#20 - Glenn Hall

Glenn Hall (Murillo Pyramid Rank = #20)

Adjusted Stats

1952-1953  Det       7 GP, 5-1-1, .786 win%, 422 min, 15 GA, 2.14 GAA
1954-1955  Det*     2 GP, 2-0-0, 1.000 win%, 141 min, 3 GA, 1.22 GAA (no stanley cup Ring for Hall)
1955-1956  Det       82 GP, 35-28-19, .543 win%, 4920 min, 209 GA, 2.55 GAA
1956-1957  Det       82 GP, 45-23-14, .634 win%, 4920 min, 208 GA, 2.53 GAA
1957-1958  Chi       82 GP, 28-46-8, .390 win%, 4920 min, 257 GA, 3.14 GAA
1958-1959  Chi       82 GP, 33-34-15, .494 win%, 4920 min, 258 GA, 3.15 GAA
1959-1960  Chi       82 GP, 33-34-15, .494 win%, 4920 min, 219 GA, 2.67 GAA
1960-1961  Chi*     82 GP, 34-28-20, .537 win%, 4920 min, 211 GA, 2.58 GAA
1961-1962  Chi       82 GP, 36-30-15, .537 win%, 4920 min, 220 GA, 2.69 GAA
1962-1963  Chi       77 GP, 35-23-18, .579 win%, 4580 min, 195 GA, 2.55 GAA
1963-1964  Chi       76 GP, 40-22-13, .620 win%, 4522 min, 192 GA, 2.55 GAA
1964-1965  Chi       48 GP, 21-20-6, .511 win%, 2858 min, 124 GA, 2.60 GAA
1965-1966  Chi       75 GP, 40-25-8, .603 win%, 4389 min, 194 GA, 2.66 GAA
1966-1967  Chi       37 GP, 22-6-6, .735 win%, 1949 min, 80 GA, 2.46 GAA
1967-1968  Stl        54 GP, 21-23-10, .481 win%, 3167 min, 144 GA, 2.73 GAA
1968-1969  Stl        44 GP, 21-13-9, .593 win%, 2540 min, 95 GA, 2.24 GAA
1969-1970  Stl        19 GP, 8-9-3, .475 win%, 1090 min, 56 GA, 3.08 GAA
1970-1971  Stl        34 GP, 14-12-8, .529 win%, 1851 min, 74 GA, 2.38 GAA

Adjusted Playoff Stats

1955-1956  Det       10 GP, 5-5, .500 win%, 604 min, 28 GA, 2.79 GAA
1956-1957  Det       5 GP, 1-4, .200 win%, 300 min, 15 GA, 3.01 GAA
1958-1959  Chi       6 GP, 2-4, .333 win%, 360 min, 20 GA, 3.28 GAA
1959-1960  Chi       4 GP, 0-4, .000 win%, 249 min, 14 GA, 3.49 GAA
1960-1961  Chi*     12 GP, 8-4, .667 win%, 772 min, 29 GA, 2.27 GAA
1961-1962  Chi       12 GP, 6-6, .500 win%, 720 min, 31 GA, 2.56 GAA
1962-1963  Chi       6 GP, 2-4, .333 win%, 360 min, 25 GA, 4.12 GAA
1963-1964  Chi       7 GP, 3-4, .429 win%, 408 min, 23 GA, 3.41 GAA
1964-1965  Chi       13 GP, 7-6, .538 win%, 760 min, 31 GA, 2.41 GAA
1965-1966  Chi       6 GP, 2-4, .333 win%, 347 min, 23 GA, 4.03 GAA
1966-1967  Chi       3 GP, 1-2, .333 win%, 176 min, 8 GA, 2.82 GAA
1967-1968  Stl        18 GP, 8-10, .444 win%, 1111 min, 45 GA, 2.44 GAA
1968-1969  Stl        3 GP, 0-2, .000 win%, 131 min, 5 GA, 2.27 GAA
1969-1970  Stl        7 GP, 4-3, .571 win%, 421 min, 19 GA, 2.78 GAA
1970-1971  Stl        3 GP, 0-3, .000 win%, 180 min, 8 GA, 2.75 GAA

Career - 1047 GP, 433-377-188, .528 win%, 61949 min, 2754 GA, 2.67 GAA
Career-Highs - 82 GP (many times); 45 wins (56-57); .735 win% (66-67); 4920 min (many times); 2.24 GAA (68-69)
Avg. (16 seasons) - 65 GP, 27-24-12, .528 win%, 3837 min, 171 GA, 2.67 GAA
Peak Avg. (56-64) - 81 GP, 36-30-15, .528 win%, 4827 min, 220 GA, 2.73 GAA, 1 Cup

Playoff Career - 115 GP, 49-65, .430 win%, 6899 min, 324 GA, 2.82 GAA
Playoff-Highs - 8 wins (twice); .667 win% (60-61); 2.27 GAA (60-61)

Accolades - 3 Vezina Trophies, Calder, 1 Conn Smythe
All-Star Teams - 7-time 1st-team, 4-time 2nd-team
1-time Stanley Cup Champion

Difficult as it is to believe, there was a time in the late 1990s and early 2000s when I had to actually waste time on in-depth arguments with friends who were Maple Leaf fans on who was the greater goaltender, Martin Brodeur or Curtis Joseph. Brodeur's resume spoke for itself, but he was undeniably the product of a great defensive team. Joseph, so the argument went, was actually a better pure goaltender, but he had played for far inferior teams. Put him in a good situation and he would thrive. When we finally got to see Joseph on a great team, the defending-champion Red Wings, what happened was exactly what I thought would happen: he wilted in big games in the playoffs.

