All-Stars Versus MVGs

Following up on the last post, we want to figure out why Hart Trophy voting results for 1924 to 1930 seem more than a little sketchy (for goaltenders, at least) if they're interpreted as who was seen as the best player at the position each season.

Fortunately, we have many seasons in which we have both Hart Trophy voting and All-Star voting results. This will shed a great deal of light on this. We know the highest-rated Hart goalie for 1934, 1937, 1939, 1940 and every season from 1942 to 1957 and beyond. But for now we'll stop at 1957, giving us 20 seasons to work with.

In these 20 seasons, only six times is the highest-rated Hart goalie the same as the First Team All-Star (Frank Brimsek in 1942, Bill Durnan in 1944, 1945, 1946 and 1949, and Harry Lumley in 1955). It's the Second All-Star goalie six times (Roy Worters in 1934, Earl Robertson in 1939, Brimsek in 1943 and 1948, Chuck Rayner in 1950 and Jim Henry in 1952), and eight times the Hartiest netminder was third in the All-Star voting (Tiny Thompson in 1937, Robertson in 1940, Turk Broda in 1947, Al Rollins in 1951, 1953 and 1954, Gump Worsley in 1956 and Terry Sawchuk in 1957). Clearly, different standards are at play between the voting for the two awards. You might not expect 100% agreement between the two if the standards were the same, but with this degree of difference, where the third-best goaltender was the most likely to be seen as the most valuable, there's clearly something going on. And it we look at the results in detail, it's pretty clear what that difference is.

Season	MVG	W%	ASG	W%
1934	WORTERS, Roy	.472	GARDINER, Charlie	.531
1937	THOMPSON, Tiny	.552	SMITH, Norm	.615
1939	ROBERTSON, Earl	.478	BRIMSEK, Frank	.779
1940	ROBERTSON, Earl	.354	KERR, Dave	.667
1943	BRIMSEK, Frank	.570	MOWERS, Johnny	.610
1947	BRODA, Turk	.600	DURNAN, Bill	.650
1948	BRIMSEK, Frank	.491	BRODA, Turk	.642
1950	RAYNER, Chuck	.486	DURNAN, Bill	.539
1951	ROLLINS, Al	.775	SAWCHUK, Terry	.721
1952	HENRY, Jim	.471	SAWCHUK, Terry	.714
1953	ROLLINS, Al	.493	SAWCHUK, Terry	.635
1954	ROLLINS, Al	.235	LUMLEY, Harry	.558
1956	WORSLEY, Gump	.529	PLANTE, Jacques	.734
1957	SAWCHUK, Terry	.618	HALL, Glenn	.629
	Average	.509	Average	.645

In every season but one, when the All-Star Goaltender (ASG) is a different man than the Most Valuable Goaltender (MVG), the (ASG) was a winning percentage (W%) that is higher than that of the MVG, and sometimes the difference is enormous. The voters of the time clearly had no problem giving Hart Trophy votes to goaltenders on bad teams (see 1940 and 1954 in particular), but not All-Star votes. The only season in which the MVG has a higher W% than the ASG is 1951, when Al Rollins did not play a full season but was still considered MVG. So MVP votes could go to a netminder who did not play a full season, but All-Star votes would not; see also in 1957 (when the difference in W% is the smallest) when Sawchuk played only 34 games. So in every season in which both the MVG and the ASG played a full season, the ASG always had a significantly higher W%; he played on a significantly better team.

It seems absolutely clear to me, then, that the voters were applying the following standards to these votes, in general:

1. The All-Star voting was for the goaltender who was the most proficient at his position.

2. The Hart Trophy voting was for the goaltender who contributed the greatest proportion of his team's success.

So if you have two goaltenders, one worth 10 points on a team that recorded 40 points, and another worth 15 points on a team that recorded 70, the latter would do better in the All-Star voting while the former would do better in the Hart voting. The former was more valuable to him team in the sense that he contributed a greater proportion of his team's success. This is the only way that the voting results for Earl Robertson in 1939 and 1940, Jim Henry in 1952 and especially Al Rollins in 1954 make sense. For purposes of the Hart Trophy, it was often most valuable in the sense of "imagine how bad they would have been without him." This is not the modern attitude, when generally a player cannot be seen as "valuable" unless his team did well, but it clearly a prevalent attitude in the time period we're looking at.

