HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie
Notices

The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

CuJo in crunch time

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-15-2010, 11:30 AM
  #1
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,828
vCash: 500
CuJo in crunch time

During the epic marathon debate of Chris Osgood on the main NHL board someone brought up CuJo in the playoffs.

My opinion on CuJo was that he was outstanding in the playoffs on several occasions that I saw lots of: St. Louis and the Leafs primarily. He went to Detroit to win a Cup and played very well in the playoffs for them but the team choked.

I'm a bit of a clutch play skeptic but I do think that some players genuinely do raise their game up at important times. I just think that the label at times gets applied more liberally to players who win rather than players who play clutch and lose.

An example of that would be perhaps Parise scoring the tying goal in the Olympics just past. To me that is a clutch play to tie that game up late like he did but it is overshadowed by the Crosby goal which was the winner. Crosby gets tons of accolades from the "golden goal" and being "clutch" from an honestly fairly weak goal where Iginla did most of the work.

My theory is that CuJo was a clutch type player but that he didn't have the benefit of playing on a team that got the job done to acquire that "clutch" label.

I think a lot of clutch is hindsight by all of us playing up the winning plays afterward.

Thoughts?

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 11:59 AM
  #2
ColdSteel2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 27,591
vCash: 50
CuJo was a pretty clutch goalie. He was the type of guy that could steal a series. I can't believe you didn't mention his Edmonton days when they upset and pushed top teams to the brink every year. The less shots he faced, the less valuable he was; similar to Khabibulin.

ColdSteel2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 12:20 PM
  #3
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 53,218
vCash: 1020
Cujo was nuts in the playoffs. No idea where that play came from, but if he had maintained that level consistently he would be in the upper pantheon. That Edmonton series against Dallas... holy crap.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 12:31 PM
  #4
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Cujo was nuts in the playoffs. No idea where that play came from, but if he had maintained that level consistently he would be in the upper pantheon. That Edmonton series against Dallas... holy crap.
I'd put forward that he was fairly consistently outstanding in his playoffs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
CuJo was a pretty clutch goalie. He was the type of guy that could steal a series. I can't believe you didn't mention his Edmonton days when they upset and pushed top teams to the brink every year. The less shots he faced, the less valuable he was; similar to Khabibulin.
I know he was very strong in Edmonton but I didn't watch an awful lot of those games because I like to sleep at night.

You bring up a good point about the shots though because many of the times a goalie is seen as being standout.. he is outshot.

And with Cujo's rather average teams much of his playoff career he was outshot pretty badly.

So the question is.. did he look good cause he was busy or was he just plain good?

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 12:40 PM
  #5
ColdSteel2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 27,591
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
So the question is.. did he look good cause he was busy or was he just plain good?
I think he was the kind of goalie that was going to give up 0-3 goals whether he faced 25 or 45 shots. He was always good but seemed to me to be sharpest when he was busy. Also, when there was no other option but for him to be spectacular for his team to have a chance at winning, that's what he was, very competitive goaltender and at his best in big games.

A modern comparable is Jonas Hiller.

ColdSteel2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 12:44 PM
  #6
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 53,218
vCash: 1020
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
I'd put forward that he was fairly consistently outstanding in his playoffs.
I agree... perhaps I should have said, if he had played that way consistently between October and June.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 03:34 PM
  #7
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,927
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
I think he was the kind of goalie that was going to give up 0-3 goals whether he faced 25 or 45 shots. He was always good but seemed to me to be sharpest when he was busy. Also, when there was no other option but for him to be spectacular for his team to have a chance at winning, that's what he was, very competitive goaltender and at his best in big games.
er.
This is the impression I got of him - a guy who got better the more shots he faced. Which is a great guy to have if you want to steal a series for an average team, but not necessarily what you want to win championships.

However, I never thought of him as a clutch goaltender. He was a guy who, for whatever reason, was always spectacular in Round 1 of the playoffs, before generally falling back down to Earth in round 2.

It would be interesting if someone could find his stats from the first round of the playoffs and compare them to the rest.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 05:09 PM
  #8
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
It would be interesting if someone could find his stats from the first round of the playoffs and compare them to the rest.
I'd be very interested as well because along these lines I don't believe his play dropped off dramatically.. I just think that he did in fact primarily play on teams that didn't get it done for one reason or another.

