In Dan We Trust?

MVP
10-25-2003, 03:29 PM
http://www.mytelus.com/sports/article.do?pageID=canucks/home&articleID=1442007


http://www.mytelus.com/news_images/sports/indanwetrust_tshirt.jpg

quat
10-25-2003, 05:46 PM
I think fans razzing Cloutier is a bit uneccessar, but I find it impossible to believe that Hedberg could be suprised... or Linden for that matter. :rolleyes: Whenever any of the top teams in the league don't play up to their abilities, fans boo... and they also boo the players, Mike Modano for example, that they expect to carry the team. I dont' see the point in booing your own players, especially the goalie, as just about every mistake he makes cost the team a goal.

But I'm getting tired of this stupid goalie graveyard comment that get's dragged out all the time. How exactly is it a graveyard if just about every goalie that has passed on from here, went to play somewhere else? Is the rest of the league the afterlife?

I think in all fairness to Cloutier, all those guys that boo him, should be cheering as well when he plays well... which he does almost every game. People seem to forget that a great deal of the success the CAnucks had last season was due to Cloutier. The Canucks lack of a good defensive system cost the Canucks the series against Minny as much as Cloutier did. EVeryone has to be playing well to win in the playoffs.

Castor Troy
10-25-2003, 08:00 PM
Great saves are met with cheers all the time. Why can't great blunders be met with boos?

If he screws up he should be held accountable. I lost sympathy for Cloutier after I read that article. He should hold himself accountable and know that its his JOB to keep those out. However, at the same time jumping all over the guy for the next 3 days after a bad goal is hardly necessary. The bottom line is nobody will remember it if he wins the game. Compare the amount of discussion about the Backman goal to the discussion about the Whitney goal in the Detroit game and you'll see what I mean. The thing I have a problem with is the endless nitpicking of Cloutier's play. I don't care what kind of goals he lets in provided we play well in front of him and win games. He shut the door when we needed it on Wednesday. Job well done.

Nalyd Psycho
10-25-2003, 08:33 PM
Not yet... Not 'til he proves consistent.

Castor Troy
10-25-2003, 09:20 PM
Not yet... Not 'til he proves consistent.

I meant job well done on that particular night. Consistency is another issue. I was just addressing the criticism levelled at Cloutier after a game in which he played well enough to allow our offence to win it.

KOMO_ROCKS
10-25-2003, 09:30 PM
fans definately have a right to boo Cloutier if he is not performing well as they do pay their hard earned money to watch him...at the same time, booing Cloutier will not really help his game and confidence...(eg Briesbois in Montreal). Since the fans stopped booing him, his play has been much better defensively

Castor Troy
10-25-2003, 10:03 PM
fans definately have a right to boo Cloutier if he is not performing well as they do pay their hard earned money to watch him...at the same time, booing Cloutier will not really help his game and confidence...(eg Briesbois in Montreal). Since the fans stopped booing him, his play has been much better defensively

I agree, too much and it gets to be a big distraction for the player. As much as we'd like to say these guys are professionals and they should be able to handle it, they're still people. I don't think you can really compare Cloutier's situation to the Brisebois one. People don't boo Cloutier because they just plain don't like him, they boo him when he screws up. Brisebois got booed because he not only was a huge defensive liability, but he had several off-ice scandals which didn't reflect well on his character or commitment. Cloutier just gets booed for not performing well.

ehc73
10-25-2003, 10:08 PM
fans definately have a right to boo Cloutier if he is not performing well as they do pay their hard earned money to watch him...at the same time, booing Cloutier will not really help his game and confidence...(eg Briesbois in Montreal). Since the fans stopped booing him, his play has been much better defensively

Of course, having your GM tell the fans who boo Brisebois to screw off tends to boost confidence. When the big guy is behind you 100%, then your play often increases.

Yammer
10-25-2003, 10:38 PM
I'm uncomfortable with booing -- like shouting "shoot!" two seconds into the powerplay, it reveals the fan to be impulsive and classless -- but I understand it.

Dan is a scary goalie.

It's one thing to be young and so on. It's another to be consistently inconsistent. Whiffing on easy plays is unnerving. You can then make save after save of the spectacular variety, but so what?

It's not just goalies who suffer from brain farts. Lots of times anyone will, say, fan on a pass, or fail to stop an easy dumpout along the boards.

But because a goalie's mistakes end up in the net so often, the mistakes are more spectacular, and therefore impel negative feedback.

Mizral
10-25-2003, 10:52 PM
Cloutier still scares me most nights, but at this point, all I care about are his numbers. So long as he puts up a healthy number of wins, and decent stats, he can stay. As far as I'm concerned, if Dan finishes with a sub .900 Save % again, I don't want him back.

However, I think Cloutier has one big lure here, and that is he seems to be able to at least keep us in games. Can you think of many games Cloutier has completely lost outright? I mean, final goal in the final minutes - backbreaking type? I mean, the Dowd goal in Game 7 wasn't great, but we were far from out of it. The Lidstrom goal shouldn't have been as big as an issue as it was. Cloutier has this ability to seemingly never keep us far out of games (like, say, a Tommy Salo does in Edmonton). Not that he wins many games for us either, mind you.

Cloutier's a decent goaltender, but he's not great. Nor is he terrible.

Is Hedberg better? Remains to be seen I suppose. We play 4 games in 6 days coming up, hopefuly we can see him start twice more to get a better feel how he will play. I do love Hedberg's ability to play the puck though. WOW what a difference.

KOMO_ROCKS
10-25-2003, 10:56 PM
I agree, too much and it gets to be a big distraction for the player. As much as we'd like to say these guys are professionals and they should be able to handle it, they're still people. I don't think you can really compare Cloutier's situation to the Brisebois one. People don't boo Cloutier because they just plain don't like him, they boo him when he screws up. Brisebois got booed because he not only was a huge defensive liability, but he had several off-ice scandals which didn't reflect well on his character or commitment. Cloutier just gets booed for not performing well.

good points :handclap:

Since the comments made by Bob Gainey, Breezer is not getting booed now....talk about respect for the gm ;)

KOMO_ROCKS
10-26-2003, 12:21 AM
Dan needs to be supported, not coddled.

I guess you would trust Dan then ;)

The Produce Man
10-26-2003, 01:53 AM
Personally, I trust Dan. He doesn't deserve half the heat he takes from everyone. I mean, sure he lets in the occasional blunder, but which goalie doesn't? The only reason Cloutier's more known for it, is because it happens to him in the playoffs. And goalies are constantly under the microscope for those games. Cloutier's clutch in the regular season. I'm completly confident with him between the pipes. Now, the playoffs are a different story, but it's only been 2 years. He may still be salvagable. But in that time, he's really in the spotlight, so it's understandable to be too caught up in trying to make flashy saves, and do things you're not good at, to try and make yourself look better. If he just keeps his head in the game, I think he can have a solid playoff run.

tantalum
10-26-2003, 01:26 AM
Occassional blunder? If it was an occassional blunder no one would care. But the fact is it is not only more than an occassional blunder but blunders at terrible times in a game and that's the problem. Not to mention a script we have witnessed countless times before. That's 3 blunders thus far this year (in only 5 games) that have helped put the team behind the 8-ball in a game. They lost points in two of those games and nearly the third. Though I guess according to the Cloutier book entitled "How Not To Take Responsibility For Your Actions" the Columbus and St. Louis blunders don't count because there was time left in the game. :rolleyes: A starting goaltender should only get a handful of blunders every year when does Cloutier use his up?

