The Death Of The Unorthodox Goalie

[RichMan]

As it stands in my books, being of the era that best reflects these type of goalies, the following tendies have clearly demonstrated that it's not how you look doing it but rather that you get the job done. As said by one of these featured goalies here in this thread (lets see who you might guess), quote: "I'd rather look ugly making a save then to look pretty and getting scored on". For myself, I've noticed that when you try to be too perfect in style, you sometimes hinder your chances more than anything. Great goaltending looks boring. Sloppy makes for occasional flashes of greatness  

Seeing how most goalies today are more or so cookie cutouts of each other and the only things that might set them apart are physical appearance and stats.

My list is quite short. I really tried to rack my brain to find more but alas, these guys are very much in a league of their own. Sure, you could attribute the style of the 80s as a whole group of trend setters of their time, then again the same could be said of the goalies from the 40s and 50s, as well of todays goalies, but no one really stands out.

So here's hoping you old foagies can dig up some more from the archives and add to my list.

I'm sure many will disagree with me and that's fine. Having played the old game and coming into the new the past 35 years, for me, these guys had a little something more that made them different from the rest.

And so, I name Dominic Hasek and Tim Thomas the 2 most unorthodox goalies of the past...oh, 30, 50 years?

[Wonder35]

My nomination is Mike Palmateer of the Leafs and later the Capitals. He was a left handed acrobat in the cage, fun to watch but subject to lower body injuries due to his puck stopping "style" or lack thereof.

[RichMan]

16 minutes ago, Wonder35 said:

My nomination is Mike Palmateer of the Leafs and later the Capitals. He was a left handed acrobat in the cage, fun to watch but subject to lower body injuries due to his puck stopping "style" or lack thereof.

I remember him. Thinking back, for me he fell into the Liut, Lindburg, Fuhr category. Been a long time since I've seen these guys play so only watching old reels would help bring back the memories.

[UCLALabrat]

I dont recall richter having much of a set style. He wasnt a huge butterfly guy, more stand up for the time but had great agility and flexibilty and would just scramble.

 

Contrasting his style with roy or potvin was like a culture shock.

[RichMan]

46 minutes ago, UCLALabrat said:

I dont recall richter having much of a set style. He wasnt a huge butterfly guy, more stand up for the time but had great agility and flexibilty and would just scramble.

 

Contrasting his style with roy or potvin was like a culture shock.

Going down that path or idea, Scott Clemmenson was kinda different from the new crops of the 2010+ period. He had a more hybrid approach to his game, resembled Brodeur now and then.

[kozzy]

A lot of the uniformity of style now boils down to how much coaching everyone has started to get, and from such an early age.  You see the same thing in pro tennis, which I watch a lot of.  There used to be a lot of different game styles (80s and 90s) but now everyone plays the same way, more or less.  

I'd put a vote in for Bill Ranford.  Not as unorthodox as Hasek, but still not very traditional in any sense of the word.  I seem to recall Hrudey doing a good amount of scrambling as well - or maybe it's just that he always looked like a bit of a mess.  And Richter too - I was just watching some highlights from 94, and a good mix of pure standup and crazy athletic splits.  And actually, today, I think Jonathan Quick's style stands out as being a bit different from most.  

[UCLALabrat]

Quick was primarily the one to bring RVH to the forefront...i feel like nost guys in the late 2000's/early 2010's were all going VH.

[A.YOUNGoalie13]

Jonathan Quick and Fleury are pretty out there. They end up making a lot more crazy saves compared to others mostly due to their playstyle

[mik]

If you say unorthodox style, Dominik Hašek is the first name that comes to my mind. But I must admit that I remember goalies form 90´ to the future. Never saw guys like Mike Palmateer , just in some video highlights.  

By todays standards I see a lot of now unorthodox saves (at NHL level, not in beer league) made by John Gibson .

 

I can´t say why, but I don´t see Jonathan Quick as unorthodox, even with all of his splits etc. He surely is by today standards, but maybe I´m used to see this type of saves from him.  

