I get it, but this says it all for me:

Bobby Orr scored 139 points in 1970-71 en route to his second consecutive Hart trophy and 4th Norris in a row. The closest defenseman to that number? JC Tremblay with 63, or 76 fewer points.
- andru2797

To put that in even more perspective, look at the 1985-86 season where Gretzky put up 215 points. To have the same ratio above his next best peer (Lemieux), Gretzky would have had to put up 311 points, almost 100 points more just to keep the same ratio. In 1981-82 when Gretzky put up 212 points, he would have had to put up 324 to keep the same ratio above his next best peer (Bossy), 112 points more.

Orr was so far above his next closest peer it wasn't even funny not to mention how much he revolutionized the game.

Wow, the all time list only has 2 guys who played before the 60s? The NHL started in 1917, and it's hard to beleive that all the goalies of the early eras missed your list. Here's mine:

#1 - Georges Vezina - career began in the NHA, the predecessor to the NHL. He led the league in GAA 7 times, and was 2nd another 5 times. He played during a time when goalies were not allowed to leave their feet. 1 SC, and was one of the 9 inaugural inductees to the Hockey HOF. And they named the award for him after his tragic death.

#2 - Terry Sawchuck - 103 shutouts, 447 wins, 4 SC, 4 Vezina, 1 Calder. Is the goalie most often topping 'best of all time' lists, including The Hockey News

#3 - Jacques Plante - Played until age 46! He redefined the position becoming the first goalie to stray from his net and handle the puck to start rushes. Popularized, but did not invent, the mask. 7 Vezinas, 1 Hart, 5 SC. Was also Bernie Parent's personal goalie coach.

#4 - Glenn Hall - 18 years in the NHL. 3 Vezina, 1 Calder, 1 Smythe, 1 Stanley Cup. His best year may have been 67-68, when he teamed with Jacques Plante (best tandem ever) to lead the STL Blues to the SCF, winning the Conn Smythe on the losing team

#5 - Bill Durnan - Only played 7 years, but won the Vezina in 6, and was 1st Team AS, in 6 of his 7 seasons. 2 SC

#6 - Dominick Hasek - Best goalie I saw play at the peak of his career. 2 SC, 6 Vezina, 3 Jennings, 2 Pearsons (most outstanding player by NHLPA). 93.9 save % in the Olympics

#7 George Hainsworth - Didn't make the NHL until 31 YO, played until 41 YO. 94 shutouts (#3) 2nd lowest career GAA in history. In 28-29 his GAA was 0.98. 1.93 career GAA in 11 seasons. 3 Vezina, 2 SC

#8 Ken Dryden

#9 Turk Broda - 5 SC, 2 Vezina, career 1.98 playoff GAA in 101 playoff games

10. Marty Brodeur

BTW, the Hockey News list is:

1. Sawchuck
2. Plante
3. Hall
4. Roy
5. Dryden
6. Durnan
7. Hainsworth
8. Broda
9. Parent
10 Brimsek

Wow, the all time list only has 2 guys who played before the 60s? The NHL started in 1917, and it's hard to beleive that all the goalies of the early eras missed your list. Here's mine:

#1 - Georges Vezina - career began in the NHA, the predecessor to the NHL. He led the league in GAA 7 times, and was 2nd another 5 times. He played during a time when goalies were not allowed to leave their feet. 1 SC, and was one of the 9 inaugural inductees to the Hockey HOF. And they named the award for him after his tragic death.

#2 - Terry Sawchuck - 103 shutouts, 447 wins, 4 SC, 4 Vezina, 1 Calder. Is the goalie most often topping 'best of all time' lists, including The Hockey News

#3 - Jacques Plante - Played until age 46! He redefined the position becoming the first goalie to stray from his net and handle the puck to start rushes. Popularized, but did not invent, the mask. 7 Vezinas, 1 Hart, 5 SC. Was also Bernie Parent's personal goalie coach.

#4 - Glenn Hall - 18 years in the NHL. 3 Vezina, 1 Calder, 1 Smythe, 1 Stanley Cup. His best year may have been 67-68, when he teamed with Jacques Plante (best tandem ever) to lead the STL Blues to the SCF, winning the Conn Smythe on the losing team

#5 - Bill Durnan - Only played 7 years, but won the Vezina in 6, and was 1st Team AS, in 6 of his 7 seasons. 2 SC

#6 - Dominick Hasek - Best goalie I saw play at the peak of his career. 2 SC, 6 Vezina, 3 Jennings, 2 Pearsons (most outstanding player by NHLPA). 93.9 save % in the Olympics

#7 George Hainsworth - Didn't make the NHL until 31 YO, played until 41 YO. 94 shutouts (#3) 2nd lowest career GAA in history. In 28-29 his GAA was 0.98. 1.93 career GAA in 11 seasons. 3 Vezina, 2 SC

#8 Ken Dryden

#9 Turk Broda - 5 SC, 2 Vezina, career 1.98 playoff GAA in 101 playoff games

10. Marty Brodeur
- scottak

Hard to vote for Vezina when even I'm not old enough to have seen him play.

