|
Post by clear observer on Dec 11, 2002 23:23:39 GMT -5
HabWest takes a swing at writing an article and knocks one outta the park...excellent work and thank you! Let’s think for a minute what this means. Theo has played 16 games and Hack 12. Since Hack’s record is 66%, it’s probably fair to suggest that if Hack had played in 20 games - an extra 8 games - the Habs would have had an extra 3 wins and 1 tie or overtime loss.
... MORE
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 12, 2002 0:58:55 GMT -5
Very good article, that was interesting. I just posted about an hour ago about Hackett might be in 1st in save % since Turco let in 3 tonight. It's hard to believe that Theodore and Osgood have some of the lowest save % in the entire league. Wow.
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Dec 12, 2002 1:18:59 GMT -5
Wow. That's a lot of numbers. Nice job.
All I can add is that Theo and Hackett have each played enough games for us to say that they've really both gotten the best and the worst that the Habs could offer in front of them. In other words, you can't say that Theo's numbers are misleading because the team has sucked in front of him, while they've played better for Hackett. For each blowout loss that Theo has to Philly, Hackett has a game in which the margin of play was just as dramatic but where we nonetheless ended up with a point or even two. Consider the Ottawa game (43 shots) and the win in Detroit. And where Hackett has had a couple of easier outings, Theo also got the benefit of playing a tired Los Angeles team (I think he played that night, anyway) and the opener against the Rangers when they sucked badly. The numbers don't lie. They can be misleading in some cases, but this isn't one of those cases.
As for the importance of goaltending, it really can't be overestimated. Few teams are good enough to overcome mediocre goaltending, let alone poor work in nets. A good example is Colorado, which has been struggling to score goals and to win at home. Well, but for Theodore having a weak night in nets, there's no way that Colorado could've come out of that game with 2 points. On 9 nights out of 10, Roy's performance means a loss in regulation. And of course it's even more true on the Habs side of the equation: despite running into an unusually sloppy Patrick Roy, the Habs didn't get the two points, and the only reason for that is that Theodore was worse. The same thing holds true over the course of a season: here and there you can survive having less than solid goaltending, but the averages will catch up with you and over the course of a long season you'll end up without those 6 or 8 crucial points at the end of the year that make the difference between the post season and oblivion.
The team hasn't played all that well and Theo's play thus far may have cost the team as little as 3 points, realistically. But projected over another 40 starts in the remaining 54 games or so, you can multiply that number by 2 or 2.5 or even 3. That's more than this team can afford. There's no other single player (other than Hackett) whose performance alone will determine whether the Habs finish 7th or 10th in the east. If Koivu's production falls off it'll hurt, but it's possible that production will come from other players who now are cold, but if Theo continues to play as he has, the Habs will not survive it because it will translate almost directly into the loss of points that they can't afford. That's why goaltending is different, and it's especially true for this team because it's challenged in so many other ways.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 12, 2002 1:47:57 GMT -5
These stats remind me of early last year (I think), when it seemed the Habs and Penguins were good trading partners, Hackett for a young centre or defenseman (Roszival or Melichar or Orpik), and Gilles Meloche supposedly scoffed at it, saying Hackett would not be an upgrade on their goaltending. Sometimes you wonder how some people get where they are.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 12, 2002 10:10:47 GMT -5
These stats remind me of early last year (I think), when it seemed the Habs and Penguins were good trading partners, Hackett for a young centre or defenseman (Roszival or Melichar or Orpik), and Gilles Meloche supposedly scoffed at it, saying Hackett would not be an upgrade on their goaltending. Sometimes you wonder how some people get where they are. or in other words Hackett made too much $$$$$$ for their liking.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Dec 12, 2002 12:23:56 GMT -5
My takeaway, which is pretty common sense, is that a franchise goalie is meaningless unless you can combine it with either superior offense or team defense.
I've been of the view that this franchise lacks and will continue lack (especially given our draft position) an elite franchise forward in the mold of Joe Thornton, Vincent Lecavalier, Ilya Kovalchuk, and Marian Gaborik, unless a major trade happens. Period. UFA's are now way to build a team, and our best forward prospect is Marian Hossa. Enough said.
What do you think Jose Theodore would have attracted in a trade at the end of last year. Lecavalier? Jason Allison? I don't know but it seems in today's NHL, blue-chip offensive talent is harder to come by than good goaltenders.