Personally I was willing to live with his errors the past couple of seasons thinking he would mature and grow out of them. He isn't and it is becoming clearer every day that he just can't stay focused for 60 minutes. He depends on the offence to bail him out, not unlike Potvin when he was a canuck. Who also had a knack for keeping the canucks in games after putting the team in a tough position with a bad goal.

Yes the season is young and the sample size probably too small but the all to familiar pattern is present. The canucks are ranked near the top in the defensive categories while Cloutier is ranked 15th in GAA and 17th in SV%. His rankings haven't really changed the last couple of seasons and I doubt they do this season. The canucks are a team that can't seem to rely on their goaltending (with Cloutier) but have to rely on superior offence. He's an average goaltender at best. If that's the case in April expect a fairly quick exit because average is simply not good enough for the playoffs.

Castor Troy
10-26-2003, 02:00 AM
I'd really like to see Hedberg given a chance to run with the ball for awhile. While I thought Cloutier played well versus St. Louis (even with the weak goal, he still only allowed 2 all game. I don't think you can ask much more than that), we haven't given Hedberg a real shot yet. Cloutier hasn't exactly secured the #1 spot with his play, so why not give Hedberg at least 2 of the next 4 games. We play 4 in 6 nights, so let's see what our "backup" is made of. Send a message to Cloutier: if he wants that top spot, he'll have to earn it just like Hedberg. We've already tried handing the position to him, time for a new approach.

Riven
10-26-2003, 05:42 AM
Castor, I think Crawford would be courting disaster, if he were to follow your advice and give Hedberg some major time in the net.

Right now, it appears Cloutier is getting two games and then Hedberg gets one game. Despite sporting a good goals against average, critics argue that Cloutier has stumbled a few times. Hedberg has played in two games and looked good both times.

What you are suggesting is that after only seven games, Crawford should hit the panic button and start Hedberg in two or three games straight to see what he will do under serious fire. If I were Cloutier, I would take this as a vote of non-confidence. Everyone reacts differently to negative commentary from their boss. If Cloutier reacts badly, you may just have burned your bridges with him.

So what, you say? Well, sure, if Hedberg steps in and shows that not only is he a step up on Cloutier, but he can handle playing a high volume of games, you have just improved at that position. But, what if Hedberg doesn't sparkle? What if he turns out to be no better than, or even worse than, Cloutier?

Can you just flip back to Cloutier? Maybe not. Cloutier may have his nose out of joint or be squeezing the stick extra hard or just plain have lost momentum. Now you are in a pickle. You have two goaltenders, neither of whom can get the job done. As a coach, you have now put your general manager in the position of having to give up assets to acquire an experienced, available goaltender. In short you have created a mess.

If Hedberg is going to come out of this as number one, it has to be based on a lot more than two games. The transition has to be driven by events, such as injury, or results. Either Cloutier has to seriously stumble or Hedberg has to show, after many games, that he is simply the superior goaltender.

LaVal
10-26-2003, 07:39 AM
IMO it comes down to this

boo'ing after Cloutier let in that horrible goal? that's going to be natural, and happens everywhere. every goaltender has to face that.

giving him the rasberry afterwards? not so cool. this is where the line crosses between good fans, and bandwagoners who can't show support to their own players.

Reign Nateo
10-26-2003, 08:09 AM
I can't wait until we get a goaltender in Vancouver that can go a game without whiffing on one.

I'm sorry Cloutier, you play in a professional league where everyone of your peers could make that save. You should expect to be heckled.

I think most of the fans have lost faith in Dan Cloutier, personally I know a lot die hard Canucks fans who think he is the worst starting goalie in the league (myself included)

The only starter in the league that I can honestly say I think is worse than Dan Cloutier is Roman Turek, but he has been injured so I can't really compare at this point. Aebischer also hasn't proved that he is better.

tantalum
10-26-2003, 10:26 AM
I can't wait until we get a goaltender in Vancouver that can go a game without whiffing on one.

I'm sorry Cloutier, you play in a professional league where everyone of your peers could make that save. You should expect to be heckled.

I think most of the fans have lost faith in Dan Cloutier, personally I know a lot die hard Canucks fans who think he is the worst starting goalie in the league (myself included)

The only starter in the league that I can honestly say I think is worse than Dan Cloutier is Roman Turek, but he has been injured so I can't really compare at this point. Aebischer also hasn't proved that he is better.

Salo is worse as well. But there are only a handful that are worse. Of course my opinion is well known. He's an average starter at best.

Being in the hockey purgatory in which I get to watch the Rangers every day I must say that I have been immensely impressed with Dunham. The last few days I've heard and read comments that Cloutier only let in 2 goals even with the bad one what more can you ask? Well had Dunham let in a weak goal last night the Rangers may not have won. They wouldn't have had a chance for that empty goal. THey wouldn't have tied Atlanta 0-0, they wouldn't have beaten Florida. Bad goals cost points it's as simple as that. No bad goals AND timely, big saves game in and game put...a novel concept for many canuck fans (and Oiler fans) right now I guess. But that's what a quality starter does.

Castor Troy
10-26-2003, 11:00 AM
The last few days I've heard and read comments that Cloutier only let in 2 goals even with the bad one what more can you ask? Well had Dunham let in a weak goal last night the Rangers may not have won. They wouldn't have had a chance for that empty goal. THey wouldn't have tied Atlanta 0-0, they wouldn't have beaten Florida. Bad goals cost points it's as simple as that. No bad goals AND timely, big saves game in and game put...a novel concept for many canuck fans (and Oiler fans) right now I guess. But that's what a quality starter does.

I'd say that you're right.... in regards to the Rangers. They're a team that hasn't excelled in any end of the ice for the last few seasons, and so they need that kind of netminding to win games. Take last season: the Rags had a 2.56 goals for average and a 2.82 goals against average. They obviously need that help from their last line of defense.

The Canucks, on the other hand, have been one of the highest scoring teams in the league for the last two seasons. Last year we finished second in league scoring with a 3.22 goals for average, and 11th in goals against average with 2.54. For a team that can be expected to score 3 goals a game most nights, I'd say 2 goals against per game works just fine. We only scored less than 2 goals in 13 games last regular season. We have yet to score less than 2 in a game this season. Our only 2 losses came when Cloutier let in 3, and cost us both games with a critical mistake. If Cloutier can maintain a GAA close to 2.00 (he's currently at 2.01) then we'll win a lot more than we'll lose.

LaVal
10-26-2003, 11:10 AM
I think most of the fans have lost faith in Dan Cloutier, personally I know a lot die hard Canucks fans who think he is the worst starting goalie in the league (myself included)

you should speak for yourself. aside from the bandwagoners most fans still support Cloutier.

tantalum
10-26-2003, 11:13 AM
I'd say that you're right.... in regards to the Rangers. They're a team that hasn't excelled in any end of the ice for the last few seasons, and so they need that kind of netminding to win games. Take last season: the Rags had a 2.56 goals for average and a 2.82 goals against average. They obviously need that help from their last line of defense.