For example in '93 he was absolutely spectacular against the Leafs in the second round and got beaten through no fault of his that I could see.

It would have been a much worse loss for St. Louis without him (in my recollection maybe the stats show this to be wrong but I don't think so).

I'm interested to see how much our perceptions of "clutch" automatically bias to the winner. I certainly think players on losing teams can raise their play every bit as much as ones on winning teams but they never seem to get the credit despite their outstanding efforts.

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 05:13 PM
  #9
ContrarianGoaltender
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 590
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
It would be interesting if someone could find his stats from the first round of the playoffs and compare them to the rest.
I happened to have these on hand, so here you go (this does not include his 2 games played in Calgary):

1st round: 39-29, .922
2nd round: 20-29, .914
3rd round: 3-8, .899

I think strength of opposition explains a lot of the discrepancy between the first and second round numbers. As for the third round, it's a small sample but Joseph was pretty bad against Buffalo in 1999.

ContrarianGoaltender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 05:31 PM
  #10
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianGoaltender View Post
I happened to have these on hand, so here you go (this does not include his 2 games played in Calgary):

1st round: 39-29, .922
2nd round: 20-29, .914
3rd round: 3-8, .899

I think strength of opposition explains a lot of the discrepancy between the first and second round numbers. As for the third round, it's a small sample but Joseph was pretty bad against Buffalo in 1999.
Would you say then, in your opinion at least (and with the exception of the round against Buffalo anyways), he significantly dropped off in play as he went forward in the playoffs or was it a case of his team being outmatched/not keeping up their end of the bargain for him?

I mean obviously with Detroit his team wouldn't be "outmatched" per se but he played very well for them and the team still just didn't score really.

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 06:05 PM
  #11
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
 
Hockey Outsider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianGoaltender View Post
I happened to have these on hand, so here you go (this does not include his 2 games played in Calgary):

1st round: 39-29, .922
2nd round: 20-29, .914
3rd round: 3-8, .899

I think strength of opposition explains a lot of the discrepancy between the first and second round numbers. As for the third round, it's a small sample but Joseph was pretty bad against Buffalo in 1999.
How do these numbers compare to the best of his generation (Hasek, Roy, Brodeur, Belfour) and the next tier (any of Barrasso, Moog, Osgood, Richter, Vernon, etc)?

I'd expect most goalies, aside from the very best, would have worse stats the deeper they go into the playoffs - tougher competition.

Hockey Outsider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 07:21 PM
  #12
Fan 4 Life
Registered User
 
Fan 4 Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Airdrie AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianGoaltender View Post
I happened to have these on hand, so here you go (this does not include his 2 games played in Calgary):

1st round: 39-29, .922
2nd round: 20-29, .914
3rd round: 3-8, .899

I think strength of opposition explains a lot of the discrepancy between the first and second round numbers. As for the third round, it's a small sample but Joseph was pretty bad against Buffalo in 1999.
I think it needs to be put into context also. Joseph played a lot with the Oilers and Toronto, both were teams that constantly were outmatched. So after Joseph would carry them through round 1 he had to be getting tired of over 40 shots per game for round 2. He would go from beating Dallas or Colorado to having to play another series against Dallas or Colorado. In Toronto he carried the Leafs through the Senators a couple times I believe. One of the best performances ever was first round again the Senators.

Fan 4 Life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 07:27 PM
  #13
ContrarianGoaltender
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 590
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Would you say then, in your opinion at least (and with the exception of the round against Buffalo anyways), he significantly dropped off in play as he went forward in the playoffs or was it a case of his team being outmatched/not keeping up their end of the bargain for him?
I don't think he significantly dropped off his play, no. Joseph's average first round matchup was a 91 point team against a 92 point opponent, whereas his average second round matchup was a 93 point team against a 101 point opponent. The 2004 Calgary series was the only time that his team lost in the second round to an opponent with fewer regular season points.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Outsider View Post
How do these numbers compare to the best of his generation (Hasek, Roy, Brodeur, Belfour) and the next tier (any of Barrasso, Moog, Osgood, Richter, Vernon, etc)?