Theo's value is suspect now, but I think a strong case can be made that last year was a perfect time to trade him in exchange for a franchise forward. With franchise Dmen already in the system (Markov, Hainsey, Komi), we could have milked another couple of years out of Hackett, and solved the goaltending problem later if Garon or Michaud didn't pan out.
The more I think of it, we definiteley should have traded Theo.
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Dec 12, 2002 14:01:36 GMT -5
If it weren't Montreal it would have at least been considered. But I don't think it was ever realy considered because the organization sees Francophone players through a different lens. Unless Theo could've brought back Vinny, or Gagne, they'd just never have done it. It's easy to forget, but the fact is they're trying to market the team throughout the province, and when you leave Montreal there's just no language being spoken other than French. No matter what it would have meant on the ice, Theodore for Iginla or Theodore for Thornton (just as examples) wouldn't have cut it in terms of marketiing the team.
But there might have been other options, in terms of bringing back a Francophone player to soften the blow. It would have been really nice to do a deal with Philly last year. Something like Theo and a pick for Simon Gagne....or something like that.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 12, 2002 15:30:21 GMT -5
This is funny
How many ELITE forwards have the Flyers had over the last decade? a bunch
how many cups?
ZERO. Why? Their goaltending has never been up to par with the rest of the big contenders
Why have the Blues never won anything?
How many cups has Mats Sundin won? or Joe Thornton? or Todd Bertuzzi? or Jason Allison? or Eric Lindros? or Pavel Bure? or Jarome Iginla?
You need to find the right mix up front, on defence and most importantly, in goal to win the cup.
Last few cup winning goalies:
Hasek Roy Brodeur Belfour Osgood(great team in front) Vernon Roy Brodeur Richter Roy Barrasso Barrasso
See a pattern? all those guys were elite goalies except for Osgood and you can make a case for Vernon in that season
Trading Theodore last year was never an option and it ain't an option now. You want Simon Gagne and his 4 goals for Theodore? come on JV...Gagne isn't even a power forward. What Theodore showed last year was the stuff elite goaltenders are made of. Stop talking about Garon. The guy has done nothing in the NHL other than shutout a bad Thrashers team twice. He has been DEMOLISHED by better teams. Michaud is years away and is playing horribly in junior.
Trading Theodore would be just as bad if not worse than trading Roy was.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Dec 12, 2002 16:19:34 GMT -5
Conversely, a good goalie means nothing unless you have the horses up front. It took Hasek years to win a Cup because Buffalo wasn't good enough in other areas. Those Cup winners had outstanding goaltending AND good scoring and defense.
It's the same in other sports as well. Dan Marino was a great QB, but his talents were ultimately wasted because Miami couldn't put the rest of the pieces together.
I agree trading Theo was never on the table after last year, but it would have made sense to explore a trade opportunity. It still does, but Theo's value is depressed right now. I still hold that we need WAY more dynamism upfront and to say that we'll have the same trade options 3 years from now that we did with Theo coming off a fabulous year is unclear at best.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 12, 2002 16:55:16 GMT -5
Conversely, a good goalie means nothing unless you have the horses up front. It took Hasek years to win a Cup because Buffalo wasn't good enough in other areas. Those Cup winners had outstanding goaltending AND good scoring and defense. I agree, like I said you need the right mix...BUT the goaltending is the most important position. You use the Buffalo example, but don't forget many times they got to the 2nd or 3rd round or even the finals(in 1999) because of Hasek... Well, up front it will be up to the guys already on the team(Zednik, Koivu, Bulis,etc) and the prospects to make us a good team up front. Most of the veterans will be gone and hopefully we can acquire more skill up front in the future.
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Dec 13, 2002 0:43:59 GMT -5
Interesting discussion. Would it be fair to say:
- you don't need great goaltending, just average, to do well in the regular season as long as you have lots of scoring and/or great defensive play.
-you do need excellent goaltending, nearly always, to win the Cup PLUS excellent defensive play (one great defenceman usually required) and very good scoring including at least one exceptional forward.
How matters will shake out this year remains to be seen as the League appears to be in a transition phase because of new key players or coaches on the top teams, entirely new teams entering the picture or past top teams still maybe having enough without any major changes. Hence, respecting the Cup chase, and in no particular order:
1) Dallas- is Turco the real deal? They have everything else.
2) Boston- are Boynton and Berard enough to cover the weaknesses in the defence? And, especially, are Grahame and/or Shileds going to be good enough in nets?