Now, the best Hart goalies in the pre-All-Star seasons were John Roach in 1924 (.435 W%), Clint Benedict in 1925 (.333), Roy Worters in 1926 (.529), 1927 (.375), 1928 (.523) and 1929 (.553), and Charlie Gardiner in 1930 (.534). It's possible that some of these men would have been voted First Team All-Stars if there had been such a thing at the time, but given this analysis, it seems that at least in 1924, 1925 and 1927 these netminders would not have been named the best, rather than most valuable in the sense defined above.

So it seems that Roy Worters should not be considered the best goaltender of the late 1920s based on his Hart voting records. These votes were not intended to say he was the best goaltender, but that he was the best relative to his team. And since his teams were usually not good, that doesn't tell us much about his absolute standing among his brethren netminders.

All-Star Goalkeepers

All-Star Team results from the past provide historians with useful information about how some players were perceived in their own time. Statistical records are of course very informative, but have their limitations. Things like All-Star Team voting records can help shed some light on things that might not be reflected in the stats. They tell us who was seen to be the best at their position at their time, which is particularly useful when it comes to defensive players.

The downside of NHL All-Star Teams is that the league only began these awards in 1931. We know Charlie Gardiner was considered the best netminder in the NHL for the 1930/31 season, but who was seen as the best in 1929/30?

Well, we may not have All-Star voting records from before 1931, but we do at least have the Hart Trophy records, which go back to 1924. (This is all thanks to work done at hfboards.com, see link here.) If we know who the top-rated goaltender in each season from 1924 to 1930 in the Hart voting, maybe we can consider them to be effectively First Team All-Stars. If they had such a vote at the time, we could figure that the goalies seen as the most valuable would also have been seen as the best.

I've certainly seen this sort of argument made, specifically that since Roy Worters received the most Hart Trophy consideration among goaltenders in every season from 1926 to 1929, he should be considered the best goalkeeper of his time. Interpreting this as the equivalent of four consecutive First All-Star Team selections, it's hard to see it otherwise.

As it happens, we do know which goaltender received the most Hart votes each season from 1924 to 1930. In chronological order, they are John Roach, Clint Benedict, Roy Worters, Roy Worters, Roy Worters, Roy Worters and Charlie Gardiner. The fact that Gardiner received the most Hart votes in 1930, and then was the First Team All-Star in 1931, suggests that we may be on to something here.

So maybe Worters was seen as the best goaltender of his time. Considering the competition, his being seen as the best each season is quite something. He was up against a variety of Clint Benedict, Alec Connell, George Hainsworth, Hap Holmes and Hugh Lehman in these seasons, Hall-of-Famers all. Of course, Benedict, Holmes and Lehman were nearing the end of the road at the time, but still, four straight seasons being the best of the best...

But hold on a minute. We also know which goaltenders received the second-most Hart votes in 1924, 1925 and 1926, namely Jake Forbes, Jake Forbes and Doc Stewart. Forbes and Stewart were both good goaltenders, but were not all-time talents by any stretch. And yet, in both 1924 and 1925 Forbes was apparently considered a better netminder than Georges Vezina, and in 1926 Stewart was seen as better tan both Benedict and Connell, if we see Hart votes as the same as All-Star votes. Now, if that is in fact what was going on, we really no longer need to concern ourselves with these voting results, because if that's how the voters saw things, then they shouldn't be taken seriously. Jakes Forbes was not a better goaltender than Georges Vezina.

So there must be something else going on. There is; and next time we'll look at exactly what it is.