The Canucks, on the other hand, have been one of the highest scoring teams in the league for the last two seasons. Last year we finished second in league scoring with a 3.22 goals for average, and 11th in goals against average with 2.54. For a team that can be expected to score 3 goals a game most nights, I'd say 2 goals against per game works just fine. We only scored less than 2 goals in 13 games last regular season. We have yet to score less than 2 in a game this season. Our only 2 losses came when Cloutier let in 3, and cost us both games with a critical mistake. If Cloutier can maintain a GAA close to 2.00 (he's currently at 2.01) then we'll win a lot more than we'll lose.

Perhaps in the regular season but not in the playoffs. And again that's the problem. The offence has been constantly needed to bail out the goaltending on this team for years...not just Cloutier but Potvin, Snow, Skudra etc. etc. Every team needs that last line of defence in the playoffs and Cloutier has been incapable of providing it. You simply can not have average goaltending in the playoffs. It must be above average at the very least. And quite frankly Cloutier has yet to show average in pressure situations let alone above average.

The difference between average goaltending and above average goaltending in the regular season also means better placement and weaker playoff opponents. It isn't simply "oh we can make the playoffs with him" it's "how much better would this team be if it received the type of goaltending that even the 5-10 guys provide every game? The type of goaltending the other good to elite teams get every night." Certainly the Avs wouldn't have won their 9th divisional title in a row or whatever it was last year. Bad goals mean blown points in the regular season and losses in the playoffs. If your starter is letting in twice as many bad goals and losing the team 5 or 6 more points (minimum...both Skudra and Cloutier were bad the second half) in a year it costs you placement or in the Oilers case last year a playoff spot. That's why it is simply imperative your starter is not letting those weak goals in on any sort of regular basis, especially at crucial times in the game. Even Cloutier supporters admit that he lets in way many more bad goals than most other teams starting goaltenders.

Reign Nateo
10-26-2003, 11:28 AM
you should speak for yourself. aside from the bandwagoners most fans still support Cloutier.

We obviously know different circles of people, because the people I talk Canucks with are around my age group (26-34) and are all huge Canuck fans. And for the most part, the people I know don't trust Cloutier, these are not bandwagon fans, just fans that can see Dan for what he is, a sub-par NHL starter.

Reign Nateo
10-26-2003, 11:32 AM
One day we'll all look back and shake our heads and say "I can't belevie we still put up 100+ points with him in net"

Anyway I don't want to get into another discussion about Dan Cloutier. I don't think he is good enough for this team, others do, we'll leave it at that.

Castor Troy
10-26-2003, 01:46 PM
Perhaps in the regular season but not in the playoffs. And again that's the problem.

I, like you, don't think that Cloutier has what it takes to bring this team to the next level. However, at this time we don't seem to have many options besides Cloutier/Hedberg. I think this tandem will suffice for this season, with Hedberg beating out Cloutier for the #1 job sometime in early 2004. In the meantime, I don't see many options for us to upgrade significantly without disturbing our current roster too much. You have to give to get and I'm not sure the right thing for the team right now would be to start trading away roster players. I don't see where we could find the type of goaltender that you're talking about until at least next January. The options that I see ahead are:

1) Trade for Sean Burke once Phoenix drops out of the playoff picture... probably not until close to the trading deadline.
2) Pick up Joseph from the Wings... not really an option because of his contract, but he's definitely an upgrade over Cloutier
3) Go with Cloutier/Hedberg until next season, then give the better of the two the starting job next season, with Auld backing him up.

#3 is far and away the most likely scenario, and one that I actually don't mind. Hedberg has some good playoff games under his belt, and I'd like to see what he could do for this team come April. Auld impressed me so much last year that I like his chances at being a very good #1 goaltender. He makes difficult saves look easy, and always seems to be in position. However, with him doing so well behind the team at the end of the last season, you have to wonder why he can't seem to do the same in the AHL. I know I'll be keeping a close eye on his stats with the Moose this year.

KOMO_ROCKS
10-26-2003, 01:53 PM
[QUOTE=Castor Troy]I, like you, don't think that Cloutier has what it takes to bring this team to the next level.

and I dont either

Castor Troy
10-26-2003, 02:00 PM
What you are suggesting is that after only seven games, Crawford should hit the panic button and start Hedberg in two or three games straight to see what he will do under serious fire. If I were Cloutier, I would take this as a vote of non-confidence. Everyone reacts differently to negative commentary from their boss. If Cloutier reacts badly, you may just have burned your bridges with him.

I'm suggesting that Crawford should go with the goalie who has performed better behind the team. Results are what count at this level and Cloutier has to know that as well as Hedberg. While two games is not a lot to go on, has Cloutier given us a real reason not to give Hedberg a chance? Nope. Has Hedberg played well in each of his games so far? Yep. If this is all it takes to "burn bridges" with Cloutier, then burn away. This organization has done nothing but support him since day one in a Vancouver uniform. If he turns around and *****es now that he's got a challenge for his job, then his lack of mental resilience has been exposed for once and for all. You never heard Daniel and/or Henrik cry about reduced ice-time did you? No, in fact they said they wanted to earn the ice-time that was handed to them. I hope that's Cloutier's attitude as well.

What if he turns out to be no better than, or even worse than, Cloutier?

Can you just flip back to Cloutier? Maybe not. Cloutier may have his nose out of joint or be squeezing the stick extra hard or just plain have lost momentum. Now you are in a pickle. You have two goaltenders, neither of whom can get the job done. As a coach, you have now put your general manager in the position of having to give up assets to acquire an experienced, available goaltender. In short you have created a mess.

If Hedberg is going to come out of this as number one, it has to be based on a lot more than two games. The transition has to be driven by events, such as injury, or results. Either Cloutier has to seriously stumble or Hedberg has to show, after many games, that he is simply the superior goaltender.

Ok, what about splitting the games for the first half? A 50/50 split between the two should be enough for each guy to feel like they're getting their chance, and should be enough for each to retain any momentum they can create. It would also give the coaches an opportunity to see each guy play enough to establish who is better for this team at this point.

PhillyNucksFan
10-26-2003, 02:32 PM
I'm suggesting that Crawford should go with the goalie who has performed better behind the team. Results are what count at this level and Cloutier has to know that as well as Hedberg. While two games is not a lot to go on, has Cloutier given us a real reason not to give Hedberg a chance? Nope. Has Hedberg played well in each of his games so far? Yep. If this is all it takes to "burn bridges" with Cloutier, then burn away. This organization has done nothing but support him since day one in a Vancouver uniform. If he turns around and *****es now that he's got a challenge for his job, then his lack of mental resilience has been exposed for once and for all. You never heard Daniel and/or Henrik cry about reduced ice-time did you? No, in fact they said they wanted to earn the ice-time that was handed to them. I hope that's Cloutier's attitude as well.



Ok, what about splitting the games for the first half? A 50/50 split between the two should be enough for each guy to feel like they're getting their chance, and should be enough for each to retain any momentum they can create. It would also give the coaches an opportunity to see each guy play enough to establish who is better for this team at this point.


legit comment.. but IF Crow does give Johan major ice team.. i think it will further destroy Cloutier confidence.. yes He did let in a bad goal, but right now, we are not ready to hit the panic button yet.. lets wait until X'mas, and by X'mas, Cloutier still lets in some or even a couple bad goals.. and cost us some games.. I'd say play Hedberg and give him some starts and see how it goes.. after all, Hedberg does have better playoff experience/success...

