HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Good team , that lacked of goaltending

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-01-2007, 06:03 PM
  #26
Al Bundy*
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 5,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blades of Glory View Post
I'm sorry, but NO team fits this thread better than the St. Louis Blues of the 1990's and early 2000's. They had almost every component necessary to win multiple Stanley Cups, but lacked a goalie. Roman Turek was the only thing that stopped that team from at least reaching a Cup Final.
I disagree.

I blame Turek's problems on bad drawing.

If that 2000 St. Louis Blues team had faced Anaheim or Vancouver that year (Both teams finished four points behind eighth-seeded San Jose), they would have DESTROYED them.

2001- Do you REALLY think Roman Turek would have struggled against the L.A. Kings had they upset the Avalanche? (While I always root for Colorado to lose, it would have been ghastly to see Ray Bourque lose that way)

Al Bundy* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2007, 06:57 PM
  #27
GuloGulo
Registered User
 
GuloGulo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: trunkofacamaro
Country: Bahrain
Posts: 3,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Bundy View Post
I disagree.

I blame Turek's problems on bad drawing.

If that 2000 St. Louis Blues team had faced Anaheim or Vancouver that year (Both teams finished four points behind eighth-seeded San Jose), they would have DESTROYED them.

2001- Do you REALLY think Roman Turek would have struggled against the L.A. Kings had they upset the Avalanche? (While I always root for Colorado to lose, it would have been ghastly to see Ray Bourque lose that way)
I see no way they beat the '99 Stars. The Stars that year had Belfour on playing like a demon and possessed one of the most savvy, experienced and gritty lineups ever fielded by a cup winner. Blues can't beat them. No matter what.

In '00 the situation is a little different. Although the Blues were good enough to take a Prez trophy, I don't think they're good enough to defeat the Devils. In my book that could be the best Devils team assembled.

In '01 the Avs were so stacked it's not even funny. And still, even if the Blues beat the Avs, are you convinced the Blues can take down a Devils squad that kept equal pace with that same crazy Avs roster?

The Blues, even with a goalie, would have some *pretty* tough opponents in their heydays to defeat in order to get multiple cups.

GuloGulo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-02-2007, 12:02 AM
  #28
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,719
vCash: 500
We'll, lets take a look at the late 90's, early 00's Blues:

Their first better-than-average year was 1997-98, as they finished with 98 points. In the first round of the playoffs they pummelled Los Angeles, sweeping them while filling the net with 16 goals. But against Detroit, the offense dried up, as they mustered just 9 goals in the final five games of the series after taking the opener. Grant Fuhr posted a 2.53 GAA and .898 save percentage in the regular season. In the playoffs, his save % went up to .906, and his GAA was 2.73, and bloated by a couple of 6-1 shellackings at the hands of the Wings, where the Blues presumably didn't give him much of a chance anyway. St. Louis' primary offensive players, Brett Hull, Pierre Turgeon, and Pavol Demitra all scored below their regular season pace. Pretty tough to chalk that one up to goaltending.

The Red Wings would cruise to their second consecutive cup, and boasted the likes of Yzerman, Fedorov, and Lidstrom all playing some of the best hockey of their careers, plus a host of other skilled veterans, so there was really no shame in losing to them.

1998-99: The Blues were barely over .500, and needed a dramatic comeback in round one to beat an average Phoenix team after falling behind three games to one. Grant Fuhr's 2.35 GAA and .898 save % in the playoffs were both better than his regular season totals. The Dallas team that the Blues lost to in round two won the President's Trophy, and had Belfour in his prime. They were a fairly high-scoring team that also gave up the fewest goal in the regular season. The Blues were done in by a total lack of secondary scoring. After Turgeon, Demitra, and Young, there was very little offensive support up front. Again, goaltending cannot be fingered this year. There's simply no way the Blues should have been expected to beat that Dallas team, though they pushed them to six games anyway.

1999-00: Turek's play took a huge nose-dive in the post-season after the Blues finished first overall, so this is really the one year that the Blues were a legit contender and fell pray to shaky netminding. BUT, in the four losses to the Sharks, the Blues scored 2, 1, 2, and 1 goals. Everyone remember's Turek letting in that goal from center ice in game 7, but when the team in front of you isn't scoring you might not win anyway. The Blues only averaged about 25 shots on goal per game in those four losses, making journeyman Steve Shields a playoff hero.

2000-01: Turek's playoff GAA (2.05) and save % (.919) were superb. He played strong in both rounds one and two as the Blues beat San Jose and Dallas without a great amount of difficulty. In the conference finals, his play fell of against Colorado, and he was replaced by Brent Johnson later in the series. But again, in the four defeats, the Blues only managed seven goals. And that Colorado team was simply loaded, with Sakic, Drury, Hejduk, Tanguay, Blake, and Bourque, and Roy in net (Forsberg was injured). They were simply the best in the NHL that year, the Blues probably weren't going to beat them. And playoff no-shows Keith Tkachuk and Pavol Demitra can certainly shoulder some of the blame.