Descryptyve Tyrmes for Olde Tyme Hockeyists

When discussing hockey players from long ago, the tendency is to use modern terminology to describe them. A gifted goal-scorer, such as Herb Jordan or Joe Malone, might be called a "sniper", for instance. A physical winger, such as Gordie Roberts, is called a "power forward" (shudder). This is understandable, as an attempt to frame old-time players in terms understood by modern fans, and it may be useful in that sense.

But on the other hand, players are really best viewed in their own contexts, rather than trying to force them into modern roles, which are often imperfect descriptions. In that regard I think it's better to use contemporaneous terms when discussing these players, and not just in the "oh, they called faceoffs bullies, how quaint!" sort of way.

The disadvantage to this approach, of course, is that if you're not familiar with the era, you have to learn these new terms. That's a small price to pay, I think, and if you have an interest in hockey history, it's well worth it.

So to begin with, here are a few descriptive terms that can be used when discussing early hockey goaltenders.

Stonewall: A stonewall goaltender (or netminder, or guardian, but never a "goalie") is one that is simply proficient at stopping shots through his positioning and technique. He frustrates his opponents' efforts by making stop after stop; he would not be said to make a save. Percy LeSueur is an example of a stonewall goaltender.

Flopping: A flopping netminder is one who finds a way to get some part of his anatomy between the puck and the goal. Generally less consistent that the stonewall variety of guardian, a flopping goaltender is more likely to make a spectacular stop. Clint Benedict is perhaps the epitome of this style, as his constant flopping actually led to rule changes for the position, which previously were required to remain on their feet when making a stop.

Stickhandling: A stickhandling guardian is one who tries to liberate the puck from opposing attackers before they can even get a shot off. He challenges opponents by leaving the goal area and uses his stick to separate disc and man. Paddy Moran is a prime example of a stickhandling goaltender, as we've discussed here before.

I'm always open to suggestions for additional "classes" of player, if you will. Next time: defencemen. (Never blueliners.)

Being Fair to Goaltenders

One of the purposes of the historical Point Allocation system is to enable players from different eras to be compared on approximately the same basis. For example, we adjust every season's numbers as if the season was 80 games in length, regardless of how many game a league actually played in that season. This is to put everyone on the same footing, and to render the numbers in a form familiar to modern eyes.

This presents an issue, however, where goaltenders are concerned. For the first 70-plus years (or so) of the history of organized hockey, a team's goaltender was expected to play every game. Now, of course, that is no longer the case, and sometimes (in the 1980s, for instance), a starting goaltender would be expected to play only about 50 of his team's 80 games. So when we're comparing the careers of a goalie from the 1920s and one from the 1980s, they're not really on the same footing, because the earlier netminder will be given credit for a significantly higher number of games per season.

To account for this, when dealing with modern NHL goaltenders we don't calculate their effective games played based on a season of 80 games. Instead, we find the goaltender with third-highest proportion of minutes played in the league, and use that as the maximum instead of 80 games. So if league-season features goaltenders who played 64, 62 and 58 effective games for their teams, all goaltenders in the league will have their games played adjusted to 58 games rather than 80 (anyone with more than 58 is capped at 80 games, of course). This means that at least three goalies will be credited with the maximum 80 games for any season. There's no particular reason that it's the third-most rather than the second or the fifth, it's just an attempt to be fair. Most starters after the third-highest will be in the 70-plus game range, which is basically what we're shooting for.

The question is, when do we need to start applying this method, rather than just using the 80-game basis? Well, some teams have experimented with two-goalie systems at times. In 1912/13 and 1913/14, for example, the NHA's Ottawa Senators had both veteran Percy LeSueur and young Clint Benedict (both Hall-of-Famers), and went into both seasons intending to rotate them in the nets, rather than just keeping one as an emergency backup. In 1912/13, LeSueur played 18 games (994 minutes) and Benedict 7 games (215 minutes). Since the team played 20 games, that means there were five games in which one relieved the other. In 1913/14, they had only two shared games, but they still split the team's netminding duties; Benedict played 9 games (474 minutes) and LeSueur 13 games (773 minutes). But this was a very unusual situation.