Hall and Plante with St. Louis - they were together in 68-69 and 69-70 - made the finals, yes, but on the backs of only expansion teams in the tournament.

BTW, the Hockey News list is:

1. Sawchuck
2. Plante
3. Hall
4. Roy
5. Dryden
6. Durnan
7. Hainsworth
8. Broda
9. Parent
10 Brimsek
- scottak

I think it falls somewhere in the middle, this list doesn't carry enough "modern day" goalies. It is hard to compare different generations.

Hard to vote for Vezina when even I'm not old enough to have seen him play.

Hall and Plante with St. Louis - they were together in 68-69 and 69-70 - made the finals, yes, but on the backs of only expansion teams in the tournament.
- StLBravesFan

Yes, the '2nd 6' battled each other to see who would lose to the winner of the 'original 6'. My point was he won the Smythe on the losing team in the SCF, due to his brilliant goal-tending throughout the playoffs that year.

No. The team put that spin on the story when they lost Niemi. Niemi outplayed Crawford that preseason AND the prior year in Rockford.

Let me add: Stanley said of Niemi and Hjalmarsson "they're not going anywhere." Fact.

Then because he miscalculated Toews' Stanley Cup bonus (or someone did), he lost Nemo to an offer sheet (essentially—I don't recall whether the actually got an offer sheet or not). THEN, the story came out, well Corey beat him out in 2010. Crawford did not beat Niemi out. Was the contract thing a concern? Sure. But Niemi was the better of the two in that preseason and the prior year.

So why, if Crawford was better anyway, make a public statement that you're not going to lose the guy that everybody was quite comfortable with as your #1? Because he WAS #1.
- John Jaeckel

Nemo was not OS'd, Hammer was. Nemo won his arb, $2.75M. Stan walked away. Hammer's OS from SJ was matched, at $3.5M cap hit. Nemo later signed a 1-yr, $2M deal w/SJ.

Totally agree Nemo beat out CC, and a few times at that. I remember watching and wondering if CC was going to one day wear the Indian Head Sweater. Guess I got my answer starting in 2011 & got the exclamation point in 2013.

Nemo was not OS'd, Hammer was. Nemo won his arb, $2.75M. Stan walked away. Hammer's OS from SJ was matched, at $3.5M cap hit. Nemo later signed a 1-yr, $2M deal w/SJ.

Totally agree Nemo beat out CC, and a few times at that. I remember watching and wondering if CC was going to one day wear the Indian Head Sweater. Guess I got my answer starting in 2011 & got the exclamation point in 2013.
- blackhawk24

IF you think I form my opinions based upon what the team says, I can't help you here.

And go look up the number JJ. Looks like the were about even with maybe a slight edge to Crawford based upon SV%

Just in SV% Niemi .910 Crawford .920
GAA Niemi2.43 Crawford 2.53

wins Niemi 18 Crawford 22
- Elbows15

Crawford played a fair amount more games, Nemo had the better winning%. You did see that, too right?

Also Nemo had more shutouts (I believe) and more shutouts per game played (as he does in the NHL as well)

Nemo was not OS'd, Hammer was. Nemo won his arb, $2.75M. Stan walked away. Hammer's OS from SJ was matched, at $3.5M cap hit. Nemo later signed a 1-yr, $2M deal w/SJ.

Totally agree Nemo beat out CC, and a few times at that. I remember watching and wondering if CC was going to one day wear the Indian Head Sweater. Guess I got my answer starting in 2011 & got the exclamation point in 2013.
- blackhawk24

They basically had to let him to to free agency as I recall now, right?

But the point is, Bowman had proclaimed: "they're not going anywhere." THAT is accurate. Why, because Nemo was the #1 in their minds. And you're right, they did have some doubts about Crawford.

All that said, did Crawford eventually rise to the occasion. By round 1 of the 2011 playoffs, yes, some fits and starts after. And some stretches of great play when it's counted. Listen, I'm not sure he's ever been better than 2011 first round and 2014 first and second round. And I am basically in agreement with Elbows where he ranks.

I will say this—and this I DO have from sources—this organization, especially Stan Bowman— has been very patient with Crawford, and Bowman is loyal to him.

To put that in even more perspective, look at the 1985-86 season where Gretzky put up 215 points. To have the same ratio above his next best peer (Lemieux), Gretzky would have had to put up 311 points, almost 100 points more just to keep the same ratio. In 1981-82 when Gretzky put up 212 points, he would have had to put up 324 to keep the same ratio above his next best peer (Bossy), 112 points more.

