Hall would have another season of 32 GP.
The active-by-year goaltenders list makes it seem like an over-represented era, when in fact it was an era in which both expansion and the prevalent use of a two-goalie system allowed for the extended careers of many of our top goaltenders of all-time. These older players were not Cheevers' true NHL contemporaries, and their continued presence as tandem goaltenders in a recently expanded league should not alone be cause to leave off a goaltender 11-16 years younger than them.
Transition era featuring the introduction of the tandem goalie system and a few expansions.
Conversely if we take a different perspective and ask how many NHL games does Cheevers get without expansion then he does not fare that well either. Probably not enough to come close to the HHOF or consideration here.
We have the top 14 in Hart voting that season (thank you for your contributions to the awards voting thread) and Connell wasn't in it.
Connells teammates who finished above him:
Frank Nighbor, the best defensive forward of the era finished 3rd.
Hooley Smith, another great defensive forward, tied for 4th
King Clancy, a great two-way defenseman finished 8th.
Roy Worters, voted by GMs as the best goalie that season, was tied with Smith for 4th in Hart voting (the only goalie in the top 14, so I wouldn't hold it too much against Connell, other than to show that he wasn't considered the primary reason for Ottawa's low GAA that season).
Yes, Connell doesn't appear in the Hart voting, but until he retired in 1937, only one 1st place goalie did, Forbes in 1925. None of the Vezina winners appear in the voting results.
I just think that the credit we can give Connell for having such a low GAA is limited when he played on the team that was the most defensively dominant team in hockey by a wide margin.
Ottawa had the best defensemen in the league, and the best defensive forwards in the league, at a time when starters still played almost the full 60 minutes.
Frank Nighbor, by himself, could dominate games defensively from the neutral zone with no forward pass allowed.
I just think that the credit we can give Connell for having such a low GAA is limited when he played on the team that was the most defensively dominant team in hockey by a wide margin.
Ottawa had the best defensemen in the league, and the best defensive forwards in the league, at a time when starters still played almost the full 60 minutes.
Frank Nighbor, by himself, could dominate games defensively from the neutral zone with no forward pass allowed.
His GAA was only 0.12 higher two years later, without being able to boast nearly the same claim. Look at how different the offensive contributions of the top Ottawa players you're alluding to were from '25/26 to '26/27 to '27/28, and tell me they were still having the same impact judged on a league-wide scale. Hainsworth might be the goalie best able to make that bolded claim in '27/28, and he's the only goalie to manage a better GAA that year. I think there's only so much credit you can take away from Connell for that set of factors, given how other goalies behind incredible defensive squads/systems from the past have been treated. Having game data in later seasons for Beveridge suggests that apparently it might have mattered who was between the pipes, too.
I just think that the credit we can give Connell for having such a low GAA is limited when he played on the team that was the most defensively dominant team in hockey by a wide margin.
Ottawa had the best defensemen in the league, and the best defensive forwards in the league, at a time when starters still played almost the full 60 minutes.
Frank Nighbor, by himself, could dominate games defensively from the neutral zone with no forward pass allowed.
But the bolded applies to multiple goalies already ranked in the project.
Hasek / Peca, Worsley / H. Richard, Bower / Keon, Lumley / Ted Kennedy, Holecek / origins of the left wing lock, Clint Benedict with a younger, better, deeper Ottawa Senators team even though Connell had a better GAA. Just a few of many examples.
His GAA was only 0.12 higher two years later, without being able to boast nearly the same claim. Look at how different the offensive contributions of the top Ottawa players you're alluding to were from '25/26 to '26/27 to '27/28, and tell me they were still having the same impact judged on a league-wide scale. Hainsworth might be the goalie best able to make that bolded claim in '27/28, and he's the only goalie to manage a better GAA that year. I think there's only so much credit you can take away from Connell for that set of factors, given how other goalies behind incredible defensive squads/systems from the past have been treated.
Ottawa still had Nighbor as their go-to center and Georges Boucher and King Clancy as their top defensive pairing in 1927-28, again still at a time when the top pairings played most of the game. Their leading scorers were Frank Finnigan and Hec Kilrea, both known as very good defensive players (the publication Ultimate Hockey awarded Finnigan multiple Retro Selkes). I don't put much stock into their retro awards, but they wouldn't have given retro selkes to a guy if he wasn't very good defensively.
But the bolded applies to multiple goalies already ranked in the project.
Hasek / Peca, Worsley / H. Richard, Bower / Keon, Lumley / Ted Kennedy, Holecek / origins of the left wing lock, Clint Benedict with a younger, better, deeper Ottawa Senators team even though Connell had a better GAA. Just a few of many examples.
Connell had a better GAA because he played in a lower scoring era.
With the possible exception of Ken Dryden's Canadiens, no team in history has ever been as stacked defensively relative to the rest of the league as the Ottawa Senators that Benedict played behind and Connell played behind during the first part of his career.
I don't think you can take anything from the raw GAA of early goalies who played back when top skaters played all or most of the game.