2001-02: Brent Johnson recorded three straight shut-outs in a first round beating of Chicago, setting the Blues up against the Presiden't Trophy and eventually Cup-winning Red Wings. His play tailed off in round two, but in what is becoming an emerging patter, so did St. Louis' offense. Just five goals scored in the four defeats, and an abysmal 16 shot out-put in the deciding game. Doug Weight and Cory Stillman were nowhere to be found in the post-season. Aging veteran Scott Mellanby (15 goals in the regular season) scored 7 goals. The rest of the team combined for 17! There's something wrong with that picture. Losing Chris Pronger to injury in game four of the Detroit series was the nail in the coffin. Again, the Blues lost to a better team, and even if not spectacular, the goaltending can't be singled out as the reason for the loss.

2002-03: The Blues fell victim to some bad luck here. Detroit and Colorado both went out in round one, and the door was open. They built up a 3-1 lead versus Vancouver, only to see the flu ravage the roster and watch the lead vanish. Al MacInnis was injured for most of the series, and I think Barrett Jackman was playing with a separted shoulder (maybe somebody remembers for sure). Osgood was great in the first four games, then fell appart in the last three. But the team in front of him was severely weakened, and maybe he himself was sick (I can't remember). Really just a tough break here, but again, the Blues only finished fifth in the west and weren't really considered a serious contender. With Giguere playing like he was, nobody was stopping the Ducks anyway.

There's just simply very little argument that the Blues missed out on one, let alone multiple, Stanley Cups thanks to bad goaltending.

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-02-2007, 01:57 AM
  #29
NOTENOUGHBREWER
Registered User
 
NOTENOUGHBREWER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 8,676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverSeven View Post
If Ottawa had a healthy top 10 goalie for the last 10 years they would probably have 3 or 4 cups.

Hasek should have meant the cup, and if he wasnt injured likely would have.
From 97-2007 I can think of only one or two years when they would win it.

97 no chance
98 no chance
99 no chance
2000 no chance
2001 no chance
2002 no chance
2003 maybe
2004 maybe
2006 they had an elite goalie
2007 we all know what happened. And it was hardly Emery's fault.

NOTENOUGHBREWER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2007, 05:57 PM
  #30
EpochLink
Canucks and Jets fan
 
EpochLink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,459
vCash: 500
Vancouver from 2002 til 2004 had a good team up front but we dealt a huge blow by bad goaltending in the playoffs.

2002: Up 2-0 against Detroit, back home for home ice advantage..Lidstrom single handedly changed the series for good with the shot from center ice. What was shocking is that Detroit won the game 3-1. So you would think Cloutier would step up in game 4? Fat chance, he crumbled severely...and was replaced by Peter Skoudra in all the remaining games mid-way through the games after he let in too many goals..

2003: Minnesota series was strange in a way the first 4 games were close by 1 goal. Up 3-1, you think the Canucks would cease the series? WRONG...Minnesota played the trap like crazy and out scored the Canucks 16 to 5. Game 6 will be remembered when the Minnesota fans yelled SIEVE! SIEVE! towards Dan Cloutier..

2004: Dan Cloutier gets injured after game 2, leaving the team high and dry again. Johan Hedberg and Alex Auld were left and they couldn't get it done at all. Hedberg had a better chance of winning the series in game 7 but Crawford let Auld in.

The bad thing about Crawford's system in Vancouver was yes, it was run and gun hockey, which was fast and exciting BUT the defense had to sacrifice their defense and play up tempo with the forwards..leaving the DEFENSE to the goaltending, and the defense come back helping him after he tries to slow/stop them..

Unfortunately, Minnesota knew that and exposed Cloutier badly...

EpochLink is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2007, 06:24 PM
  #31
boredmale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,772
vCash: 500
The Flyers of the Late 90s would be my pick. I think Clarke made a huge mistake not beaking the bank for Cujo when he was a UFA. I always though Philly would have been more successful if they had a guy who could steal a game or 2 for them in the playoffs(and by success i mean they might have won the cup).

boredmale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2007, 12:12 AM
  #32
mattihp
Registered User
 
mattihp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Årsta
Country: Finland
Posts: 14,916
vCash: 50
Lots of flyers teams.

mattihp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2007, 07:55 AM
  #33
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Fish on The Sand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 50,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blades of Glory View Post
Roman Turek was the only thing that stopped that team from at least reaching a Cup Final.
that and several other teams who were clearly better.