I'd expect most goalies, aside from the very best, would have worse stats the deeper they go into the playoffs - tougher competition.
I would expect the same, but I don't have the numbers available for any of the goalies you mentioned, other than Martin Brodeur:

1st round: 45-38, .922
2nd round: 20-22, .916
3rd round: 19-13, .920
4th round: 15-9, .912

ContrarianGoaltender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 07:27 PM
  #14
Fan 4 Life
Registered User
 
Fan 4 Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Airdrie AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 750
vCash: 500
The year I was thinking of above was 2000-01 first round. He swept the Senators going shutout, shutout, 2 against, 1 against. Ottawa was the 2 seed and Toronto was the 7 seed.

They then lost to the Devils, the 1 seed, in seven. His first 5 games his SV% was 1.000, .818, .933, .958, .923. Then he had two bad games. Can't help but think he got tired.

Fan 4 Life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 08:09 PM
  #15
vadim sharifijanov
ugh
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 14,927
vCash: 500
the thing with cujo is that the two best defensive teams he played on were the '91 blues, when riendeau got the playoff starts (and, according to hockey-reference, jabonski was the backup-- was cujo injured?), and in his two years with detroit. outside of that, he played on teams that were either badly coached (STL), mediocre (EDM), or completely lacking any kind of defensive system (TOR, in the high-water age of defensive coaching).

an argument can be made that he was the kind of goalie that seemed to play better facing more shots, as some have mentioned upthread. but he certainly wasn't a sieve with detroit, though maybe a low shots/shutout guy like marty brodeur could have won those series.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 09:56 PM
  #16
arrbez
bad chi
 
arrbez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,152
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to arrbez
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
This is the impression I got of him - a guy who got better the more shots he faced. Which is a great guy to have if you want to steal a series for an average team, but not necessarily what you want to win championships.

However, I never thought of him as a clutch goaltender. He was a guy who, for whatever reason, was always spectacular in Round 1 of the playoffs, before generally falling back down to Earth in round 2.

It would be interesting if someone could find his stats from the first round of the playoffs and compare them to the rest.
I think hockey-reference.com has added this stuff in recently, or I just never knew it was there before. But if you go to the Season Summary for any year, you can scroll down to the League Playoffs heading, and then click any of the links on the left and they'll give you a game-by-game box score for each series. By the look of it, they have every series going back to 1988. I seem to remember it not going back that far before, so I guess they're slowly working their way back, which is great news.

So based on these numbers, here's what Cujo's two Conference Finals appearances look like:

In 2002, he had:

Round 1 vs. NYI: .912 sv% (27.5 SPG)
Round 2 vs. OTT: .917 sv% (29.2 SPG)
round 3 vs. CAR: .937 sv% (26.5 SPG)


In 1999 he had:

Round 1 vs. PHI: .952 sv% (31.5 SPG)
Round 2 vs. PIT: .895 sv% (20.6 SPG)
Round 3 vs. BUF: .881 sv% (25.4 SPG)


I guess it's a tale of two very different playoffs, at least based on what sv% can tell us.

arrbez is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 10:08 PM
  #17
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,111
vCash: 500
I've heard Joseph called "the best first round goalie of all-time" and without addressing that statement's legitimacy (he's probably not the best first round goalie of all-time), it is meant to be a backhanded compliment. But I don't necessarily buy it. Cujo was a money goalie almost all the time. I have personally seen almost all of his playoff career and he's been excellent.

My first Cujo experience was the 1993 playoffs, when my Leafs blew out St. Louis in game 7 of a hard-fought 2nd round series. Joseph was outstanding the whole way through. (although it would be difficult to argue he was good in game 7) - he was definitely their MVP.

I saw a lot of the 1997 round 1 matchup with Dallas as well, and there is no doubt that Joseph was the MVP, and the key to that first round update. Remember that without that brilliant OT save on Nieuwendyk, then there is no 2nd round series for him to post a losing record and lower save percentage in.

I don't actually recall much of the 1998 series Cujo played in. But his playoff sv% was .928.

