Clarke wants wandering goalies penalized
View Single Post
11-05-2003, 02:12 PM
Join Date: Feb 2002
Originally Posted by
True, where "every year" is the Devils in 1995. I'd like to meet the 4 out of 5 dentists who consider any other team before 1997 a trapping team first and foremost.
Err ... you mean, of course EXCEPT for The Wings who played a lock in 95, Colorado who played a lock in 96, and the Wings again in 97? Do you also mean EXCEPT for the other finalists (the locking Wings in 95, the trapping Panthers in 96?) Your suggestion becomes more bizarre when we add in the teams that showed the effectiveness of those systems by reaching the conference finals in those years.
I'm sorry if it wasn't clear to
by '97 that traps and locks were the wave of the future, but the evidence was abundant for anyone with eyes to see, and I'd respectfully suggest that Bob Clarke had a somewhat better understanding of the league's trends.
Secondly, I find it ridiculous to criticize a player, team, executive, et. al, for trying to gain a competitive advantage.
I'd think that would depend on the MEANS of gaining a competitive advantage. Changing the rules for the entire league to shackle the individual talents of certain players for whom you can't find a solution is a sleazy way of going about trying to gain an edge, in my opinion. I suspect it would be your opinion, too, if Martin Brodeur was Flyers' property and Glen Sather was proposing changes to limit Brodeur's ability to use his skills.
I also question whether you guys read the current article in the Post. If one had, one might mention that Clarke suggested shrinking goaltender equipment more than it is currently and pointed out that it was Hextall himself who began the trend of the puck-handling goaltender.
Those are irrelevant points, of course. Whether or not Clarke believes in bringing about
changes has nothing to do with the fact that he wants one
change that targets a select group of players - the best of whom is the goaltender for Clarke's primary division rival, and a rival by which Clarke has been singularly frustrated through his entire second tenure in Philly. (Let's face it, the Flyers' only Finals appearance in that tenure came when the Rangers did them the courtesy of knocking off the Devils in '97.) Clarke's suggestion doesn't even work from a standpoint of pure practicality. If his only intent is to raise scoring throughout the league, why is he trying to implement a rule change that involves less than half the league's teams, those with wandering goalies? Clearly raising scoring isn't his
intent, and as I said before, trying to legislate a team into weakness because you can't beat them any other way is just sleazy.
As for Hextall, Clarke's pointing out the player who started the current trend makes no difference to this argument. Did Clarke express disapproval of Hextall in his quotes? I doubt it, but even if he did, it would make no difference. He did nothing to curb the wandering goalie when he had one, nor was he even speaking out against them at that time.
There's just a little bit of hypocricy, um...trapped in this thread, don't you think?
Hardly. Lou is not complaining of the system. If he was complaining and also calling for a solution, THEN he would be guilty of hypocrisy.
Quite frankly Bob Clarke is closer to the hypocrite here. He complains of low scoring but he has no issues with the system that is primarily responsible. Bob Clarke doesn't fault
for low scoring. And why not? Couldn't be that his coach employs the trap, could it?
But in answer to your main objection, the problem that people have with Clarke's solution is that it simply doesn't impact all teams equally. Taking out the red line would influence both teams the same except that it would allow the exceptional players on BOTH teams to better utilize their talents. Same with widening the goalposts, etc.
Clarke's "solution" does exactly the reverse. It doesn't effect every team because it doesn't effect every goalie. Furthermore, it serves to
the excellence of some goalies rather than help them better utilize their talents. Clarke doesn't have one of those goalies playing 60 games a season, that's why he wants this particular change. If Clarke HAD one of those goalies, he would be outraged that someone would try to curb his goalie's individual brilliance.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by dedalus