Orr was so far above his next closest peer it wasn't even funny not to mention how much he revolutionized the game.
- stljam

Thank you. That he put up those kind of points in a lower scoring era than Gretzky as well, and was STILL in some ways the best defensive defenseman of his time, and was a great fighter, is flat incredible.

Yeah whatever. DK showed it was about waivers. So we were both wrong in some aspect. Except for the fact Niemi didn't outplay Crawford until the game in Helsinki. Though if the game as in Montreal, I suspect a different outcome.

And Bowman saying it was partly a business reasons means it was all a business reason.
- Elbows15

Yeah, because this would have sounded great:

"We chose Antti because Corey gave up six goals in one of his outings and the players have a lot more confidence in Antti." Both of which were true (I'm pretty sure he got shelled in the the one game he started that preseason). I know the players really had a lot of confidence in Niemi.

That was GM speak, Elbows, a nice way of sugar coating sending Crawford down, and no I don't think you buy their spin, by the way.

Niemi outplayed Crawford in that camp.

They're not at all, we're all just monkeys throwing poop at each other on here
- FourFeathers773

No argument

"Blackhawks GM Stan Bowman claimed it was partly a business decision to keep Antti Niemi as the backup goalie instead of Corey Crawford. But Niemi showed Saturday it was more than that with a 4-0 shutout of the Florida Panthers in his first start. Niemi had a slightly better camp than Crawford, a former second-round draft pick who now has to wonder if there’s much of a future for him in Chicago. Little was said about Niemi winning the backup job, although Bowman told the Sun-Times some of what went into the decision. “They came into camp neck-and-neck and had similar camps,” Bowman said. “It came down to Corey being exempt from re-entry waivers, so if a player is injured, we can bring Corey up. Antti wouldn't have been exempt. “In a lot of ways it was a business decision. You'd like one to be so much different than the other one, but they were similar in camp.” Crawford has cleared waivers on Friday and can be sent to Rockford, where he will start his fifth season in the American Hockey League."

So consider those statements, and then you know why Stanley came out with the business decision spin Niemi won the job because the players (and coaches) had more confidence in him. Yes, from sources, but a lot of other writers knew the same.

You can say Crawford beat him out and it was purely a business decision a million times, It doesn't get any more true.

Read the entire piece above, not just Stanley's official spin for the media and Corey's self-esteem. The editorializing there that Niemi WON the job, by the way, is by the late Tim Sassone, who knew his stuff

You put Niemi in a Hawks sweater and Crawford in a Sharks sweater, and this gets even more debatable.

Outside Chicago, Crawford is just not held in the same regard as he is by a certain amount of Hawks' fans. Why? Because he's criminally underrated? Or maybe from a dispassionate point of view, he's not as good as some of you guys would like to believe. No one, including me, is saying he sucks.

He's good, and he's gotten better. Maybe he's in my top 10 next year, He was close this year.

"Blackhawks GM Stan Bowman claimed it was partly a business decision to keep Antti Niemi as the backup goalie instead of Corey Crawford. But Niemi showed Saturday it was more than that with a 4-0 shutout of the Florida Panthers in his first start. Niemi had a slightly better camp than Crawford, a former second-round draft pick who now has to wonder if there’s much of a future for him in Chicago. Little was said about Niemi winning the backup job, although Bowman told the Sun-Times some of what went into the decision. “They came into camp neck-and-neck and had similar camps,” Bowman said. “It came down to Corey being exempt from re-entry waivers, so if a player is injured, we can bring Corey up. Antti wouldn't have been exempt. “In a lot of ways it was a business decision. You'd like one to be so much different than the other one, but they were similar in camp.” Crawford has cleared waivers on Friday and can be sent to Rockford, where he will start his fifth season in the American Hockey League."

So consider those statements, and then you know why Stanley came out with the business decision spin Niemi won the job because the players (and coaches) had more confidence in him. Yes, from sources, but a lot of other writers knew the same.

You can say Crawford beat him out and it was purely a business decision a million times, It doesn't get any more true.

Read the entire piece above, not just Stanley's official spin for the media and Corey's self-esteem. The editorializing there that Niemi WON the job, by the way, is by the late Tim Sassone, who knew his stuff

You put Niemi in a Hawks sweater and Crawford in a Sharks sweater, and this gets even more debatable.

Outside Chicago, Crawford is just not held in the same regard as he is by a certain amount of Hawks' fans. Why? Because he's criminally underrated? Or maybe from a dispassionate point of view, he's not as good as some of you guys would like to believe. No one, including me, is saying he sucks.