In 1999 Cujo was definitely the MVP of a Leaf team that was otherwise outplayed by Philadelphia. (this was the start of a recurring theme in their six playoff series wins with Joseph) Then he was nothing special against the Pens from what I recall, but he didn't have to be. They were able to contain Jagr enough to outscore the Pens. (this was probably the leafs' most desireable matchup in the conference). Against Buffalo, he was not good. The team was also badly physically outmatched and the team was trounced.

In 2000 the Leafs and Ottawa were more or less even, but Joseph was the difference. He was also the better goalie than Martin Brodeur in round 2, despite losing the series.

In 2001, yes, the Leafs pulled off a sweep of Ottawa and they were the better team. But this sweep was fueled more by Joseph's stonewalling of the Sens for the first 175 minutes of the series, than by anything else. Against New Jersey, he was again better than Brodeur (not to the same degree as the year before) and he lost (DOMI!!!!)

In 2002, clutch Roberts scoring and Cujo saves were the main reasons Toronto staved off defeat at the hands of an upstart Isles team. Against Ottawa, it's not even close, Roberts and Joseph carried that series for Toronto. They were badly decimated by injuries and badly outplayed (I think they were the first to about 20% of loose pucks, if that) and had no business winning. Ottawa, for their part, found a way to lose. The Carolina series was a goaltending duel. Joseph unfortunately lost the battle to Irbe, but he allowed just 10 goals in 6 games for a team that could only manage six themselves. Definitely the team MVP.

In 2003, Joseph earned some of the blame for being on the receiving end of one of the most stunning sweeps in league history. But he stopped 91.7% of the shots he faced, and his team could only manage six goals. Has any team ever scored six goals in a series and won it?

In 2004, he was excellent and sported a .939 sv% - he was simply outdueled and the Flames simply wanted it more than Detroit did.

Joseph had 8 playoffs in which he played 500 or more minutes. Here is how his sv% those seasons compares to the league average playoff sv%:

1993: +43 points
1998: +18
2004: +17
2001: +15
2000: +14
2002: -4
1997: -8
1999: -11

His weighted average throughout his career is +5, including all seasons. As a comparison, a guy like Brodeur is at +5.5. Belfour is at +10.7, Roy is +13.1, Hasek +9.9. It kinda lends weight to TCG's "Brodeur is Cujo with better teammates" statement... kinda. Because it doesn't credit Brodeur for maintaining that level over more minutes, or for more games in the 3rd and final rounds of the playoffs, where the shots will assumedly be tougher.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 10:11 PM
  #18
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
the thing with cujo is that the two best defensive teams he played on were the '91 blues, when riendeau got the playoff starts (and, according to hockey-reference, jabonski was the backup-- was cujo injured?), and in his two years with detroit. outside of that, he played on teams that were either badly coached (STL), mediocre (EDM), or completely lacking any kind of defensive system (TOR, in the high-water age of defensive coaching).
It's true. Even on those Toronto teams where they actually were pretty successful.. Quinn outright refused to play trap or even defense first hockey, and he wasn't shy about letting everyone know it. And he wasn't much of a systems guy.

They relied on Cujo an awful lot (and later Belfour until his back and age caught up to him).

Its no coincidence in my mind that as soon as Toronto no longer had a standout goaltender they stopped making the playoffs.

Most of my memories of Cujo in the playoffs are of him playing extremely well. I wonder how many people would have given him the "clutch" label ala Grant Fuhr for stepping it up in the playoffs if his teams had been more successful. As it is everyone seems to remember him for having great playoffs but he never enters the discussion of great goalies of recent times.

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 10:37 PM
  #19
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,111
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Most of my memories of Cujo in the playoffs are of him playing extremely well.
Absolutely.

And Toronto was not always the best team in the series that they won.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2010, 10:48 PM
  #20
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
However, I never thought of him as a clutch goaltender. He was a guy who, for whatever reason, was always spectacular in Round 1 of the playoffs, before generally falling back down to Earth in round 2.
Well you beat me to it. He was incredible in the 1st round of the playoffs. He was a choker any other time.

Look no further than some disastrous Game 7s he played (1993 or 2001). Look at the dying moments of the 1996 World Cup. Look at the 2002 Olympics. Or the overtime goals he allowed in the 2002 playoffs. When he looked bad, he looked BAD! There were enough times when he looked bad as well.