What we really want to know is when teams, as a whole, no longer expected their goaltenders to play every game. As late as 1957/58, three of six NHL teams had goalies who played all 70 games of the schedule. Goaltenders still normally played every game. In the next two seasons, Glenn Hall was the only goaltender to play every game, but there were also two or three other guardians who played almost every game. So it seems that they were still expected to play every game, it's just that over a long 70-game schedule, that's not always going to be possible.

When we get to 1960/61, we still have Hall playing every day. However, no other goaltender played more than 59 of his team's 70 games. And then two seasons later we have no goalies playing every game, though several missed only a few games. In 1964/65, Roger Crozier played 70 games, but the next-highest total was only 53.

It seems to me, then, that 1960/61 serves as a good demarcation point to begin using the "modern" system for calculating netminders' games played for Point Allocation purposes. That's the dividing line that will produce the fairest results.

Tom Paton

Tom L. Paton (b.1854) was a goaltender for the Montreal Hockey Club (or AAA, or Winged Wheelers) from 1885 to 1893. He is easily the most successful goaltender of the pre-Stanley Cup era, and indeed for the 19th century. His team won the Montreal Winter Carnival championship in 1885 and 1887, and the championship of the Amateur Hockey Association of Canada (AHAC) in 1888, 1889, 1890, 1891, 1892 and 1893. With James Stewart and Allan Cameron playing in front of him on the defence, the Winger Wheelers were often an impenetrable defensive fortress.

The goaltender's task in the 1880s was clearly different in execution from that of the modern goalie, due to the fact that he was prohibited from falling to the ice to make saves. However, it is easy to overstate the degree of difference; olde tyme goalers used whatever body part was handy in order to stop the puck, just like today's netminders. Quebec Hockey Club goaltender Frank Stocking, who played senior hockey from 1892 to 1901, describes the goaltender's role in Art Farrell's 1899 book Hockey: Canada's Royal Winter Game as follows:

In stopping the puck, the feet, limbs, body and hands are all used according to the nature of the shot. The stick is used to clear the puck from the goals after stop has been made, but rarely to make the stop. Some goalers use the hands much more frequently than others and make splendid stops in this way. But this depends on the individual's handiness, those accustomed to play baseball and cricket, excelling. The most difficult shot to stop results from a quick pass in front of goals at the height of about one foot off the ice.

It should be noted that Stocking wrote this passage after the introduction of goalie pads, which were introduced by Winnipeg goaltender George Merritt in 1896, who used cricket pads to protect his shins. One surmises that, before these pads were in use, a goaltender would have been more likely to use his stick to make stops, to limit the numbers of shots against his shins. Although 1880s goaltenders did wear some shin protection, it was not nearly as full as the cricket pads would be.

Also note the reference to clearing the puck; though Tom Paton was clearly an effective goaltender in terms of stopping the puck, it seems his most noteworthy feature was his skill at clearing the puck once it was stopped. From a Montreal Gazette game report of January 14, 1888, for example, we have the following:

Brown by a rush took the puck well up where Lee made a gallant effort to score without success, as Paton was on the alerts and sent it down only to be returned to him to defend his charge which he did well.

 

McQuisten was the first man to show up prominently; he passed it to Brown who shot for goals, but as Paton was keeping a sharp lookout it was sent up again where another spell of open play occurred.

Lee sent in another sharp one to Paton, who sent it back.

He was not just a stickhandler, though, as this passage from the January 30, 1893 edition of the Gazette suggests:

At the start the puck was carried down to the Montreal end of the ice and shot after shot was made at the goal, but Paton stopped them with his hands, stick or feet. He seemed to be in every part of the goals at once, and every time the puck was shot in it was as speedily returned, and finally Cameron scooped it up to the other end of the rink.

So I see Paton very much as a 19th Century Martin Brodeur: a goaltender who is very proficient at stopping the puck, but who also contributes greatly to his side's efforts with his stick.

More on Paton, and Stewart and Cameron, in the coming days.