I like cloutier very much actually.. but after 3 years... I am beginning to have major doubts.. and Personally, I would give him half of this season to prove his consistency/save %/GAA... a loss is ok, but I want to see him perform...

right now, it looks like every time we lose, it IS CLOUTIER's FAULT!!! I want to see some wins or even losses, that we can say.. ITS NOT CLOUTIER'S Fault..

cc
10-26-2003, 02:47 PM
The discussion on whether Hedberg or Cloutier should be number 1 at this point doesn't matter. We know that Cloutier is good enough for the regular season to get the Canucks into the playoffs... that isn't the issue at all because he did it last year and the year before... the issue is which goalie will emerge as the number 1 during the playoffs. I personally believe that the only way Cloutier will lose his number 1 spot is if he's losing the Canucks chance of making it to the post season, or he craps out in the playoffs again. Otherwise, I assume that the game splits between him and Hedberg will be about 50-55/27-32 split.

LaVal
10-26-2003, 03:21 PM
We obviously know different circles of people, because the people I talk Canucks with are around my age group (26-34) and are all huge Canuck fans. And for the most part, the people I know don't trust Cloutier, these are not bandwagon fans, just fans that can see Dan for what he is, a sub-par NHL starter.

on-air Sportsnet polls, Canucks.com polls, etc all show the majority still support Cloutier. maybe you and your friends don't, but you shouldn't assume and state everybody shares your opinion.

Riven
10-26-2003, 04:34 PM
"Certainly the Avs wouldn't have won their 9th divisional title in a row or whatever it was last year. Bad goals mean blown points in the regular season and losses in the playoffs."

Oh tant, come on, let's not lay everything at the feet of one guy. I know you can argue a bad goal here or a bad goal there cost us points in the standings. But, you can also argue that missed shots here or missed checks there cost us points, too.

The bottom line, however, was the last game of the year. All we had to do was tie the Los Angeles Kings and we could have had the divisional title. We lost 2-0. We lost to a team so decimated by injuries they were more AHL than NHL. We lost to a team with basically one guy who could put the puck in the net. All the big guns had to do was score a couple of goals, not too much to ask, and we have the divisional title.

Look, I couldn't care less if Cloutier or Hedberg is our number one goalie. Whoever plays the best gets the job. I hope we don't have to make a trade. We might lose too much in other areas making a deal to get an established goalie. But, really, this anti-Cloutier stuff has just gone right over the top. He's not the only one on the ice making mistakes. He's not the only starter in the league who let's in some bad goals. Trying to pin every single problem the Canucks have on Danny is just ridiculous.

It seems like Cloutier has replaced the Sedins as the flavour of the day whipping boy. Well, so be it. I just wish you anti-Cloutier types would drop the hyperbole.

Thalia
10-26-2003, 05:54 PM
"Certainly the Avs wouldn't have won their 9th divisional title in a row or whatever it was last year. Bad goals mean blown points in the regular season and losses in the playoffs."

Oh tant, come on, let's not lay everything at the feet of one guy. I know you can argue a bad goal here or a bad goal there cost us points in the standings. But, you can also argue that missed shots here or missed checks there cost us points, too.

The bottom line, however, was the last game of the year. All we had to do was tie the Los Angeles Kings and we could have had the divisional title. We lost 2-0. We lost to a team so decimated by injuries they were more AHL than NHL. We lost to a team with basically one guy who could put the puck in the net. All the big guns had to do was score a couple of goals, not too much to ask, and we have the divisional title.

Look, I couldn't care less if Cloutier or Hedberg is our number one goalie. Whoever plays the best gets the job. I hope we don't have to make a trade. We might lose too much in other areas making a deal to get an established goalie. But, really, this anti-Cloutier stuff has just gone right over the top. He's not the only one on the ice making mistakes. He's not the only starter in the league who let's in some bad goals. Trying to pin every single problem the Canucks have on Danny is just ridiculous.

It seems like Cloutier has replaced the Sedins as the flavour of the day whipping boy. Well, so be it. I just wish you anti-Cloutier types would drop the hyperbole.
I'd just like to say that I agree with this comment 100% :D

tantalum
10-26-2003, 06:09 PM
"Certainly the Avs wouldn't have won their 9th divisional title in a row or whatever it was last year. Bad goals mean blown points in the regular season and losses in the playoffs."

Oh tant, come on, let's not lay everything at the feet of one guy. I know you can argue a bad goal here or a bad goal there cost us points in the standings. But, you can also argue that missed shots here or missed checks there cost us points, too.

The bottom line, however, was the last game of the year. All we had to do was tie the Los Angeles Kings and we could have had the divisional title. We lost 2-0. We lost to a team so decimated by injuries they were more AHL than NHL. We lost to a team with basically one guy who could put the puck in the net. All the big guns had to do was score a couple of goals, not too much to ask, and we have the divisional title.

Look, I couldn't care less if Cloutier or Hedberg is our number one goalie. Whoever plays the best gets the job. I hope we don't have to make a trade. We might lose too much in other areas making a deal to get an established goalie. But, really, this anti-Cloutier stuff has just gone right over the top. He's not the only one on the ice making mistakes. He's not the only starter in the league who let's in some bad goals. Trying to pin every single problem the Canucks have on Danny is just ridiculous.

It seems like Cloutier has replaced the Sedins as the flavour of the day whipping boy. Well, so be it. I just wish you anti-Cloutier types would drop the hyperbole.

I never laid it at the feet of one guy at all...both Skudra and Cloutier were poor the second half of the season. The BIGGEST problem was the plague of bad goals which were the main culprit in all those blown leads. The goaltending was the weakest link on the team last year down the stretch and in the playoffs. The thing that makes me laugh is that I and others have never said Cloutier is solely to blame or the only one making mistakes. He is however the one making the most mistakes, making repeated mistakes, making the same mistakes he has made for years, making those mistakes at terrible times of the game and the one player on the team that absolutely can't be making those mistakes. HE HAS TO BE THE BEST OR VERY NEAR THE BEST PLAYER ON THE TEAM GAME IN AND GAME OUT! He isn't even close. There is no hyperbole. He is at best an average goaltender and that simply isn't good enough for this team.

Riven
10-26-2003, 07:36 PM
"Certainly the Avs wouldn't have won their 9th divisional title in a row or whatever it was last year. Bad goals mean blown points in the regular season and losses in the playoffs."

"I never laid it at the feet of one guy at all."

BULLFEATHERS! The "Avs wouldn't have won their 9th divisional title ... Bad goals mean blown points" is very much a statement that Cloutier cost us the divisional title. How else are we supposed to read that?

This is all nonsense, though. Do we go through the whole season, desperately looking for every point lost? Do we only count the Cloutier mistakes? What about the game where it was all on the line? The game against a glorified AHL squad? The divisional title was lost that day. The day we couldn't score a single goal against Los Angeles.

LaVal
10-26-2003, 07:42 PM
it seems some people think only Cloutier makes mistakes

sorry to dissapoint everybody... but every goatlender has gaffs here and there... even the best of the best. if everybody thinks if we change goaltenders that will change then they need to keep dreaming.

Waveburner
10-26-2003, 09:56 PM
A starting goaltender should only get a handful of blunders every year when does Cloutier use his up?



Biggest exageration in HF history? A starting goalie is only allowed a handful of blunders in ENTIRE season??!!? The only goalie I think who has even come close to that was Hasek in his glory years, and even then, he still made a fair number of big blunders over the course of the season. Seriously, it's like you just want a robot that covers 99% of the net at all times. I am not a Cloutier fan either, but the bashing has now officially reached colossal levels of idiocy.