His playoff portfolio is the reason people want to keep him out of the HHOF. Yes, he had some brilliant moments especially with Edmonton. But this myth that Cujo didn't have good teams in front of him is nuts. St. Louis was always a good team. Toronto was a near great team. Then the brief time with Detroit.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2010, 01:25 AM
  #21
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,111
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
Well you beat me to it. He was incredible in the 1st round of the playoffs. He was a choker any other time.

Look no further than some disastrous Game 7s he played (1993 or 2001). Look at the dying moments of the 1996 World Cup. Look at the 2002 Olympics. Or the overtime goals he allowed in the 2002 playoffs. When he looked bad, he looked BAD! There were enough times when he looked bad as well.

His playoff portfolio is the reason people want to keep him out of the HHOF. Yes, he had some brilliant moments especially with Edmonton. But this myth that Cujo didn't have good teams in front of him is nuts. St. Louis was always a good team. Toronto was a near great team. Then the brief time with Detroit.
Oh noes! not OT goals! You know, where one of two teams has to eventually score....

Two things you often hear about goalies with good sv% who were not actually that good are:

1) But his team made him look better; he wasn't actually facing very good shots.

2) But look at "when" he allowed those goals, they were at crucial moments, crippling to his team.

This criticism is often levied towards Roman Cechmanek and Patrick Lalime, most recently anyways. And I would argue that it was mostly deserved. Unfortunately, neither really applies to Joseph.

As was already discussed, he never really had a powerhouse defensive team in front of him. The best example was Detroit, and they forgot how to score when he was in net. His teams generally made his job tougher, not easier. So forget option 1.

As a Leafs fan, I can't think of one time when Cujo "screwed" us the way a guy like Cechmanek or Cloutier or Lalime did. There was never that "soft" late goal, that demoralizing gaffe on the first shot of the game, etc. As far as OT goes, he was rock solid for the Leafs. Yes, he lost games, but he won games, too... including a couple really long ones where it took forever for the team to finish the job. Remember those consecutive Hossa breakaways he stopped in triple OT vs. Ottawa in game 1? That's a 2-0 series deficit heading back to the Corel Center if he doesn't stop those.

I have a copy of "Total Stanley Cup 2006" and Joseph's OT record doesn't look out of line compared to other active goalies of the time:

Belfour: 22-20, .945
Brodeur: 8-18, .910 (do you think of Brodeur as clutch?)
Hasek: 13-12, .940
Joseph: 14-14, .927
Khabibulin: 6-6, .927
Kolzig: 6-7, .945
Lalime: 6-4, .932
Osgood: 3-6, .870

And please remind everyone how many goals St. Louis scored in game 7 in 1993, and how many Toronto scored in game 7 in 2001. These two teams were completely outclassed. You see it all the time, a series is closer than it should be, and the better team puts the underdog in its place in game 7. (see Detroit/Phoenix)

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2010, 07:00 AM
  #22
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Oh noes! not OT goals! You know, where one of two teams has to eventually score....

Two things you often hear about goalies with good sv% who were not actually that good are:

1) But his team made him look better; he wasn't actually facing very good shots.

2) But look at "when" he allowed those goals, they were at crucial moments, crippling to his team.

This criticism is often levied towards Roman Cechmanek and Patrick Lalime, most recently anyways. And I would argue that it was mostly deserved. Unfortunately, neither really applies to Joseph.

As was already discussed, he never really had a powerhouse defensive team in front of him. The best example was Detroit, and they forgot how to score when he was in net. His teams generally made his job tougher, not easier. So forget option 1.

As a Leafs fan, I can't think of one time when Cujo "screwed" us the way a guy like Cechmanek or Cloutier or Lalime did. There was never that "soft" late goal, that demoralizing gaffe on the first shot of the game, etc. As far as OT goes, he was rock solid for the Leafs. Yes, he lost games, but he won games, too... including a couple really long ones where it took forever for the team to finish the job. Remember those consecutive Hossa breakaways he stopped in triple OT vs. Ottawa in game 1? That's a 2-0 series deficit heading back to the Corel Center if he doesn't stop those.