He's good, and he's gotten better. Maybe he's in my top 10 next year, He was close this year.
- John Jaeckel

What Crawford got good at - after Phoenix, thru 2013, and until the LA series last year - was (a) keeping the Hawks in games (bending but not breaking), and (b) most importantly not giving up late goals that cost leads and/or lost games.

He made the big saves late that got the Hawks points.

Yeah, because this would have sounded great:

"We chose Antti because Corey gave up six goals in one of his outings and the players have a lot more confidence in Antti." Both of which were true (I'm pretty sure he got shelled in the the one game he started that preseason). I know the players really had a lot of confidence in Niemi.

That was GM speak, Elbows, a nice way of sugar coating sending Crawford down, and no I don't think you buy their spin, by the way.

Niemi outplayed Crawford in that camp.
- John Jaeckel

Guess we will have to agree to disagree about that.

They basically had to let him to to free agency as I recall now, right?

But the point is, Bowman had proclaimed: "they're not going anywhere." THAT is accurate. Why, because Nemo was the #1 in their minds. And you're right, they did have some doubts about Crawford.

All that said, did Crawford eventually rise to the occasion. By round 1 of the 2011 playoffs, yes, some fits and starts after. And some stretches of great play when it's counted. Listen, I'm not sure he's ever been better than 2011 first round and 2014 first and second round. And I am basically in agreement with Elbows where he ranks.

I will say this—and this I DO have from sources—this organization, especially Stan Bowman— has been very patient with Crawford, and Bowman is loyal to him.
- John Jaeckel

Agree they have been patient with Crawford. And given Bowman's philosophy regarding goalies, there must be something about Crawford that really like.

What Crawford got good at - after Phoenix, thru 2013, and until the LA series last year - was (a) keeping the Hawks in games (bending but not breaking), and (b) most importantly not giving up late goals that cost leads and/or lost games.

He made the big saves late that got the Hawks points.
- StLBravesFan

No argument. He's a workhorse and he has become more consistent. He also has stretches, when he's really wired in technique-wise, where he is quite, quite good.

Agree they have been patient with Crawford. And given Bowman's philosophy regarding goalies, there must be something about Crawford that really like.
- Elbows15

I'd feel better with a quality back-up - not a potential replacement, but some who could take 30 games thus year - I fear Raanta got too messed up last year and needs some a Rockfish time.

Agree they have been patient with Crawford. And given Bowman's philosophy regarding goalies, there must be something about Crawford that really like.
- Elbows15

Oh, well yeah, but listen, he HAD to hang his hat on Crawford after the Niemi/Hammer debacle. NO DOUBT they thought Crawford could probably carry them. They were right.

I'd feel better with a quality back-up - not a potential replacement, but some who could take 30 games thus year - I fear Raanta got too messed up last year and needs some a Rockfish time.
- StLBravesFan

To start with, I don't like Raanta's size. He is short for a goalie in today's NHL. His technique is terrible. His angles are off and with his size he pretty much needs to be perfect.. His glove hand is that of someone who never caught anything in his life. And he over commits to everything. Add in the fact he can not track the puck through traffic and its not a pretty picture.

No argument. He's a workhorse and he has become more consistent. He also has stretches, when he's really wired in technique-wise, where he is quite, quite good.
- John Jaeckel

All goalies lose their technique from time to time. Quick was pretty pedestrian in the playoffs last season. And he was downright terrible for a stretch. What he was able to do was make the one save that absolutely needed to be made at the right time.

I think getting back to a Waite will help him regain his form this season.

All goalies lose their technique from time to time. Quick was pretty pedestrian in the playoffs last season. And he was downright terrible for a stretch. What he was able to do was make the one save that absolutely needed to be made at the right time.

I think getting back to a Waite will help him regain his form this season.
- Elbows15

Agreed.

So why do you like Raanta so much?


All the criticisms you level at him, and from what I've seen, he reminds me a fair amount of a guy who IMO is also underrated, Jaroslav Halak. Who can be dominant and carry a team.

Raanta might not ever be as good, but there is something there to work with. Agreed he has flaws, also gives up a lot of rebounds, but he makes some pretty amazing point blank saves.

All goalies lose their technique from time to time. Quick was pretty pedestrian in the playoffs last season. And he was downright terrible for a stretch. What he was able to do was make the one save that absolutely needed to be made at the right time.

I think getting back to a Waite will help him regain his form this season.
- Elbows15

I thought Crawford was actually for stretches of the 2014 playoffs as good as he's ever been.

All goalies lose their technique from time to time. Quick was pretty pedestrian in the playoffs last season. And he was downright terrible for a stretch. What he was able to do was make the one save that absolutely needed to be made at the right time.

I think getting back to a Waite will help him regain his form this season.
- Elbows15

Relief pitchers, every damn one of them.