Reign Nateo
10-26-2003, 10:17 PM
[QUOTE=LaVal575]on-air Sportsnet polls, Canucks.com polls, etc all show the majority still support Cloutier...QUOTE]

Oh then it must be true. ;)

MVP
10-26-2003, 10:43 PM
Say what you want about Cloutier though, he is not too bad, but he is not too good either.

My problem with him is the fact he MUST give out one weak goal per game, i really don't understand it. i mean i thought he played pretty well tonight against the Coyo until that last goal with a minute left. i don't get it, the bottom line is he is not a clutch goalie. i actually think he has all the physical ability to be a good goalie but i doubt his mental focus is good enough to carry a team all the way to the Stanley Cup final. You need great consistency throughout 4 rounds in the playoff, at less 20 games against elite teams, can any of you honestly tell me that Cloutier has the mental focus to hold up for at less 16 of those 20 games?

KOMO_ROCKS
10-26-2003, 10:46 PM
can any of you honestly tell me that Cloutier has the mental focus to hold up for at less 16 of those 20 games?

simple answer in my view: NO ;)

orcatown
10-26-2003, 11:38 PM
Every ranking done by knowledgable publications and knowledgeable hockey pundits puts Cloutier well below the average among NHL goaltenders. Stats-wise he is poor. His save percentage being one of the lowest for starting goalies in the League. Let's face he is at best a very average goal tender. That he has done much is a testimony to the generally good defensive nature of the team and the low amount shots allowed. Also his win percentage is related to the fact the Canucks have finished first or second in goals scored. In crunch time he has badly failed. In late parts of games, in the playoffs - you name it. Every bit of objective evidence suggests he is mediocre.

There are substantial reasons for believeing that Cloutier is not to be depended upon. Most important, and I say this sadly, is his lack of maturity. Others teams know this and use it to their advantage. They know they can get under skin by refering to his lack of mental toughness (and ,maybe intelligence) and his inability to handle needling about it. Why do you think they do it. They know better than anyone how shallow his confidence is and they know the button to push. Everyone knows people whose buttons can be pushed and those who can't. If you're going to play sports at high level you'd better be someone who can stand up to being pushed both mentally and physically.

I think the most telling comment ever about Cloutier came from the Detroit dressing room after they eliminated the Canucks after the Canucks took the series lead in the playoffs two years ago. The comment made by a couple of Detroit vets (including Steve Duschene) was the Canucks could never win with Cloutier. The comments were delivered with conviction and insight and without any malice. I've always felt that if really want to know how good a player is then ask other players.

Do I hope that Cloutier will break through and become an elite goalie? You bet. Do I believe it will happen? No. I've seen enough, heard enough to know he has fundamental flaws in his game and to know that he lacks mental toughness. Any belief to the contrary would be built upon hope and not upon evidence.

Thus I believe that we must hope Hedburg can come through. I believe that if we are going to do anything in the playoffs, where great goaltending is an absolute requirement, then we must hope that Hedburg gets on a hot streak. We have to hope that he is the answer. Maybe we will rue the fact that we didn't get Cechmanek. But that's history. At present success will depend, I think, on Hedburg.

tantalum
10-27-2003, 03:02 AM
Biggest exageration in HF history? A starting goalie is only allowed a handful of blunders in ENTIRE season??!!? The only goalie I think who has even come close to that was Hasek in his glory years, and even then, he still made a fair number of big blunders over the course of the season. Seriously, it's like you just want a robot that covers 99% of the net at all times. I am not a Cloutier fan either, but the bashing has now officially reached colossal levels of idiocy.

Sorry to dissappoint you but yes the best starters in the league do only have handful of blunders that cost teams points during the year. Which is why their numbers are far superior. Bad goals are the SV% killer. For example if Cloutier does not allow the wraparound tonight his save percentage is 0.895 (17 for 19)...acceptable, not spectacular, given the Sopel giveaway. With the bad goal it became 0.857 (18 for 21). He has allowed 4 poor goals this year by my count. He has faced 141 shots and currently has a 0.908. Take away those 4 goals he should have stopped or never came about and you are looking at a 0.930+ SV% thus far in the season. A Cloutier supporter on another board went through the bad goals in the Minnesota series and if you take those as saves his SV% would be magically acceptable. You can see that consistently letting in bad goals is what kills the SV%. The better goaltenders don't let in bad goals consistently as Cloutier or Salo do and they still make the big saves. They do only make a handful of blunders compared to Cloutier (or Salo or OSgood). At least Cloutier is consistent in something. Now do you want to argue what a handful means? Well in comparison the likes of Cloutier, Potvin, Salo, Osgood, Turek make buckets full how's that?

I've never said good goaltenders don't make mistakes what I've said and others have said is that Cloutier makes a great deal more than is acceptable for an upper echelon team, and I mean a GREAT deal more. This is a top 10 team without top 10 goaltending (without top 15 IMO). Is cloutier horrid? No but again I've never said that he was except about his playoff performances. I've said his play is unacceptable for where the rest of the team is at and has been at the last couple of seasons. Do I want I robot? no. I want a goaltender that atleast plays to the level of the team in front of him...an upper echelon team needs an upper echelon goaltender to succeed. A goaltender capable of outdueling someone other than a sick Osgood for a game series. Cloutier isn't that guy IMO. I don't think Cloutier has gotten much better over the past couple of seasons to suggest he ever will be that. Everyone understand now?

How did you like that wraparound goal with a minute left tonight and the canucks leading by one? Wraparounds are weak goals. Always have been and always will be! The face of the canuck boss on the bench didn't look to impressed. Oh yes he made some other nice saves but again that doesn't amount to anything if you let in the weak goal...just ask Felix or Osgood or Salo or Turek.

So let's see thus far this season in 6 starts:

a brutal penalty and goal against Columbus when leading 1-0 and the canucks controlling play. 3-2 loss.

a brutal play against Detroit in the dwindling minutes of the game. 3-2 loss.

a bad goal against St. Louis at 1-0 on the first shot of the game. 3-2 win as the offence bails him out.

a bad wraparound goal against Phoneix during the last minute to lose a win. 3-3 score.

That's acceptable? 6 games and 4 bad errors at crucial points in a game. Not to me it isn't. And we haven't even entered pressure filled parts of the season yet.

Riven
10-27-2003, 05:47 AM
Tant, once again you have laid blame entirely at the feet of Cloutier. You only talk about Cloutier's role in the third goal against Phoenix, ignoring his partners in crime.

On that play, there were at least two Phoenix players behind Cloutier. One was on the boards to his right, fighting with Jovanovski for the puck. The other was behind the net and somewhat to Cloutier's left. The puck was pushed across to the player behind the net. With no help in sight, Cloutier guessed that the puck was going to come from behind the net to his left and shot across to that side. As he turned his head, however, he spotted the Phoenix player moving back behind the net, past Jovanovski, to come out on the right. Cloutier stopped and tried to get back to his right, not getting there in time.

If you are going to criticize Cloutier on the goal, why not mention that Malik was caught on the back boards, off to Cloutier's left? Why not mention that Morrison was floating around in the slot, but didn't move to get involved in checking anyone? Why not ask why both Jovanovski and Malik were on the back boards? Do you consider that proper positioning for defensemen in their own zone?

