Martin Brodeur wouldn't mind being the Habs back up goalie.
Sept 9, 2014 23:29:05 GMT -5
Post by seventeen on Sept 9, 2014 23:29:05 GMT -5
Eric Engels on this subject:
www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?blogger_id=82
Brodeur to Montreal is more Romantic than it is Crazy
September 9, 2014
This isn't going to be one of those "stats be damned" arguments, but I'll happily admit they don't easily support the argument I'm about to make.
Martin Brodeur, at 43, is an option worth entertaining for the Canadiens. The numbers don't agree with that statement, and the eye test doesn't either. The truth is, Brodeur hasn't been the same since he hit the pine in the 2010 Olympics, in favor of Roberto Luongo. In that time, his save % has hovered around .900, and there's been some ugly hockey in there, no doubt. The truth is, retirement should be an easy call for Brodeur if he honestly believes anyone is interested in having him be a starting goalie in the NHL this season.
But here's some more truth: Brodeur's a winner. He's only lost 394 of the 1259 regular season games he's played in this league. He's won 113 of the 205 games of playoff hockey he's appeared in. Win and win royally is all he's ever done in Montreal. And with a good team in front of him, for 20 or so games a year, he can do more of it. With the mystique of Brodeur finishing his career in his home town; with the energy Montreal fans will give him, he may find the very best version of himself--even if that version pales in comparison to the hall of fame version he was for most of his career. There will be more than enough people to throw cold water on that, but you can't grandstand on the idea that Peter Budaj is absolutely a better option.
What of the notion that Brodeur could cast a long shadow behind Carey Price? This is sure to be a common theme in discussing the possibility of having Brodeur finish his career here. What if instead of stealing the limelight or casting a shadow, Brodeur helps Price embolden his championship resolve? Couldn't Brodeur provide leadership to fill some of the void left by Brian Gionta and Josh Gorges?
Put Brodeur aside for a second, does it make sense at all that the Canadiens hang on to Budaj? Whether Budaj bounces back or not, nothing changes the fact that the Canadiens passed over him when it mattered most last year. Apologies and second chances don't erase history. If Price goes down again when things matter, will the Canadiens have the confidence to turn to a guy they clearly didn't believe in?
Budaj's proven beyond serviceable at times. He put up some great wins pinch hitting for Price last year. But when Price came back from the Olympics hurting, and the Canadiens were in position to advance on solid positioning in the standings, in came Budaj with five losses in seven starts, including four in a row--albeit to premiums like San Jose, Boston, Los Angeles--with an average save percentage over the seven games of .863%. This stretch shattered the team's confidence in him as a back up having to take over and be a starter.
And what of Tokarski? He sure showed some great promise last year. Why stunt his development by sticking him on the bench in Montreal? The Canadiens might just be willing to risk exposing Tokarski to waivers if they don't intend on keeping him beyond training camp. They can certainly use him on the farm. The goalie market isn't so explosive that he'd be a guaranteed claim, though I'm certainly not arguing that losing him for nothing would be a good thing.
I digress. Bringing in Brodeur as a backup to Price is more of a romantic notion than it is a realistic one. But, I can't concur with the assessment that Budaj's a safer bet, even given the statistical support for it. Can Budaj be a better option if Price is healthy all season? It's not a guaranteed yes; it's a maybe--at best. Can Brodeur carry the load short-term, if Price goes down? At least he has the experience to suggest he can.
We also can't ignore the appeal of Brodeur as a Montreal Canadien, and what that means from a marketing and merchandising perspective. To suggest none of that matters would be somewhat ignorant. It can't be the main reason to take such a decision, but it can certainly be put in the plus column for those making it.
We'll see how this shakes out.
www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?blogger_id=82
Brodeur to Montreal is more Romantic than it is Crazy
September 9, 2014
This isn't going to be one of those "stats be damned" arguments, but I'll happily admit they don't easily support the argument I'm about to make.
Martin Brodeur, at 43, is an option worth entertaining for the Canadiens. The numbers don't agree with that statement, and the eye test doesn't either. The truth is, Brodeur hasn't been the same since he hit the pine in the 2010 Olympics, in favor of Roberto Luongo. In that time, his save % has hovered around .900, and there's been some ugly hockey in there, no doubt. The truth is, retirement should be an easy call for Brodeur if he honestly believes anyone is interested in having him be a starting goalie in the NHL this season.
But here's some more truth: Brodeur's a winner. He's only lost 394 of the 1259 regular season games he's played in this league. He's won 113 of the 205 games of playoff hockey he's appeared in. Win and win royally is all he's ever done in Montreal. And with a good team in front of him, for 20 or so games a year, he can do more of it. With the mystique of Brodeur finishing his career in his home town; with the energy Montreal fans will give him, he may find the very best version of himself--even if that version pales in comparison to the hall of fame version he was for most of his career. There will be more than enough people to throw cold water on that, but you can't grandstand on the idea that Peter Budaj is absolutely a better option.
What of the notion that Brodeur could cast a long shadow behind Carey Price? This is sure to be a common theme in discussing the possibility of having Brodeur finish his career here. What if instead of stealing the limelight or casting a shadow, Brodeur helps Price embolden his championship resolve? Couldn't Brodeur provide leadership to fill some of the void left by Brian Gionta and Josh Gorges?
Put Brodeur aside for a second, does it make sense at all that the Canadiens hang on to Budaj? Whether Budaj bounces back or not, nothing changes the fact that the Canadiens passed over him when it mattered most last year. Apologies and second chances don't erase history. If Price goes down again when things matter, will the Canadiens have the confidence to turn to a guy they clearly didn't believe in?
Budaj's proven beyond serviceable at times. He put up some great wins pinch hitting for Price last year. But when Price came back from the Olympics hurting, and the Canadiens were in position to advance on solid positioning in the standings, in came Budaj with five losses in seven starts, including four in a row--albeit to premiums like San Jose, Boston, Los Angeles--with an average save percentage over the seven games of .863%. This stretch shattered the team's confidence in him as a back up having to take over and be a starter.
And what of Tokarski? He sure showed some great promise last year. Why stunt his development by sticking him on the bench in Montreal? The Canadiens might just be willing to risk exposing Tokarski to waivers if they don't intend on keeping him beyond training camp. They can certainly use him on the farm. The goalie market isn't so explosive that he'd be a guaranteed claim, though I'm certainly not arguing that losing him for nothing would be a good thing.
I digress. Bringing in Brodeur as a backup to Price is more of a romantic notion than it is a realistic one. But, I can't concur with the assessment that Budaj's a safer bet, even given the statistical support for it. Can Budaj be a better option if Price is healthy all season? It's not a guaranteed yes; it's a maybe--at best. Can Brodeur carry the load short-term, if Price goes down? At least he has the experience to suggest he can.
We also can't ignore the appeal of Brodeur as a Montreal Canadien, and what that means from a marketing and merchandising perspective. To suggest none of that matters would be somewhat ignorant. It can't be the main reason to take such a decision, but it can certainly be put in the plus column for those making it.
We'll see how this shakes out.