HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Round 2, Vote 10 (HOH Top Goaltenders final round)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-23-2013, 06:49 PM
  #176
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pacific NW
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Doubtful. Pre expansion, 26 year old Cheevers had played 31 NHL games while 21 year old Parent had already played 57 NHL games.
Ya, I think the thing there was that although Parent had played more NHL games than Cheesy, the latter had been outstanding in Rochester leading that team to 48 wins and the Calder Cup in 65, while Bernie struggled, 3.67 GAA playing for the Bruins, who as we know at that time were hardly the toast of the league they were very shortly about to become. Bernie to me was a superior goaltender, however not always so, his work with Jacques Plante turning his game around, going from "good" to "excellent". Very interesting character to boot. Quite the loner. Didnt even start skating until 11 in Montreal. While with Boston, nervous, bordering on fear in facing NHL'rs, whereas Cheevers was the complete opposite having been so successful in the AHL, exuding considerably more confidence with a bit of a laissez faire attitude more suited to Boston at that time.

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2013, 06:54 PM
  #177
Mike Farkas
Hockey's Future Staff
Moron!
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,995
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
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?
Maybe there isn't an answer to that. But I'd like to give Roach and Liut a shot at it to be honest. Besides Fuhr and Smith, who was definitely better than Liut in the 80's?

Mike Farkas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2013, 07:02 PM
  #178
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,735
vCash: 500
1967-68 Season

Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
Ya, I think the thing there was that although Parent had played more NHL games than Cheesy, the latter had been outstanding in Rochester leading that team to 48 wins and the Calder Cup in 65, while Bernie struggled, 3.67 GAA playing for the Bruins, who as we know at that time were hardly the toast of the league they were very shortly about to become. Bernie to me was a superior goaltender, however not always so, his work with Jacques Plante turning his game around, going from "good" to "excellent". Very interesting character to boot. Quite the loner. Didnt even start skating until 11 in Montreal. While with Boston, nervous, bordering on fear in facing NHL'rs, whereas Cheevers was the complete opposite having been so successful in the AHL, exuding considerably more confidence with a bit of a laissez faire attitude more suited to Boston at that time.
After the Esposito trade with Chicago, the Bruins felt they were playoff contenders so they prepared their protected list for the expansion list accordingly, going with veteran goalies not young prospects.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2013, 07:12 PM
  #179
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pacific NW
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
...going with veteran goalies not young prospects.
... and Gerry had 5yrs on Bernie at a critical time, decision made simple for Hap Emms' & Milt Schmidt.

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2013, 07:15 PM
  #180
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
Maybe there isn't an answer to that. But I'd like to give Roach and Liut a shot at it to be honest. Besides Fuhr and Smith, who was definitely better than Liut in the 80's?
Well, by as early as ~'85/86, lots of goalies imo. Liut resides in the background of what other guys like Beezer, Barrasso, and even Lemelin/Moog were doing for almost the entire last half of that decade, imo of course, and there are also guys like Vernon, Hextall, and Roy mixed in before all is said and done. Depends on where and how you place your weights. The '80s are a tough decade to try and use in its entirety for the purposes of player comparison at all positions, really.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2013, 07:30 PM
  #181
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pacific NW
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,136
vCash: 500
Pete Peeters. Wheres' he at? He had the best Winning % and 2nd best GAA in the 80's no?

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2013, 10:18 PM
  #182
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,646
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
After the Esposito trade with Chicago, the Bruins felt they were playoff contenders so they prepared their protected list for the expansion list accordingly, going with veteran goalies not young prospects.
So coming off a 44 point season, 14 points behind the 5th place team, 28 points out of the playoffs, the Bruins decided they were contenders? Seriously?

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2013, 10:33 PM
  #183
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,920
vCash: 500
Current thoughts:

I like Lundqvist as #1 this round, and after reading the arguments so far, I'm really not seeing anyone better than Thomas for #2.

Alec Connell? He seems almost like a default choice to make the top 4, but I'm not yet convinced any of the other guys are better.

I thought Kiprusoff was a good candidate for the top 4 because of the quality of his short peak and his workhorse status after the peak, but I'm not sure anymore after seeing his road save percentages.