Edited March 8 by mik

[keeperton]

I'm of the opinion that Jonathan Quick would make a great goalie coach by virtue of his ability to read plays/situations; I think he'd be able to coach/foster good habits (watch how much he shoulder checks and how well he keeps vision on the puck in any situation sometime).

The current crop of Russian goalies is proving to be outside the current standard. They still play within the bounds, but the creativity and personality is there. There are numerous clips of Askarov wandering to play the puck/make plays as more than a pylon and Kochetkov plays with a ton of fire.

Hellebuyck is not a standard goalie either. The best way I can describe his game is, "that guy is a professional."

The orthodox is definitely coming from how the game is played, it's much more studied and optimized compared to how it was at any point in the past.

 

Anyway, plain answer: Irbe, one of my favorites.

Edited March 8 by keeperton

[Naz]

Interestingly, the ones that came to mind for being outside the normal all got named throughout the thread.

Palmateer ( @RichMan look on YouTube for "Showdown" clips vs Bossy etc)
Ranford - almost an evolution of Palmateer how he would explode into saves
Hrudey - dude had some weird moves
Gibson - definitely pulls out old school moves.  Kinda looks like a modern street hockey goalie.
Price had some tendencies.  He was technically sound, but also very good at scrambling and going outside the butterfly box to make the save

As mentioned, some of the Russian goalies deviate from the structure of the technique.  I think it's because the technique is taught to them later, after they have developed their own instincts to stop the puck in any way shape or form.

[froese]

4 hours ago, keeperton said:

I'm of the opinion that Jonathan Quick would make a great goalie coach by virtue of his ability to read plays/situations; I think he'd be able to coach/foster good habits (watch how much he shoulder checks and how well he keeps vision on the puck in any situation sometime).

The current crop of Russian goalies is proving to be outside the current standard. They still play within the bounds, but the creativity and personality is there. There are numerous clips of Askarov wandering to play the puck/make plays as more than a pylon and Kochetkov plays with a ton of fire.

Hellebuyck is not a standard goalie either. The best way I can describe his game is, "that guy is a professional."

The orthodox is definitely coming from how the game is played, it's much more studied and optimized compared to how it was at any point in the past.

 

Anyway, plain answer: Irbe, one of my favorites.

Hellebuyck gave a great interview in October on "After Hours" which for all the non Canadian folks is a post Hockey Night In Canada interview segment after the late game. It's one of the better goalie interviews I've seen in terms of honesty and non BS answers, and in particular he talks about his style and how he plays - at one point even just candidly stating there's not way he can do the splits and how his style is constructed in a way that doesn't require it. Professional is a great way to describe it.

 

[Fullright]

@RichMan, another good topic!

Problem I am having is the meaning of unorthodox in the current context. For my time, starting organized hockey in 1971, almost all goalies played a standup style. The unorthodox goalie at the time was Tony Esposito. He took what Glen Hall called his "v style" and amplified it. Roy took the butterfly style and amplified it further so that it became the approach taught to this day. Contemporary goalies now all pretty much play the same way. Because he lasted so long, the last unorthodox (meaning different) is probably Martin Broduer and perhaps MAF. Each stood and still does stand up to make stops whereas everyone else butterflies which used to be called flopping. Searching my compromised brain, I think Cujo might be considered unorthodox because he did both the last several years of his career. Tim Thomas and Hank probably fit into the unorthodox category.

I think the current doctrine of butterfly needs to adapt just the skaters adapted to it. Right now, I think the skaters have the edge. Almost every night, someone bangs one in off the side of the goalie's head while he's in a VH or RVH. Also, almost all of them instinctively drop to butterfly once a shot is released. It strikes me as bizarre that all management wants is big guys in net but then 6' something men drop and get beat up top. The net is only 4' high. They are all excellent but are many of them that distinct from each other?