Fish on The Sand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2007, 07:58 AM
  #34
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Fish on The Sand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 50,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by boredmale View Post
The Flyers of the Late 90s would be my pick. I think Clarke made a huge mistake not beaking the bank for Cujo when he was a UFA. I always though Philly would have been more successful if they had a guy who could steal a game or 2 for them in the playoffs(and by success i mean they might have won the cup).
In 2000 and 2004 they went to game 7 of the ECF and the common ingredient both years was brilliant goaltending. In 2000 it was brian Boucher and in 04 it was Esche. The Flyers problem was those goalies could not maintain that level of success after that.

Fish on The Sand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2007, 08:00 AM
  #35
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Fish on The Sand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 50,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOTENOUGHBREWER View Post
From 97-2007 I can think of only one or two years when they would win it.

97 no chance
98 no chance
99 no chance
2000 no chance
2001 no chance
2002 no chance
2003 maybe
2004 maybe
2006 they had an elite goalie
2007 we all know what happened. And it was hardly Emery's fault.
In 2006 Emery was their goalie. hasek did not play after the olympics.

Fish on The Sand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2007, 11:48 AM
  #36
cupcrazyman
In Shanny We Trust
 
cupcrazyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Parts Unknown
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blades of Glory View Post
I'm sorry, but NO team fits this thread better than the St. Louis Blues of the 1990's and early 2000's. They had almost every component necessary to win multiple Stanley Cups, but lacked a goalie. Roman Turek was the only thing that stopped that team from at least reaching a Cup Final.
No love for Cujo ?

cupcrazyman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2007, 12:02 PM
  #37
McNasty
Registered User
 
McNasty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Rutgers
Country: United States
Posts: 5,722
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand View Post
In 2000 and 2004 they went to game 7 of the ECF and the common ingredient both years was brilliant goaltending. In 2000 it was brian Boucher and in 04 it was Esche. The Flyers problem was those goalies could not maintain that level of success after that.
Boucher was amazing in 2000 but Esche was hardly brilliant for us. He was good but that Tampa series he was lit up by Lecavalier and Fedotenko. It was the incredible play of Keith Primeau that got them within one game of the finals.

McNasty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2007, 12:43 PM
  #38
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 111,671
vCash: 50
I think a lot of people are or will give Emery a pass for the 2006 playoffs. As 2007 proved, Emery was a year away from being a #1 at that point.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2007, 03:29 PM
  #39
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Fish on The Sand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 50,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McNasty View Post
Boucher was amazing in 2000 but Esche was hardly brilliant for us. He was good but that Tampa series he was lit up by Lecavalier and Fedotenko. It was the incredible play of Keith Primeau that got them within one game of the finals.
Esche was great all playoffs. It wasn't like he was giving up weak goals. The Flyers lost because they were completly outplayed and Esche kept them in games to win. Khabibulin only had to make more than 23 saves once, and that was the game 6 overtime game. Esche was great in those playoffs and to say otherwsie is just unfair to him. There is a reason he was the US starter in the world cup that summer and it was entirely because of his performance in the NHL playoffs.

Fish on The Sand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2007, 03:35 PM
  #40
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Fish on The Sand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 50,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS View Post
- 1980-83 Montreal Canadiens
- 1982-87 Quebec Nordiques
- 1983-86 Washington Capitals
- 1991-96 Detroit Red Wings
- 1995-00 Philadelphia Flyers
- 1997-03 St. Louis Blues
- 1998-07 Ottawa Senators
- 2001-04 Vancouver Canucks

... are probably the most obvious examples in recent years, and most have already been mentioned.
I don't think you can include the Canucks. They weren't a powerhouse team being held back by their goaltending. They were consistantly a bottom seed, and the goaltending excuse has been beaten to death. It was their lack of scoring depth that killed them, and that one line they had always managed to disappear. The only season they could have honestly expected to go far and make noise was in 2004 when they won the northwest, but for the most part they had good goaltending that series. Calgary just had better goaltending and A LOT more depth.

Fish on The Sand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2007, 03:50 PM
  #41
ered7
Registered User
 
ered7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 95
vCash: 500
Observationally

Without taking the time and looking up the numbers I would say that some of the 80s Blackhawk teams with Savard, Larmer, Secord, and Doug Wilson lacked the top tier goaltending, especially for playoff time. It wasn't until Belfour came along that the Hawks could seriously argue they possessed a top 5 goalie in the league. Prior to him there was a menagerie of goalies (in no particular order):

Greg Millen (past his prime)
Jacques Cloutier
Alain Chevrier
Bob Sauve
Bob Mason
Darren Pang (till he got hurt)
Warren Skorodenski
Murray Bannerman

ered7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2007, 06:40 PM
  #42
SilverSeven
Registered User
 
SilverSeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,451
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOTENOUGHBREWER View Post
From 97-2007 I can think of only one or two years when they would win it.