I have a copy of "Total Stanley Cup 2006" and Joseph's OT record doesn't look out of line compared to other active goalies of the time:

Belfour: 22-20, .945
Brodeur: 8-18, .910 (do you think of Brodeur as clutch?)
Hasek: 13-12, .940
Joseph: 14-14, .927
Khabibulin: 6-6, .927
Kolzig: 6-7, .945
Lalime: 6-4, .932
Osgood: 3-6, .870

And please remind everyone how many goals St. Louis scored in game 7 in 1993, and how many Toronto scored in game 7 in 2001. These two teams were completely outclassed. You see it all the time, a series is closer than it should be, and the better team puts the underdog in its place in game 7. (see Detroit/Phoenix)
See this is a really good example of what I am trying to get at in this thread. And I think Cujo illustrates it pretty well.

Here is a guy who most people who saw him first hand would agree played very well almost all the time in the playoffs. At times he pulled teams through series they had no business winning.

But he gets the choker label because he wasn't able to win it all while someone like Fuhr or maybe a better example would be Brodeur, who you point out played at a similarly high level as Joseph in the playoffs, but additionally "got it done" is a "clutch player".

As for the 1993 game 7 that Cujo played average in and lost. There is no way in a million years that series even goes to 7 without Cujo. The famous Gilmour goal in game 1 in double OT is a loss on Cujo's OT record but the Blues were outshot 60-30 something in that game, as an example.

He was standing on his head the whole series and gets the "choker" label for an average game 7. And I would point out that his team was also shutout in game 7 and pretty much dominated. They got blown out in game 7.

In the '01 series against New Jersey in game 7 the Leafs only managed 16 shots! The two earlier OT losses in that series that would have swung the series to the Leafs.. the Devils also outshot the Leafs by a comfortable margin. Joseph was not outplayed in that series by Brodeur in my opinion.

I'm pretty interested in how skewed our perceptions of who is a clutch player and who is a choker has nothing to do with an individual's actual performance (in some cases) but more to do with our memory focusing on the winners.

I'll put forward that I disagree with Big Phil that Cujo was a choker.


Last edited by BraveCanadian: 12-16-2010 at 08:14 AM.
BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2010, 09:31 AM
  #23
Padan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 534
vCash: 500
I'll never forget Curtis Joseph vs. Colorado Avalanche in the 1998 playoffs. He shot out Colorado twice despite facing 30+ shots. He really stood on his head in that series.

Padan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2010, 12:34 PM
  #24
BM67
Registered User
 
BM67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In "The System"
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,638
vCash: 500
Here is a home/road breakdown of Brodeur, Roy, Hasek, Belfour and Joseph in playoff OT games.

PlayerGPMINWLGAGAASOGSV%SOSOG/60MIN/GP
Brodeur H141072:0468321.794750.933126.5876:35
Brodeur R191425:24613471.986400.927026.9475:01
Roy H231613:05158531.977090.925026.3770:08
Roy R352509:572510862.0612110.929128.9571:42
Hasek H14995:1359352.114320.919126.0471:05
Hasek R141129:3395361.915310.932028.2180:41
Belfour H181388:58108492.126400.923027.6577:10
Belfour R241839:011212 491.608340.941227.2176:38
Joseph H161188:5879412.075710.928028.8174:19
Joseph R11798:5965261.954520.9422 33.9472:38

Here's Roy split for era, 86-93 & 94-03.

PlayerGPMINWLGAGAASOGSV%SOSOG/60MIN/GP
H 86-93141009:35122301.784350.931025.8572:07
H 94-039603:3036232.292740.916027.2467:03
R 86-9314925:24104372.404900.924031.7766:06
R 94-03211584:33156491.867210.932127.375:27

Here is an incomplete home/road breakdown of Brodeur, Roy, Hasek, Belfour and Joseph in playoff OT games for the OT only. The Summary Project doesn't have 88-90, 92 or 97 playoffs up yet, so Brodeur is missing 2 games, Roy is missing 11 games, Hasek is missing 1, Belfour is missing 1, Joseph is missing 6.