So I've always been consistent on my stance on goaltenders: I don't give a shit about whether or not they are great goalies on bad teams...if they're still losing, it's the same end game as if they were terrible goalies (they're just losing by a little less). It's why I always felt that Roberto Luongo and Curtis Joseph, great as they were, were slightly overrated, while Brodeur for a good early chunk of his career was underrated. And yet, here we are on the Pyramid, and Glenn Hall is ranked ahead of the man generally ranked as one of the best goaltenders ever, Terry Sawchuk. Glenn Hall...with a career winning% barely above .500 and only one Stanley Cup ring, AHEAD of Sawchuk, who had the record for most career wins before Roy and Brodeur shattered it, and won four Cups.

How can I explain this? First of all, I'll go a step further and say that I was extremely close to putting Hall ahead of Jacques Plante, but in the end the fact that Plante won an MVP award (as well as, oh yeah, five Stanley Cups) tipped the scales in his favour. But I firmly believe that, while Glenn Hall had the 3rd-best goaltending career of the Original Six goaltenders, he was in fact the best goaltender of the bunch. In fact, in terms of raw talent and athleticism, I think Hall might be in the top three of all-time, perhaps bested only by Roy and Hasek. Don't believe me? Do yourself a favour and watch ESPN classic or "Legends of Hockey" or anything that has significant footage of Hall.

What you'll notice is that Hall's style was extremely ahead of his time...he was the first butterfly goaltender, and far more than Sawchuk or even Plante (and indeed, many of the goaltenders who followed), I feel confident in saying that Glenn Hall wouldn't have only survived, he would have thrived if he was put in a time machine and brought to the present. There aren't a lot of the past greats you can say that about, in any position: certainly not Doug Harvey, great as he was, or Ted Lindsay. But to watch Hall is to watch a goaltender of supreme athletic ability and a fundamental understanding that, uh, yeah, dropping down to a butterfly position seems to work!

First of all, no extra points in my books to Hall within the Pyramid for the two things he is most commonly remembered for: playing the butterfly without a mask, and his incredible consecutive-games streak. Those accomplishments make me think more of him as a human being...they are astonishing demonstrations of bravery and perserverance, made all the more remarkable by Hall's honesty and humility when asked about them. Hall, one of my personal favourite players of any era, has a personality that's impossible to dislike. He doesn't self-mythologize...indeed, he says, "I hated the pain of the puck hitting me. Hated it". There aren't the usual "well that was the way we were back then...tougher" platitudes with Hall. He admits it was hell.

People remember Hall putting up year after year of excellence with the Blackhawks, but, like Gehrig and Ripken, they focus more on the "streak" than the elite level of play during that streak. Hall is also fondly remembered for being the backbone of the expansion St. Louis Blues and pretty much single-handedly carrying them to three straight Stanley Cup final appearances (although, to be fair, the Blues were in the league's expansion division...so making the finals was like winning the award for "Britain's Sexiest Smile"). Even though they were swept by the Habs in the 1968 finals, Glenn Hall won Conn Smythe honours as playoff MVP, a testament to how critical Hall was to his team's success.

So those are Hall's highlights, and yet there's still that not-terribly-overwhelming 433-377 career W-L record, and an even less impressive 49-65 career playoff record, along with only one Stanley Cup. How could he possibly be ranked ahead of Sawchuk? Especially given that I've gone on record saying that I don't subscribe to the "great goalie on a bad team" theory as much as many do (I certainly lend it some weight, but it's not the be-all and end-all).

Well, here's why: until the 1980s, the Vezina trophy wasn't awarded to the league's top goaltender, it was awarded to the goalie who played for the team that allowed the fewest goals (the equivalent of today's Jennings trophy). So saying that Plante won seven Vezinas, Sawchuk won four and Hall won three is somewhat irrelevant. The only measure of how the goalie was viewed by his peers, fans and media at the time is the year-end All-Star team. By this measure, Hall was named the league's best goalie seven times, more than any goalie in NHL history. Plante has 3 appearances as the best goalie, as does Sawchuk. In addition, Hall made the 2nd-team another four times, so in 11 of his 16 seasons, he was one of the two best goalies in the league (more impressive considering some of them came post-expansion).

Here's something that to me is more remarkable than Hall winning Conn Smythe in the year he was swept. In 1957-1958, after being traded from the Red Wings to the Blackhawks, Hall went 28-46-8 with a 3.14 adjusted GAA. Ouch, right? Terrible! A .390 winning percentage?!? And guess what? Hall was named the 1st-team all-star that year.

Let that sink in. People weren't smoking crack. They could have easily voted for Plante or Sawchuk, instead they named Hall. In a year when he went 28-46. So Glenn Hall was no Roberto Luongo or Curtis Joseph. He wasn't a very good goaltender on a bad team. He was a great goaltender on an absolutely terrible team. If they had counted shots on goal before the 1980s (and like Simmons with blocks in the NBA, I'm going to ask...why the fuck didn't they?), it's a pretty safe bet that Glenn Hall would be leading the league in save% and facing 35-40 shots a night.

We'll never know. But what we do know is that Hall was a superstar goalie who did his best with a Blackhawks team that, while good later in his career, wasn't in the elite class of the Canadiens' dynasty. His final year with an above-average (but again, not great) Red Wings team gives an indication of what Hall was capable of with a decent team: a 45-23 record. If Hall hadn't reached hockey's pinnacle for at least the one season, in 1960-1961, he'd be ranked behind Sawchuk, no question. And although it's a contradiction of everything I believe in when debating the merits of goaltenders, in Glenn Hall's case, he was so amazing that he has made me reconsider the "great goalie on a bad team" argument.