If our defensive zone coverage had been better on that play, Cloutier would not have been forced into guessing in the first place. At worst he was one of at least four players who got themselves out of position.

Our defensive zone coverage broke down numerous times against Phoenix. Cloutier made some fine saves in bailing the team out.

Perhaps Hedberg could have done better. Perhaps not. Perhaps Hasek would have got us the two points. Perhaps not. The truth is, however, that this team is not going to win the Stanley Cup until it improves its' defensive zone coverage. I don't care who we put in the nets, we won't win the big one until we learn how to build up a 2-0 lead and then smother the opposition.

LaVal
10-27-2003, 06:03 AM
[QUOTE=LaVal575]on-air Sportsnet polls, Canucks.com polls, etc all show the majority still support Cloutier...QUOTE]

Oh then it must be true. ;)

well it covers the most watched Canucks TV station, and most visited online Canucks publication. i'm sorry but that's a little more credible than your "26-34 year old" friends.

Every ranking done by knowledgable publications and knowledgeable hockey pundits puts Cloutier well below the average among NHL goaltenders. Stats-wise he is poor. His save percentage being one of the lowest for starting goalies in the League.

sorry, but you are incorrect. most rankings put Cloutier in the middle of the pack. his GAA was almost in the top-10, and his save percentage is in the middle of the pack.

So let's see thus far this season in 6 starts:

a brutal penalty and goal against Columbus when leading 1-0 and the canucks controlling play. 3-2 loss.

a brutal play against Detroit in the dwindling minutes of the game. 3-2 loss.

a bad goal against St. Louis at 1-0 on the first shot of the game. 3-2 win as the offence bails him out.

a bad wraparound goal against Phoneix during the last minute to lose a win. 3-3 score.

- a penalty that never should have been a penalty
- he wasn't the one that passed the puck out into the slot
- offense bails him out? bullsh*t. Cloutier was under siege the entire game and held the fort. played brilliant in that game despite a poor 1st goal against.
- hardly a bad goal. Jovanovski and Morrison were standing around thinking they won the game.

i'm not trying to defend Cloutier here or anything... but some of the arguments the Cloutier bashers are coming up with are terrible. i don't get why the bashers can pin all the blame on one person when the entire team is clearly playing poorly in their own zone.

i guess that's always the way it'll be in Vancouver. the goaltender gets all the blame. it's always their fault we lost :dunno:

tantalum
10-27-2003, 06:16 AM
Once again people are failing to grasp the concept of a bad goal. A shot that should be stopped. It is irrelevant what happens before that as even with that stuff happening THE SHOT SHOULD HAVE BEEN STOPPED! It wasn't. It was a bad goal that rightfully gets laid at the feet of the goaltender. It is the goaltenders fault and his alone if a shot that should be stopped isn't. It is his job to make sure those shots do get stopped and don't turn the red light on behind him.

EVERY shot is the result of a defensive breakdown somewhere. That's why you have a goaltender in this game. It's his job to stop the shots that do get through.

What you guys who are defending these bad goals are telling everyone else is that unless the canucks play a game in which they give up precisely ZERO scoring chances no finger can be pointed at the goaltender. Hell, given Cloutiers affintiy for the bad goal they can't even give up a shot. Well that isn't going to happen so until then Cloutier has to do what his job is and what he's being paid to do. And for the last time Potvin made some damn fine saves each and every game he played as a canuck as well (and a leaf, islander, king). The problem was the same...terrible goals at terrible times. His job as a starter is to make those big saves for goodness sake, he doesn't get a pat on the back for it! It is in the job description for starting a goaltender. But so is NOT letting in softies. He isn't fulfilling that part of the job at all.

A bad goal is a bad goal is a bad goal is a bad goal is a bad goal is a bad goal is a bad goal is a bad goal is a bad goal is a bad goal is a bad goal.

tantalum
10-27-2003, 06:26 AM
sorry, but you are incorrect. most rankings put Cloutier in the middle of the pack. his GAA was almost in the top-10, and his save percentage is in the middle of the pack.

Middle of the pack (actually in the bottom half)...you wouldn't mean "average at best" would you? Because then you would agree with me. And that simply isn't good enough for a team expecting to do damage this year.

- a penalty that never should have been a penalty

No it was a penalty. He lost his cool and paid for it. But more so the goal was absolutely brutal.

- he wasn't the one that passed the puck out into the slot

Umm he was the one that failed to freeze the puck when everyone in the arena and at home KNEW he should have frozen the puck. Even the goalscorer on the play wondered out loud why the heck the puck wasn't frozen. Completely his bad decision.

- offense bails him out? bullsh*t. Cloutier was under siege the entire game and held the fort. played brilliant in that game despite a poor 1st goal against.

Wow so he ALMOST did his job. He made big saves but ruined it by allowing a terrible goal. Sound familiar? He has to do BOTH those things each and every game to be an above average goaltender. he doesn't, hence he's "average at best" and not good enough.

- hardly a bad goal. Jovanovski and Morrison were standing around thinking they won the game.

Was the shot a good scoring chance? No it wasn't it was a wraparound. Should it have been stopped? Yes it should have without difficulty. It was a terrible goal.

i guess that's always the way it'll be in Vancouver. the goaltender gets all the blame. it's always their fault we lost :dunno:

Until a goaltender doesn't deserve the criticism he gets yes he will get it and deservedly so. A bad goal only has one person to blame...the person that should have stopped it from going in. That would be the goaltenders job. Or atleast it is on any team not named the canucks apparently.

orcatown
10-27-2003, 10:06 AM
Exactly tanta. Riven and others are suggesting that a goalie can't be blamed if someone else also makes a mistake. Garbage. No team will ever play error free hockey. You can't expect a defense to never make a mistake. That's why you have a goalie in hockey. He's there to stop the puck when you do get beat by good play or you do make a mistake. Will he stop every shot. No. But he should at the NHL level stop those that should be stopped. In this game Cloutier lost sight of Kolonos, when he should not have, and did not get to the post in time. Was Cloutier totally responsible. No. But the key thing is that he did not, at a critical point, come up with a makeable play. That's why he is not a top end goalie. And that's why there is justified concern about his ablitiy to take us anywhere.

La Val - I don't know what publications you are looking at but The Sporting News had him ranked 21st and the forecaster 24th. Let's hear back from you on the publications you are sighting. Before you start calling people incorrect provide some evidence.

As for you sighting the ridiculous surveys on SportsNet as some sort of indisputable authority, its laughable. Most often they are designed as humorous sidebar with little or no meaning. For God sake get real.

tantalum
10-27-2003, 12:31 PM
Was Cloutier totally responsible. No. But the key thing is that he did not, at a critical point, come up with a makeable play. That's why he is not a top end goalie. And that's why there is justified concern about his ablitiy to take us anywhere.


This is the only point we sort of disagree on. A wraparound isn't a scoring chance IMO. I've always considered it the worst goal in hockey. If it isn't a scoring chance, not even a minor one, then how is it anybody elses fault other than the goaltender? That was the only play Kolanos seemed to have. No one was open in front for a pass and there was no pass across the crease. I guess he had two plays...hold onto the puck and dump it back into the corner or a wraparound. There may have been mistakes made elsewhere but they didn't lead to a scoring chance. That is the defence's job correct? Yet from no scoring chance comes a red light (once again).