Another element that changed is quickness and "reflex goalies". Hand and foot speed to stop a shot is less important now. On that standard, Soros can probably be considered unorthodox to some degree because he is damn quick and is probably as quick as Richter, Palmateer, Fuhr, Ranford, and Don Beaupre when he broke in. I am not sure why but the thinking seems to be that quick reflexes are not that significant. Orthodoxy seems to mean big men who are pretty much technically identical. 

This is really an interesting topic.

 

[MTH]

Marty Brodeur was unorthodox too by today's standard. I always thought of him a athletic. He looked the same from a youth until the end...

 

Might be the last NHL goalie to have his pad face on the ice while making a save.

Pads worn by goalies is an easy indicator of their style.

[RichMan]

5 hours ago, froese said:

Hellebuyck gave a great interview in October on "After Hours" which for all the non Canadian folks is a post Hockey Night In Canada interview segment after the late game. It's one of the better goalie interviews I've seen in terms of honesty and non BS answers, and in particular he talks about his style and how he plays - at one point even just candidly stating there's not way he can do the splits and how his style is constructed in a way that doesn't require it. Professional is a great way to describe it.

 

Hellebuyck to me is the most sound goalie when you consider technique. Sure he sometimes has to scramble or dive but he makes everything else look simple, almost boring lolll. I like watching his game.

4 hours ago, Fullright said:

@RichMan, another good topic!

Problem I am having is the meaning of unorthodox in the current context. For my time, starting organized hockey in 1971, almost all goalies played a standup style. The unorthodox goalie at the time was Tony Esposito. He took what Glen Hall called his "v style" and amplified it. Roy took the butterfly style and amplified it further so that it became the approach taught to this day. Contemporary goalies now all pretty much play the same way. Because he lasted so long, the last unorthodox (meaning different) is probably Martin Broduer and perhaps MAF. Each stood and still does stand up to make stops whereas everyone else butterflies which used to be called flopping. Searching my compromised brain, I think Cujo might be considered unorthodox because he did both the last several years of his career. Tim Thomas and Hank probably fit into the unorthodox category.

I think the current doctrine of butterfly needs to adapt just the skaters adapted to it. Right now, I think the skaters have the edge. Almost every night, someone bangs one in off the side of the goalie's head while he's in a VH or RVH. Also, almost all of them instinctively drop to butterfly once a shot is released. It strikes me as bizarre that all management wants is big guys in net but then 6' something men drop and get beat up top. The net is only 4' high. They are all excellent but are many of them that distinct from each other?

Another element that changed is quickness and "reflex goalies". Hand and foot speed to stop a shot is less important now. On that standard, Soros can probably be considered unorthodox to some degree because he is damn quick and is probably as quick as Richter, Palmateer, Fuhr, Ranford, and Don Beaupre when he broke in. I am not sure why but the thinking seems to be that quick reflexes are not that significant. Orthodoxy seems to mean big men who are pretty much technically identical. 

This is really an interesting topic.

 

It would be a whole new topic/thread in itself, but it would be very interesting to discuss the in-depth history of the butterfly. To this day, I can't recall who was the first guy to do a butterfly slide in a game. Knee straps were on the outside of the knee block and made sliding near impossible. It had to be timed with Pete Smith putting out the Vaughn Velocity pads. There had to be some closed door discussions between him and a pro somewhere.

1 hour ago, MTH said:

Marty Brodeur was unorthodox too by today's standard. I always thought of him a athletic. He looked the same from a youth until the end...

 

Might be the last NHL goalie to have his pad face on the ice while making a save.

Pads worn by goalies is an easy indicator of their style.

If you were still using toe straps and buckles, your pads wouldn't rotate either. It would torque the ankles like a M$%^%*. I don't miss that small transition period.

[Fullright]

@RichMan, agreed. Butterfly slide is a whole different phenomenon than the butterfly itself. Next to impossible to do in leather pads; impossible for me certainly and I tried hard. I dont recall ever seeing Hall doing it. Esposito's way around that problem was the 'stack. Modern pads made it possible; the impact of equipment and style/approach/orthodoxy cannot be overstated.