Liut looks somewhat attractive, but I don't think he was as close to as consistently elite in the regular season as someone like Luongo or Lundqvist, and his playoff record is no better.

Roach? His contemporaries praise him a lot, but why was Connell inducted into the HHOF and Roach wasn't? We added non-HHOFer Vachon before HHOFer Cheevers, but I think we have a lot more information (statistical and otherwise) from the 1970s.

Rollins? Is it time to induct a pre-expansion non-HHOFer? Did he accomplish enough in his relatively short career?

Cheevers? We have so many goalies from the 70s. What makes a guy who was never top 3 in the NHL so special that he should be added? On the other hand, he's the only post-expansion HHOFer left. But I have a feeling he achieved a lot of his "fame" by being Bobby Orr's goalie.

Dzurilla? Seems kind of a cop out not to even consider him because "it's hard." But, it is hard.

Kerr? a 3 year peak as good as almost anyone left, but it wasn't enough for the Hall to induct him. should that matter?

Chabot? Called a clutch goalie, but so was Cheevers, and Cheevers is at least in the HHOF. And it seems to me like Connell and Roach were usually considered better when they all played at the same time. I'm still unimpressed by Chabot at this point.

Richter? The worse regular season NHL goalie here (and that includes Vernon and Hextall), but something has to be said for his stellar international resume, right? Still doubt I vote for him though.

I think it's too early for Hern, Hextall, and Vernon.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2013, 10:34 PM
  #184
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,586
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
I'd hate to see Gerry Cheevers fall victim to the belief that we've added too many goaltenders from 1968-1980 already. Here's the list from TDMM:

1968-1969: 11
1970: 12
1971: 11
1972-1973: 10
1974-1975: 9
1976-1978: 8
1979: 7
1980: 6

And here are the ages and NHL GPs in the beginning years of the list:

1968 (Age)
Bower (43), Plante (39), Worsley (38), Sawchuk (38), Hall (36), Giacomin (28), Esposito (24), Holecek (24), Vachon (22), Parent (22), Tretiak (16)

1968 (NHL GP)
Bower (43), Plante (0), Worsley (40), Sawchuk (36), Hall (49), Giacomin (66), Esposito (0), Holecek (0), Vachon (39), Parent (38), Tretiak (0)

1969 (Age)
Bower (44), Plante (40), Worsley (39), Sawchuk (39), Hall (37), Giacomin (29), Esposito (25), Holecek (25), Vachon (23), Parent (23), Tretiak (17)

1969 (NHL GP)
Bower (20), Plante (37), Worsley (30), Sawchuk (13), Hall (41), Giacomin (70), Esposito (13), Holecek (0), Vachon (36), Parent (58), Tretiak (0)

1970 (Age)
Bower (45), Plante (41), Worsley (40), Sawchuk (40), Hall (38), Giacomin (30), Esposito (26), Holecek (26), Vachon (24), Parent (24), Dryden (22), Tretiak (18)

1970 (NHL GP)
Bower (1), Plante (32), Worsley (14), Sawchuk (8), Hall (18), Giacomin (70), Esposito (63), Holecek (0), Vachon (64), Parent (62), Dryden (0), Tretiak (0)


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.
good point... I'd like to see that list redone, only counting years where each goalie was a relevant player, performing at a level that was adding to their all-tiem value.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
Maybe there isn't an answer to that. But I'd like to give Roach and Liut a shot at it to be honest. Besides Fuhr and Smith, who was definitely better than Liut in the 80's?
to add to that, how sure are we that he wasn't better than them himself? He earned more personal recognition than any other goalie in the decade, and it's a little "too convenient" that the best goalies of the decade are the ones who swept 8 of 10 cups. Chicken, or egg? Did you really need to have a top-2 goalie to win the cup for a period of 9 years? It's never been that way at any other time in history.