MVP
10-27-2003, 12:41 PM
well it covers the most watched Canucks TV station, and most visited online Canucks publication. i'm sorry but that's a little more credible than your "26-34 year old" friends.



sorry, but you are incorrect. most rankings put Cloutier in the middle of the pack. his GAA was almost in the top-10, and his save percentage is in the middle of the pack.






First provides the online poll or tv poll with link or fact before you come on here to proclaim them as fact. This is not the first time you proclaim something as true by poll without providing any link or evidence.

Second, i am sorry you have to figure out whether the public hockey publication is placing Cloutier as a fantasy player or a real player, because they are different stuff. For example according to forecaster, Cloutier is ranked 23, definately not middle of the pack if you ask me.

KOMO_ROCKS
10-27-2003, 12:42 PM
For example according to forecaster, Cloutier is ranked 23, definately not middle of the pack if you ask me.

I agree with you here.... ;)

quat
10-27-2003, 12:47 PM
This is the only point we sort of disagree on. A wraparound isn't a scoring chance IMO. I've always considered it the worst goal in hockey. If it isn't a scoring chance, not even a minor one, then how is it anybody elses fault other than the goaltender? That was the only play Kolanos seemed to have. No one was open in front for a pass and there was no pass across the crease. I guess he had two plays...hold onto the puck and dump it back into the corner or a wraparound. There may have been mistakes made elsewhere but they didn't lead to a scoring chance. That is the defence's job correct? Yet from no scoring chance comes a red light (once again).

I've been reading this debate, and have enjoyed the discussion to no end. Both sides are both informed and convincing. I believe that Cloutier still has some major hurdles to overcome, and his game still shows a lot of promise. It's kind of odd, because you can see why Burke was interested (great saves, able to keep the Canucks in almost every game), and why other teams have let him go (lack of focus, and ability to let in soft goals). It's also true that Cloutier has been given tons of support, and expecting him to be able at this point to steal games is not without merrit. However, it's only the begining of the season, and we need to see a lot more of Dans play before we should be calling for his head. I think the thing that bothers me, is the Canucks often do have lapses in their defensive game... I don't know if that's a lack of maturity or what... I'm way more concerned about that than I am with Cloutier. I say this because if Cloutier can't make the grade, there is a good chance that Hedberg can... and if he can't then there is always another goalie to try. The system the CAnucks play doesn't seem to be likely to change, as it's the way Crawford coaches, and Burke seems to support it. I don't understand why, a team as good as the Canucks gives up the puck as easily as they do when they have some forchecking pressure on them. I guess if we had a goalie like J.S.G or Brodeur or Lalime (?), then maybe we wouldn't notice it so much. I just can't help but recall that the Canucks seemed to play a better game with Auld in the net... I wonder why?

quat
10-27-2003, 12:58 PM
Originally Posted by tantalum
This is the only point we sort of disagree on. A wraparound isn't a scoring chance IMO

I know this is nitpicking... but any shot on net is a scoring chance... just by definition alone.. heh. :)

Connecticut
10-27-2003, 01:04 PM
I know this is nitpicking... but any shot on net is a scoring chance... just by definition alone.. heh. :)

Well, I'd at least say that it depends ont he situation. A wrap-around can most certainly be a scoring chance in the right circumstances - you only have to watch Naslund back there a couple of times, or better yet, TGO, to realize that it may not be as advantageous as being unchecked in the slot, but if you can open up enough options wraparounds can become difficult to defend against in a hurry.

This particular wraparound...

Ol' Dirty Chinaman*
10-27-2003, 01:19 PM
Heh, Cloutier Cloutier Cloutier ...

I honestly think he's playing over his head, and he is a sub-par goalie.

However, he did play well last night, and the tie against the Coyotes was bad defense.

Those two goals were absolute brainfarts on Jovo and Sopel. Sopel (and Jovo to a lesser extent), has to learn to NOT PASS THROUGH THE MIDDLE IF THERE IS A DIFFERENT COLORED JERSEY IN BETWEEN!

There have been so many dangerous passes through the middle lately, I know the defense is trying to free a forward but its still stupid.

Heck, I could have picked almost 10 plays that against a better team (Detroit) would have resulted in turnovers.

That last goal could have been solved if some of our players watch Coach's Corner ... STOP BEING FANCY AND CARRYING IT OUT AND JUST DUMP IT OFF THE DAMNED BOARDS !!!!!

SedinFan*
10-27-2003, 01:22 PM
I've been saying this for awhile about Cloutier. Finally people are understanding why.

A bad goal 8/10 games isn't the sign of bad defense.

Tom.H
10-27-2003, 01:42 PM
I have to say that I am not convinced either way about Cloutier.
I am not happy with his letting in bad goals at inapropriate times.
But I do see in Cloutier a goaltender with capability (when he is on his game) to go all the way.
I must admit though that my patience with Cloutier is running a little thin.

LaVal
10-27-2003, 03:34 PM
Middle of the pack (actually in the bottom half)...you wouldn't mean "average at best" would you? Because then you would agree with me. And that simply isn't good enough for a team expecting to do damage this year.

yes i do agree he's average. not bottom of the pack however.

Umm he was the one that failed to freeze the puck when everyone in the arena and at home KNEW he should have frozen the puck. Even the goalscorer on the play wondered out loud why the heck the puck wasn't frozen. Completely his bad decision.

again, a bad play everybody on the ice and Cloutier gets singled out. that is my point. yes he should have covered it up... but since he didn't Sopel (i think it was Sopel, correct me if i'm wrong), lost the puck in the slot right after.

Wow so he ALMOST did his job. He made big saves but ruined it by allowing a terrible goal. Sound familiar? He has to do BOTH those things each and every game to be an above average goaltender. he doesn't, hence he's "average at best" and not good enough.

how did he ruin it? we came out with the win, and did because of his outstanding play. i'll take 1 bad goal in the game if he's going to make 3 impossible saves ANYDAY.

Was the shot a good scoring chance? No it wasn't it was a wraparound. Should it have been stopped? Yes it should have without difficulty. It was a terrible goal.

it was a good goal. Hughson and Garret said right afterwards there wasn't anything he could do about it.

btw, it was registered as a scoring chance.

Until a goaltender doesn't deserve the criticism he gets yes he will get it and deservedly so. A bad goal only has one person to blame...the person that should have stopped it from going in. That would be the goaltenders job. Or atleast it is on any team not named the canucks apparently.

that's bull. it's a team game and when HORRIBLE defensive zone coverage is in the fray it's not just the goaltenders fault. typical of Vancouver fans to single out the goatlender.

Exactly tanta. Riven and others are suggesting that a goalie can't be blamed if someone else also makes a mistake. Garbage.

you know DAMN well what people are trying to say and that's not it. it's quite the opposite. Cloutier bashers here are saying that every goal against is SOLEY the goaltenders fault. you hear everybody calling for Cloutier's head but never for the defense, or Crawford.

La Val - I don't know what publications you are looking at but The Sporting News had him ranked 21st and the forecaster 24th. Let's hear back from you on the publications you are sighting. Before you start calling people incorrect provide some evidence.

ok here's an example. what about THN rating our goaltending situation (Before the aquisition of Hedberg... so this is with Cloutier and a rookie), as a B- which is directly in the middle of the pack.

and i am calling you incorrect more about your statements about his stats being in the bottom of the league (which were wrong) than your also unbacked up "hockey publications" statement.