3) Detroit- Is Joseph good enough? Doubts persist. How about the new coach? Will Yzerman have enough left when he returns and will he be able to stay healthy enough throughout the playoffs? If they win it could be another "Osgood" Cup.
4) New Jersey- we know Bordeur can be good enough when it counts. The big question is can they score enough? Do they have that dominant leader at forward?
5) Tampa Bay- new all around. They look to be dynamite at forward with several talented leaders. The defence looks suspect and right now their goaltending looks ordinary. What about the coaching?
6) Ottawa- they keep getting better. The scoring seems to be coming along. Will Alfredson and Hossa be the catalysts at forward needed for a Cup run? Is Lalime the real deal? Do they finally have enough toughness with Chara, Volchenkov, Neil and Fisher?
7) Philadelphia- a big question mark remains at goal and will Recchi, LeClair and Roenick have enough left to provide the spark up front? If not can Gagne add enough?
8) Vancouver- is Cloutier really good enough? Do they have a leader capable of leading them to the prize?
9) Minnesota- is their goaltending for real, at least in a playoff hot house? And is Gaborik enough up front?
10) Edmonton- they've probably got the goaltending and defence, although the latter is pretty young. Can Comrie, Smyth and Carter lead them up front?
11) Toronto- they've finally got the goalie. Will Sundin, Mogilny and Roberts be sufficient up front? Are Kaberle and Svehla good enough on defence and will McCabe recover his play to lead them here?
12) St Louis- one big question- goaltending. Brathwaite just doesn't look to be good enough. Will one of their one or two game wonders (Rudkowsky or Divis) emerge to lead them? Or will they be able to get a real goaltender by the trading deadline (like Hackett?) without giving up too much somewhare else?
13) Colorado- do the old boys have enoguh left in the tank? Are Sakic and Forsberg enough to bring their scoring alive? Will Morris be a good enough addition to Blake and Foote? And, most importantly, will Roy regain his Hall of Fame form?
The rest all appear to be just too far away.
So, we know New Jersey, Toronto, probably Dallas and Edmonton, and possibly Colorado, have the necessary outstanding goaltending for the Cup.
We know that St Louis does not now have the needed goaltending. On past performances, I would be inclined to add Philadelphia in here. I very nearly added Joseph in here but held back as the Toronto teams that he was on may just never have had the horses otherwise needed to finish the job.
The Goaltending in Boston, Detroit, Tampa Bay, Ottawa, Vancouver and Minnesota remains a question mark as to whether it is of Cup qualtiy. I am not saying that they cannot do it. I am saying, "Show Me".
This does not mean that a team cannot win the Cup without great goaltending. It does happen from time to time if the rest of the team is good enough. But the odds are not in favour of it.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 13, 2002 7:19:10 GMT -5
Maybe in a year like this you can get away with it.
The Blues are getting Brent Johnson back soon(if he isn't already back) for those who did not know
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Dec 13, 2002 21:58:27 GMT -5
Yea, he played last night. He may be their answer. I'd forgotten about him. I checked and he's been very good in the regular season and great in the playoffs.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 13, 2002 22:08:12 GMT -5
Yup.
I doubt the Blues will go out and get a ''big name'' goalie until Johnson really stinks it up in the post-season.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Dec 14, 2002 10:50:53 GMT -5
Great read HabsWesty.
There is not much to launch a debate about because I pretty much agree with you on everything. *d*mn* And I was spoiling for a fight........
Who said old man can't think straight, if only they could stay awake. *nods off*
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Dec 14, 2002 13:27:25 GMT -5
Great goaltending is where it all starts. The flying Frenchmen always had Plante, Worsley, Vachon, Dryden, Roy performing magic between the pipes. Without great goaltending, teams that get outshot 9 of 10 games are in last place. Without Theo and Hackett, the Habs are like Pamela Anderson without her right and left wings. She can't sing,she can't dance and she can't cook.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Dec 15, 2002 14:45:26 GMT -5
Habwest,
thanks for an intersting read. After reading the article and some of the replies ( particularly Marc's list of 1990's Cup winners) I started to think about another factor - the age of your goalie.
With the exception of Hasek ( an exceptional goalie playing on a great team) at 37 and Roy at 35 in 2001 none of these guys were over 34 with a number in them in their late twenties - their "prime". I have done a mental checklist through the eighties and the oldest goalie I can find is Billy Smith at 33 in 1983. If I missed someone please let me know.