I know, we already dropped those two further than "conventional wisdom" (winners = teh awesom) would have them, but it's food for thought at least.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2013, 10:52 PM
  #185
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,920
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post


to add to that, how sure are we that he wasn't better than them himself? He earned more personal recognition than any other goalie in the decade, and it's a little "too convenient" that the best goalies of the decade are the ones who swept 8 of 10 cups. Chicken, or egg? Did you really need to have a top-2 goalie to win the cup for a period of 9 years? It's never been that way at any other time in history.

I know, we already dropped those two further than "conventional wisdom" (winners = teh awesom) would have them, but it's food for thought at least.
Did Liut really get more regular season accolades than Fuhr?

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2013, 11:13 PM
  #186
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,586
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Did Liut really get more regular season accolades than Fuhr?
1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th in AS/Vezina, 2nd, 3rd, 6th for the Hart

1st, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd in AS/Vezina, 2nd, 6th for the Hart

that's pretty even, if anything.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2013, 11:17 PM
  #187
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,735
vCash: 500
Other Teams

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
So coming off a 44 point season, 14 points behind the 5th place team, 28 points out of the playoffs, the Bruins decided they were contenders? Seriously?
The Esposito trade gave the Bruins a number 1 and number 2 center plus a solid winger.in Ken Hodge. Also a May trade brought Eddie Shack for Murray Oliver, adding scoring, size and toughness.

Toronto, Chicago and Detroit were regarded as weaker than at the end of 1966-67 since age was catching -up to them.

The Bruins were counting on an improved and healthy Bobby Orr. Healthy Ted Green and Gary Doak.Incoming Derek Sanderson was viewed as a 3rd center at least.

Overall, the team had more size, speed, scoring and toughness. So the choice of an older Cheevers was in keeping with their outlook.

Also the Bruins left many good young skaters unprotected in the expansion draft. Gary Dornhoefer, Bill Goldsworthy, J.P. Parise, Bob Woytowich.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2013, 01:59 AM
  #188
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I like Lundqvist as #1 this round, and after reading the arguments so far
Too bad you apparently didn't read any of the arguments that exposed Lundqvist for the fraud that he is.

MadArcand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2013, 11:52 AM
  #189
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,586
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Too bad you apparently didn't read any of the arguments that exposed Lundqvist for the fraud that he is.
There were arguments that did this?

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2013, 12:51 PM
  #190
quoipourquoi
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 2,917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
to add to that, how sure are we that he wasn't better than them himself? He earned more personal recognition than any other goalie in the decade, and it's a little "too convenient" that the best goalies of the decade are the ones who swept 8 of 10 cups. Chicken, or egg? Did you really need to have a top-2 goalie to win the cup for a period of 9 years? It's never been that way at any other time in history.

I know, we already dropped those two further than "conventional wisdom" (winners = teh awesom) would have them, but it's food for thought at least.
I would say it's less about him not winning Stanley Cup championships and more about him not even winning Division championships on his own when he probably should have. He's had great underdog playoffs on both the Whalers and the Blues, but on his best run for both teams, he gets knocked out in Game 7 overtime in the Adams and Norris Finals. Between that and the Canada Cup in 1981, the 33-point upset to the Rangers in 1981, the 21-point upset to the Nordiques in 1987, and relying on Beaupre to get him out of the first round in 1990 - deserved or not, he doesn't have the reputation of a Fuhr or a Smith for a reason, even with his comparable regular season accolades.

I don't think he should be far from Roberto Luongo or John Vanbiesbrouck, but I'm fairly sure that he was not better than Grant Fuhr or Billy Smith, and if he is, then it would mean that we overrated them and not necessarily underrated Mike Liut.

But he and I went to the same college, so by all means, vote for him.

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2013, 05:28 PM
  #191
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,646
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
The Esposito trade gave the Bruins a number 1 and number 2 center plus a solid winger.in Ken Hodge. Also a May trade brought Eddie Shack for Murray Oliver, adding scoring, size and toughness.

Toronto, Chicago and Detroit were regarded as weaker than at the end of 1966-67 since age was catching -up to them.

The Bruins were counting on an improved and healthy Bobby Orr. Healthy Ted Green and Gary Doak.Incoming Derek Sanderson was viewed as a 3rd center at least.

Overall, the team had more size, speed, scoring and toughness. So the choice of an older Cheevers was in keeping with their outlook.

