Would Chicago be a better team...

[DG]

Originally Posted by Chris Hansen

I'd say with Hossa. People have been underrating how good he is for years. Was the best forward on the team last year by a somewhat hefty margin.

I completely agree. I have no idea why he doesn't get his due credit.

[Vankiller Whale]

Originally Posted by Hawkaholic

Look at Nashville, Vancouver, Boston, Buffalo, etc.

None of those teams made it to the 3rd round, and all have great goaltending. Having great goaltending guarantees nothing, just like having a top offense guarantees nothing.

Miller had been injured, and because of that his team missed the playoffs.

Vancouver played against another elite goalie, who was running hot.

Boston lost because of Holtby's astounding performance, he is arguably the best goalie prospect in the league(at worst 2nd best).

Nashville lost to a red hot Mike Smith.

There was not a single team with mediocre goaltending that beat a team with elite goaltending in the playoffs.

Having an elite goaltendet may not guarantee the cup, but not having one ensures an early exit against another team if their goaltender is hot.

[Sevanston]

Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale

Miller had been injured, and because of that his team missed the playoffs.

Vancouver played against another elite goalie, who was running hot.

Boston lost because of Holtby's astounding performance, he is arguably the best goalie prospect in the league(at worst 2nd best).

Nashville lost to a red hot Mike Smith.

There was not a single team with mediocre goaltending that beat a team with elite goaltending in the playoffs.

Having an elite goaltendet may not guarantee the cup, but not having one ensures an early exit against another team if their goaltender is hot.

Of course then you look at 2011.

Howard beats Phoenix Bryzgalov.

Neuvirth beats Lundqvist.

Roloson goes 7 games and OT with Thomas.

Leighton and Boucher beat Miller.

Crawford goes 7 games and OT with Luongo.

I don't even need to do 2010 because we both know how that's going to go.

Everyone draws conclusions about what you need to win after the postseason ends. Truculence, elite goaltending (or its naughty cousin, "hot goaltending"), depth, elite centers, elite defense, blah blah blah. It's all bogus.

The truth is there is no one thing that "ensures" squat come playoff time.

[Hawkaholic]

Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale

Miller had been injured, and because of that his team missed the playoffs.

Vancouver played against another elite goalie, who was running hot.

Boston lost because of Holtby's astounding performance, he is arguably the best goalie prospect in the league(at worst 2nd best).

Nashville lost to a red hot Mike Smith.

There was not a single team with mediocre goaltending that beat a team with elite goaltending in the playoffs.

Having an elite goaltendet may not guarantee the cup, but not having one ensures an early exit against another team if their goaltender is hot.

Miller being injured played a minor role in his team not making it, their dreadful start was more of a reason.

VAN/LAK – so what you are saying is, even if we had an elite goalie, we would still lose? So what’s the point of trading an elite forward for a goalie who we will lose with?

Holtby had an outstanding performance, so did Crawford in 10-11.

Chicago lost to a red hot Mike Smith too, but that doesn’t count, right?

Actually, New Jersey won with mediocre goaltending, with Brodeur. And in past years, it has happened quite a bit where an avg goalie beat an elite one.

Not having an elite goalie doesn’t guarantee anything, see 2010, 2009, 2008.

But you hit the nail on the head with your last statement, if you get a goalie that is hot, he’s hard to beat. But that goalie doesn’t have to be an elite goalie, see Mike Smith, Brandon Holtby, + many others over the years.

Keep grasping at straws though.

And it’s been stated countless times, Luongo is NOT an elite goalie when it comes to the playoffs. He is downright avg, considering his 908sv% over the course of the last 4 years.