Because of the long schedule in a compressed time period and the 4 round marathon I think that teams relying on an older goaltender to carry the load during the season & through the playoffs are in for problems.
Of the teams on your list (the top 13) Toronto & Colorado fit. Roy just turned 37, Belfour will be 38 when the playoffs start. They seem to be going on opposite direction sright now. Roy is struggling but he is less than a year removed from a sub 2.00 Gaa season. I think he will bounce back. But it is getting harder. He needed 7 games to beat LA & SAN Jose last year.
Belfour lost his game last seson & I didn't think he would get it back. His 5th place save % on a team that is 14th place in GAA suggests otherwise. Unlike Roy, he does not have a reliable backup(Kidd is 1-5) & he is playing most of the games, even the back to back. The Leafs are getting outshot on a regular basis and I think over the course of the season he will wear down.
The other "old" goalie in the mix is Curtis Joseph. He will be 36 when the playoffs begin. I believe he is good enough to win - especially on a Detroit team that outscore you or just shut you down. The Wngs are just a special case & hard to categorize because they are so good everywhere else. The goaltending can be solid to very good withour being spectacular & they still win.
I'm not saying you can't win with an older goalie, it just looks like the stats are against it.
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Dec 15, 2002 20:42:36 GMT -5
Good perspective jkr, hadn't even crossed my mind. It will be interesting to see what happens with Roy and Belfour. As to Joseph, I remain to be convinced that he's in the great category but I agree that Detroit is a special case and may be able to win it all if Joseph is 'merely' solid (which is nothing to sneeze at) throughout the playoffs.
Just to be provocative, I'll disagree that great goaltending is necessary for the regular season. I think the figures show that pretty clearly. If you're stong enough offensively and/or defensively you can get by quite nicely with average tending. It is more important for success in the playoffs and winning the Cup, when you often get down to teams which are pretty close in talent otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by Pam on Dec 17, 2002 0:14:45 GMT -5
I'm going to play the role of the Devil here.
I seem to remember this same thing last season. It seems that a lot of you wanted Hackett to be the Starting Goalie and trade Theodore. I came back and said it would be a mistake. That Jose was a better goalie than you were giving him credit for. I also seem to remember Jose started slow last season. Who's to say Jose isn't having another slow start like last season, or he could just be having a sophomore slump. It's too soon to give up on Jose. He's a very good goalie. I agree with Marc. If the Habs traded Jose it could come back and bite them in the butt. It was bad enough the Habs traded Roy instead of working out the problem. It would be worse if they let Jose go. I really think he is the goalie for the Habs future. If you want to trade him, maybe we could talk Quinn into putting together a deal to get him. He would be great on the Leafs. Give Jose a chance. He could still do it for you. It isn't any fluke he got the Habs past the Bruins. He didn't suddenly get bad over night. He still has what it takes if you are patient.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Dec 19, 2002 16:15:01 GMT -5
I'm going to play the role of the Devil here. I seem to remember this same thing last season. It seems that a lot of you wanted Hackett to be the Starting Goalie and trade Theodore. I came back and said it would be a mistake. That Jose was a better goalie than you were giving him credit for. I also seem to remember Jose started slow last season. Who's to say Jose isn't having another slow start like last season, or he could just be having a sophomore slump. It's too soon to give up on Jose. He's a very good goalie. I agree with Marc. If the Habs traded Jose it could come back and bite them in the butt. It was bad enough the Habs traded Roy instead of working out the problem. It would be worse if they let Jose go. I really think he is the goalie for the Habs future. If you want to trade him, maybe we could talk Quinn into putting together a deal to get him. He would be great on the Leafs. Give Jose a chance. He could still do it for you. It isn't any fluke he got the Habs past the Bruins. He didn't suddenly get bad over night. He still has what it takes if you are patient. I hate to say it but I agree with Pam. I think all of the hoopla in the summer with the commercials, the publicity etc kept him from keeping in shape and staying focused. If he has been a slow starter in the past, what happened in the summer will only extend the slow start. I figure by the middle to end of Janurary he'll be back in a groove.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 19, 2002 17:31:34 GMT -5
He'll be fine.
Alot of players tend to have a little bit of a letdown the season after after a major breakthrough.
This slow start should only motivate Theodore next year to eliminate the ''slow starter'' tag.
|
|