Also the Bruins left many good young skaters unprotected in the expansion draft. Gary Dornhoefer, Bill Goldsworthy, J.P. Parise, Bob Woytowich.
Fred Stanfield had played 10 games the season before with 1 point. So the Bruins knew he was a legit #2 center?

Derek Sanderson had 2 NHL games the year before, so he was a 3rd line center at least?

Kenny Hodge was coming off his best best season, 10 goals.

There was no reason to think they would be playoff contenders when they left Parent unprotected in favor of Cheevers.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2013, 06:48 PM
  #192
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,735
vCash: 500
Selective

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
Fred Stanfield had played 10 games the season before with 1 point. So the Bruins knew he was a legit #2 center?

Derek Sanderson had 2 NHL games the year before, so he was a 3rd line center at least?

Kenny Hodge was coming off his best best season, 10 goals.

There was no reason to think they would be playoff contenders when they left Parent unprotected in favor of Cheevers.
Selective stats do not work.

Sanderson had been to the Bruins camp previously as a junior - old sponsorship days, plus he had led the OHA in scoring during the 1966-67 season so the Bruins knew what he could do.

Ken Hodge had led the OHA in scoring during the 1964-65 season. You add the 25 assists he recorded to the 10 goals as a part-time player and he ranked 1 point behind the top two Bruin RWs who played regularly.

Fred Stanfield played a full NHL season - 1964-65 as a 20 year old out of junior - OHA scoring 7 goals and 10 assists with the Hawks.

Given the talent levels of the skaters in question, the assessment made by the Bruins was accurate. Cheevers gave the team some needed experience in goal.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2013, 09:14 PM
  #193
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,646
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Selective stats do not work.

Sanderson had been to the Bruins camp previously as a junior - old sponsorship days, plus he had led the OHA in scoring during the 1966-67 season so the Bruins knew what he could do.

Ken Hodge had led the OHA in scoring during the 1964-65 season. You add the 25 assists he recorded to the 10 goals as a part-time player and he ranked 1 point behind the top two Bruin RWs who played regularly.

Fred Stanfield played a full NHL season - 1964-65 as a 20 year old out of junior - OHA scoring 7 goals and 10 assists with the Hawks.

Given the talent levels of the skaters in question, the assessment made by the Bruins was accurate. Cheevers gave the team some needed experience in goal.
Excellent 20/20 hindsight.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2013, 12:34 AM
  #194
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,920
vCash: 500
Gerry Cheevers spent 3 full seasons in the WHA and was an All Star each season. But against what competition?

1973 1st Team: Gerry Cheevers
1973 2nd Team: Bernie Parent

1974 1st Team: Don McLeod
1974 2nd Team: Gerry Cheevers

1975 1st Team: Ron Grahame
1975 2nd Team: Gerry Cheevers

IMO, only the 1973 WHA All Star nod is worth anything. Finishing 2nd to the likes of Don McLeod and Ron Grahame doesn't impress me.

So what do we have for regular season accolades for Cheevers? 1 NHL All Star Game (1969) and the best goalie in the WHA in 1973 over Bernie Parent.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2013, 07:15 AM
  #195
Mike Farkas
Hockey's Future Staff
Moron!
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,995
vCash: 500
Honest question, was the WHA competition considered better than the Soviet competition at the time? Meaning, which league is ranked higher? I'm assuming it's the SuperLeague, but it never was made readily apparent for me that the WHA was anything more than a very good high minors league with some star talent at the top, but was largely backfilled with "meh" talent.

Like the AHL during a lockout year?

Mike Farkas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2013, 08:42 AM
  #196
BM67
Registered User
 
BM67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In "The System"
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,573
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Gerry Cheevers spent 3 full seasons in the WHA and was an All Star each season. But against what competition?

1973 1st Team: Gerry Cheevers
1973 2nd Team: Bernie Parent

1974 1st Team: Don McLeod
1974 2nd Team: Gerry Cheevers

1975 1st Team: Ron Grahame
1975 2nd Team: Gerry Cheevers

IMO, only the 1973 WHA All Star nod is worth anything. Finishing 2nd to the likes of Don McLeod and Ron Grahame doesn't impress me.