97 no chance
98 no chance
99 no chance
2000 no chance
2001 no chance
2002 no chance
2003 maybe
2004 maybe
2006 they had an elite goalie
2007 we all know what happened. And it was hardly Emery's fault.

They had an elite goalie in the 2006 playoffs? The only reason they had no chance those years is because of goaltending. Much less talented teams have won the cup because of goaltending.

SilverSeven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2007, 06:46 PM
  #43
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 21,860
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ered7 View Post
Without taking the time and looking up the numbers I would say that some of the 80s Blackhawk teams with Savard, Larmer, Secord, and Doug Wilson lacked the top tier goaltending, especially for playoff time. It wasn't until Belfour came along that the Hawks could seriously argue they possessed a top 5 goalie in the league. Prior to him there was a menagerie of goalies (in no particular order):

Greg Millen (past his prime)
Jacques Cloutier
Alain Chevrier
Bob Sauve
Bob Mason
Darren Pang (till he got hurt)
Warren Skorodenski
Murray Bannerman
Bannerman is underated, but I agree this list isn't exactly great.
I don't where the reference point starts, but the Hawks weren't better than the North Stars for part of the '80ies... And the Wings came in MUCH later. There was indeed a 5 year span or so that they were the best team in what was, probably, the worst division in NHL history for a 10 year span, every team being mediocre for a while except for, actually, Chicago.

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2007, 08:39 PM
  #44
NOTENOUGHBREWER
Registered User
 
NOTENOUGHBREWER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 8,676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverSeven View Post
They had an elite goalie in the 2006 playoffs? The only reason they had no chance those years is because of goaltending. Much less talented teams have won the cup because of goaltending.
I think 2006 was where Emery established himself as a good goalie. Elite was too strong a word perhaps.

But for the majority of those years like the 2000 Devils, 2001 Avs, 2002 Detroit, Ottawa has zero chance no matter who their goalie is.

2003 they could've beat Anaheim could go either way I think
2004 I think they beat the Flames pretty easily
2006 I think going into it Emery was playing like a top 10 goalie
2007 again Emery was very very good

NOTENOUGHBREWER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2007, 11:12 PM
  #45
Master_Of_Districts
Registered User
 
Master_Of_Districts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Black Ruthenia
Country: Belarus
Posts: 1,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Esche was great all playoffs. It wasn't like he was giving up weak goals. The Flyers lost because they were completly outplayed and Esche kept them in games to win. Khabibulin only had to make more than 23 saves once, and that was the game 6 overtime game. Esche was great in those playoffs and to say otherwsie is just unfair to him. There is a reason he was the US starter in the world cup that summer and it was entirely because of his performance in the NHL playoffs.
Are you sure the Flyers were completely outplayed?

The shots in that series were dead even at 196-196.

No data on the scoring chances, but having watched a fair amount of that series, it wouldn't surprise me if they had been in Philadelphia's favor.

Master_Of_Districts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2007, 11:31 PM
  #46
cupcrazyman
In Shanny We Trust
 
cupcrazyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Parts Unknown
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,498
vCash: 500
the leafs late 60's .after sawchuk & bower moved on there was still a good crop of players on that team.except the leafs had Bruce Gamble & Marv Edwards between the pipes.they still had:

Keon,Ulman,Ellis,Henderson,Pulford,Armstrong,Horto n,Pronovost,Walton.Pelyk.

cupcrazyman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2007, 11:24 PM
  #47
ered7
Registered User
 
ered7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 95
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
Bannerman is underated, but I agree this list isn't exactly great.
I don't where the reference point starts, but the Hawks weren't better than the North Stars for part of the '80ies... And the Wings came in MUCH later. There was indeed a 5 year span or so that they were the best team in what was, probably, the worst division in NHL history for a 10 year span, every team being mediocre for a while except for, actually, Chicago.
Which part of the 80s? I agree about Bannerman, but he wasn't a top tier goalie or as a frame of comparison: I'd take Belfour (even with his bad goals) over Bannerman any day of the week.

I mentioned the Hawks because most people forget the Hawks fought admirably against the Oilers and Flames in a couple of conference finals. I don't know if I agree with the Norris being the worst division in NHL history for a 10 yr. span. In fact, ask anyone that watched the Norris back then and you really threw out a team's respective record on most nights because it was a battle. To me, that was one of hockey's most exciting times. I think Detroit, Toronto, Minnesota, St. Louis and Chicago were all pretty competitive near the end of the 80s.

ered7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:36 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.