First provides the online poll or tv poll with link or fact before you come on here to proclaim them as fact. This is not the first time you proclaim something as true by poll without providing any link or evidence

honestly what am i supposed to do for a TV poll? record the game, run the media through my computer, then make it into a clip? the only thing i can do is give examples of polls. for example the other day there was a poll on our goaltending situation on sportsnet. it asked what you would do if you were the coach. the choices were like "Cloutier clear starter", "Ride the hot hand", etc and Cloutier as the starter had i think something like 46%.

i'd like to know what else you are talking about however.

Hobo
10-27-2003, 05:19 PM
Tantalum - I agree with the majority of your comments about Cloutier's mistakes in the last 6 games - especially the Blue Jackets and Detroit.

But that wraparound took place because Morrison and the D let two Coyotes pass the puck back and forth in close behind, and it sure looked to me like Morrison's blade both deflected the puck in and stopped Cloutier's skate from coming past the post. Sopel, Jovo and Morrison all made defensive errors that cost that game. Cloutier made at least one spectacular save in the third period and was otherwise solid.

I like Cloutier because he is a fiesty battler. I agree with lots of the posts on this thread about people losing patience and giving up because he can't seem to control his demons. To those that have lost patience I guess my response is, what would you do different from current management. I think they have played Cloutier at the right times so far. I expect Hedberg will start on Tuesday. If somebody has a bright idea about how you make a trade or deal and can identify the goaltender available to Vancouver (given we have to bid against Colorado), go ahead and suggest it. You can throw in Umberger if we can get a draft pick or a decent prospect, and Sopel if we can get a No. 6 or 7 D.

tantalum
10-27-2003, 05:50 PM
I still find it baffling that people can blame someone other than the goaltender on a shot that should be stopped. It wasn't a hard shot. It wasn't a scoring chance according to anyome but the most liberal every shot is a scoring chance viewpoint. If it's not a scoring chance how is it anyones fault but the goaltenders? Anyways....

It isn't an easy problem to solve but that doesn't mean the fans have to live with it. The canucks have one basic choice given payroll. And that is identifying a goaltender they feel is a quality starter and that they think can elevate their game to a level necessary for success. They did this when they got Cloutier. They were wrong (and I was wrong). Ottawa identified Lalime. The Rangers look like they identified Dunham who has simply been awesome for them. I think the canucks are trying it again with Hedberg in all honesty. I'm not convinced of him but he has atleast shown he can elevate his game in the playoffs. Like I said it isn't an easy solution but it can be done and quite frankly it has to be done IMO.

Hobo
10-27-2003, 06:15 PM
I still find it baffling that people can blame someone other than the goaltender on a shot that should be stopped. .

I say it should be stopped if Morrison hadn't jammed his stick inside the post and helped put the puck in.

But one example is trivial and all the various examples do add up to a concern. So Abramovich can sign Cujo as a gesture of good faith by a new owner with a pure $$$ deal. Cloutier, Umberger and Sopel can be packaged to Pittsburgh for Dick Tarnstrom and one of the great draft picks they will have coming up. Problems solved.

Ol' Dirty Chinaman*
10-27-2003, 08:07 PM
Just theoretically -- but Cujo would be the wrong step for this team.

I think Cujo's a great guy and everything, but I lump him in with Osgood, Cloutier, Snow, Irbe as subpar or mediorce at best goalies.

This team needs a Hasek, Roy or Brodeur to go over the top.

Turco and Giguere (who is looking like a one-hit wonder) have been playing too short to judge.

The jury is out on Thibault, I haven't seen enough games to say.

Waveburner
10-27-2003, 08:33 PM
EDIT-deleted post...

I think I'm just not going to post on goaltending anymore-it's already getting beaten to death. I honestly don't care which goalie plays-they are both average. I just want these threads to disappear, along with the ridiculous exagerations that pass as "fact" in these arguments.

Reign Nateo
10-27-2003, 08:55 PM
I don't know why it's so hard for some Canucks fans to see. Cloutier is a poor starter. He plays on one of the better teams in the leauge, a team that everyone agrees has one of the better defensive cores in the league. Yet he has put up the same mediocre numbers.

He put up mediocre numbers in the OHL, NYR, Tampa, and now here. He absolutley stunk in the Memorial Cup and was traded. He's a hot head with poor composure, can't stickhadle worth a damn, and is routinely out of position.

Furthermore, in small stints that managment has let other goalies play, they have been great behind this defence (current) Auld put up a gaa well below 2, and a sv pct well above .920 Hedberg is doing the same this season. But Cloutier still hovers around 2.35 and .900. Average to poor my friends.

Cloutier is and always will be a poor starter, and this team, WE deserve better. This is a top notch team and needs top notch goaltending to go on, if Cloutier can't provide that, then he is out the door.

Managment knows this and if Cloutier doesn't show that he can do it, expect him to move on this summer.

Personally I'm sick of having a goalie that makes a huge gaff every game. In my opinion there are 20 other goalies in the NHL that would do a better job than Cloutier.

PecaFan
10-28-2003, 03:39 AM
Furthermore, in small stints that managment has let other goalies play, they have been great behind this defence (current) Auld put up a gaa well below 2, and a sv pct well above .920 Hedberg is doing the same this season.

Well, let's not go nuts about Hedberg. He's only been in two games, one where he performed well, but admitted it was the easiest game of his life, and another where he was poor, allowing 2 goals on a paltry 18 shots (.889 sp) to a weak Minnesota team. One more weak game, and those "great" numbers will suddenly be worst in the league.

It's way too soon to talk about how well Hedberg is doing.

As for Clouts, I see the same thing I've always seen. Some great play, some crappy play, overall, an average goalie.

LaVal
10-28-2003, 05:46 AM
He plays on one of the better teams in the leauge, a team that everyone agrees has one of the better defensive cores in the league. Yet he has put up the same mediocre numbers.

one of the best defensive cores on paper. our defense is offense. we have good GAA because we have prolonged puck posession. the team is still lost in their own zone. a lot of this is because of our forwards, and a lot is because our defense is easily rattled and chases and loses composure with any sustained attack against. it's been a glaring problem for years in Vancouver.

those numbers actually happen to be the best a starting goaltender has ever put up in Vancouver. i don't think ANY current goaltender could get a higher save% than .915 or so on this current team. with that said it's obvious i am implying Cloutier can improve quite a bit, but as i've always stressed goaltender numbers are decieving.

tantalum
10-28-2003, 11:02 AM
uh huh. But goaltenders can put up 0.915 on the Rangers (Dunham 43 gp), Washington (kolzig), Pittsburgh (caron though only 24 GP), Florida, TB, islander, Chicago, Toronto. But not the canucks. The league average last year was 0.910 and there are a fair number of goaltenders above that mark on defensively inferior teams. The ones below that mark may or may not play on poor defensive teams...they are just the poorer goaltenders in the league.

LaVal
10-28-2003, 04:20 PM
uh huh. But goaltenders can put up 0.915 on the Rangers (Dunham 43 gp), Washington (kolzig), Pittsburgh (caron though only 24 GP), Florida, TB, islander, Chicago, Toronto. But not the canucks. The league average last year was 0.910 and there are a fair number of goaltenders above that mark on defensively inferior teams. The ones below that mark may or may not play on poor defensive teams...they are just the poorer goaltenders in the league.

we've had this argument before so i don't feel there is any need to do it again