Ottawa still had Nighbor as their go-to center and Georges Boucher and King Clancy as their top defensive pairing in 1927-28, again still at a time when the top pairings played most of the game. Their leading scorers were Frank Finnigan and Hec Kilrea, both known as very good defensive players (the publication Ultimate Hockey awarded Finnigan multiple Retro Selkes). I don't put much stock into their retro awards, but they wouldn't have given retro selkes to a guy if he wasn't very good defensively.
Sure, but how does all of that compare to having 25 year olds Morenz and Mantha patrolling the ice in front of you, like Hainsworth did in '27/28, just for one example, or Thompson behind Stewart/Shore/Clapper just a couple of years later, for another? I mean, how much effort are you going to spend "taking away" from all of them "consistently" - as opposed to perhaps just "adding on" to those who might specifically/particularly deserve it?
The counter-argument in important contextually, of course, but how much are you forcing yourself to not just ignore, but penalize, someone for something that, in an of itself, is such a positive?
Transition era featuring the introduction of the tandem goalie system and a few expansions.
Conversely if we take a different perspective and ask how many NHL games does Cheevers get without expansion then he does not fare that well either. Probably not enough to come close to the HHOF or consideration here.
Cheevers was playing behind Eddie Johnston the last year of the original 6. Bernie Parent was also in the mix. The Bruins kept Cheevers.
Maybe Parent never sees the light of day without expansion.
Connell had a better GAA because he played in a lower scoring era.
With the possible exception of Ken Dryden's Canadiens, no team in history has ever been as stacked defensively relative to the rest of the league as the Ottawa Senators that Benedict played behind and Connell played behind during the first part of his career.
I don't think you can take anything from the raw GAA of early goalies who played back when top skaters played all or most of the game.
Name any other team that dominated in GA like Ottawa in 25-26.
His 1.12 is 0.78 lower than the 1.90 of Worters in 2nd place. Ottawa is 28 GA better than #2 in a 36 game schedule. Take away all 15 of his shutouts and he's a close #2 to Worters with 1.91.
Connell had a better GAA because he played in a lower scoring era.
With the possible exception of Ken Dryden's Canadiens, no team in history has ever been as stacked defensively relative to the rest of the league as the Ottawa Senators that Benedict played behind and Connell played behind during the first part of his career.
I don't think you can take anything from the raw GAA of early goalies who played back when top skaters played all or most of the game.
The majority of Connell's regular season and playoff games came after the forward pass arrived on the scene at the start of the 1929-30 season:
So the scoring was higher than you imply. As for the defensive team aspect Connell won the SC with the 1935 Maroons a solid defensive team led by Lionel Conacher on defense.
Sure, but how does all of that compare to having 25 year olds Morenz and Mantha patrolling the ice in front of you, like Hainsworth did in '27/28, just for one example, or Thompson behind Stewart/Shore/Clapper just a couple of years later, for another? I mean, how much effort are you going to spend "taking away" from all of them "consistently" - as opposed to perhaps just "adding on" to those who might specifically/particularly deserve it?
I don't think you should judge those goalies based only on their GAA either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958
The majority of Connell's regular season and playoff games came after the forward pass arrived on the scene at the start of the 1929-30 season:
So the scoring was higher than you imply. As for the defensive team aspect Connell won the SC with the 1935 Maroons a solid defensive team led by Lionel Conacher on defense.
Name any other team that dominated in GA like Ottawa in 25-26.
His 1.12 is 0.78 lower than the 1.90 of Worters in 2nd place. Ottawa is 28 GA better than #2 in a 36 game schedule. Take away all 15 of his shutouts and he's a close #2 to Worters with 1.91.
And if you credit it to any one player, I would credit it to Frank Nighbor above anyone else, though I'm sure Hooley Smith, King Clancy, George Boucher, and Alec Connell himself all did their parts.
Edit: Is there any evidence that Connell, in particular, was given special credit for Ottawa's GAA in 1925-26?
In the game reports, I've found, Connell is seldom ever mentioned like a "first star" would be. Usually deferring to Frank Nighbor, for starters. Certainly didn't get as much praise as you might expect for those numbers. I made a lengthy post in the stickied thread that accompanies this project that somewhat touches on that in wall-of-text, rant fashion. The more I think about Connell, the more I think he might be a mistake to include. I think we're chasing something that's not there, personally. He's probably not too terribly far out from 40, but he probably doesn't belong we'll come to find out when more research material is made available to us.
In the game reports, I've found, Connell is seldom ever mentioned like a "first star" would be. Usually deferring to Frank Nighbor, for starters. Certainly didn't get as much praise as you might expect for those numbers. I made a lengthy post in the stickied thread that accompanies this project that somewhat touches on that in wall-of-text, rant fashion. The more I think about Connell, the more I think he might be a mistake to include. I think we're chasing something that's not there, personally. He's probably not too terribly far out from 40, but he probably doesn't belong we'll come to find out when more research material is made available to us.
I've been critical of the posts that IMO are overrating Connell's contribution to his team's GAA, but who do you propose replace him in the top 40?