So what do we have for regular season accolades for Cheevers? 1 NHL All Star Game (1969) and the best goalie in the WHA in 1973 over Bernie Parent.
So, you're going to rate the seasons off of name recognition only?

League average SV%: 72-73: .890, 73-74: .891, 74-75: .891

PlayerYearTeamGPMINWLTGAGAASOSASV%SA/60
Cheevers72-73CLC523144322001492.8451695.91232.35
Parent72-73PHB633653332802203.6121936.88631.80
Cheevers73-74CLC593562302061803.0341911.90632.19
McLeod73-74HSA492971331331272.5631432.91128.92
Cheevers74-75CLC523076262421673.2641763.90534.39
Grahame74-75HSA432590331001313.0341307.90030.28

BM67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2013, 08:59 AM
  #197
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,735
vCash: 500
Other Factors.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
Honest question, was the WHA competition considered better than the Soviet competition at the time? Meaning, which league is ranked higher? I'm assuming it's the SuperLeague, but it never was made readily apparent for me that the WHA was anything more than a very good high minors league with some star talent at the top, but was largely backfilled with "meh" talent.

Like the AHL during a lockout year?
WHA had more depth talent - goalies that could start or play a back-up role in the NHL. Soviets league had more high end offensive talent and yound defensive talent versus old in the WHA.

WHA lacked coaching - Billy Harris, Glen Sather, Jacques Demers were the best, the rest were rather weak. Phil Watson coached Philadelphia the first season and the team underachieved significantly.

Management was nothing great. Some like Maurice Filion learned on the job and became serviceable.

So when looking at the likes of Cheevers and Liut this round or Parent previously this has to be considered.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2013, 03:49 PM
  #198
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,920
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BM67 View Post
So, you're going to rate the seasons off of name recognition only?

League average SV%: 72-73: .890, 73-74: .891, 74-75: .891

PlayerYearTeamGPMINWLTGAGAASOSASV%SA/60
Cheevers72-73CLC523144322001492.8451695.91232.35
Parent72-73PHB633653332802203.6121936.88631.80
Cheevers73-74CLC593562302061803.0341911.90632.19
McLeod73-74HSA492971331331272.5631432.91128.92
Cheevers74-75CLC523076262421673.2641763.90534.39
Grahame74-75HSA432590331001313.0341307.90030.28
Okay, so Cheevers was better than the average WHA goalie; what exactly does that mean? The WHA wasn't exactly known for its defense and goaltending, right?

In 1973, Parent played on the worst defensive team in the WHA and had significantly better stats than any of his backups. (Cheevers had the best GAA in the league and stats significantly better than his no-name backup). It seems like 1973 was a legit great season for Cheevers, though it's hard to tell how great against WHA competition.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2013, 04:39 PM
  #199
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,646
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Okay, so Cheevers was better than the average WHA goalie; what exactly does that mean? The WHA wasn't exactly known for its defense and goaltending, right?

In 1973, Parent played on the worst defensive team in the WHA and had significantly better stats than any of his backups. (Cheevers had the best GAA in the league and stats significantly better than his no-name backup). It seems like 1973 was a legit great season for Cheevers, though it's hard to tell how great against WHA competition.
Yet Cheevers faced more shots per game.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2013, 04:50 PM
  #200
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,920
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
Yet Cheevers faced more shots per game.
1973

Cleveland Crusaders goalies:

Gerry Cheevers 52 GP, 2.84 GAA, .912 save percentage
Bob Whidden 26 GP, 3.28 GAA, .901 save percentatge

Philadelphia Blazers goalies:

Bernie Parent 63 GP, 3.61 GAA, 3.61 GAA, .886 save percentage
backups combined* 24 GP, 4.39 GAA, .871 save percentage

*There were 4 of them and they must have overlapped games to get that GP

I was assuming that the terrible goalie stats in Philadelphia were due to team defense, considering Parent was a 2nd Team All Star and significantly outperformed his backups.

TheDevilMadeMe 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 08:04 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.