PlayerGPMINWLGAGAASOGSV%SOG/60MIN/GP
Brodeur H13238:446771.731140.93928.6518:22
Brodeur R18238:26612123.021020.88225.6713:15
Roy H17137:1411662.62750.92032.798:04
Roy R30370:2923771.131960.96431.7412:21
Hasek H14175:255993.08990.90933.8612:32
Hasek R13268:299440.891130.96525.2520:39
Belfour H18309:4410881.551730.95433.5117:12
Belfour R23415:441112121.731920.93827.7118:04
Joseph H13188:165882.55840.90526.7714:29
Joseph R8104:243552.87620.91935.6313:03

Here is an home/road breakdown of Brodeur, Roy, Hasek, Belfour and Joseph in playoff OT games for the OT only. The Summary Project doesn't have 88-90, 92 or 97 playoffs up yet, so Brodeur is missing 2 games, Roy is missing 11 games, Hasek is missing 1, Belfour is missing 1, Joseph is missing 6. The missing games have been given a shot total based on the overall game average per minute. The minutes and GAA should be accurate, but the SOG, SV% and SOG/60 are unlikely to be.

PlayerGPMINWLGAGAASOGSV%SOG/60MIN/GP
Brodeur H14252:526881.901200.93328.4718:04
Brodeur R19286:03613132.731200.89225.1715:03
Roy H23233:5715882.051140.93029.2410:10
Roy R35428:252510101.402300.95732.2112:14
Hasek H14175:255993.08990.90933.8612:32
Hasek R14292:029551.031240.96025.4820:52
Belfour H18309:4410881.551730.95433.5117:12
Belfour R24418:291212121.721930.93827.6717:26
Joseph H16229:397992.351080.91728.2214:21
Joseph R11143:166552.09840.94035.1813:01

Taking the OT away leaves what they did in regulation.

PlayerGPMINGAGAASOGSV%SOSOG/60
Brodeur H14819:12241.763550.932226.00
Brodeur R191139:21341.795200.935227.38
Roy H231379:08451.965950.924125.89
Roy R352081:32762.199810.923228.28
Hasek H14819:48261.903330.922124.37
Hasek R14837:31312.224070.924029.16
Belfour H181079:14412.284670.912025.96
Belfour R241420:32371.566410.942427.07
Joseph H16959:19322.004630.931128.96
Joseph R11655:43211.923680.943333.67

Here are the number of playoff OT wins where each goalie had to make 0 or 1 save to earn the win or lost after only 1 or 2 shots.

PlayerOT Wins0 Save Wins1 Save WinsOT Losses0 Save Loss1 Save Loss
Belfour22302012
Brodeur12112122
Hasek14111430
Joseph13111401
Roy40661822

Belfour's one missing OT game only lasted 2:45 so he might have one more win that would count.
Roy has 4 losses in his missing games that would likely count. They ended at 5:02 (only 21 saves on 23 shots for the game), 3:12, 3:42 and 0:24.

W-L by length of OT.

PlayerTotal OT>5 min5-10 min10-20 min20-40 min40-60 min60+ min
Belfour22-207-46-43-42-64-20-0
Brodeur12-212-84-52-33-21-10-2
Hasek14-143-32-34-63-11-11-0
Joseph13-142-12-75-43-11-10-0
Roy40-1812-98-214-44-32-00-0


Last edited by BM67: 12-17-2010 at 04:20 PM.
BM67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2010, 04:50 PM
  #25
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Oh noes! not OT goals! You know, where one of two teams has to eventually score....
Is it any coincidence that Roy and Smith literally dominated when the chips were down in overtime? During the Isles dynasty I believe Smith was 11-2 in overtime. Roy on the other hand won 10 straight in 1993 alone. Eventually it goes beyond the common denominator thing.


Quote:
As a Leafs fan, I can't think of one time when Cujo "screwed" us the way a guy like Cechmanek or Cloutier or Lalime did. There was never that "soft" late goal, that demoralizing gaffe on the first shot of the game, etc. As far as OT goes, he was rock solid for the Leafs. Yes, he lost games, but he won games, too... including a couple really long ones where it took forever for the team to finish the job. Remember those consecutive Hossa breakaways he stopped in triple OT vs. Ottawa in game 1? That's a 2-0 series deficit heading back to the Corel Center if he doesn't stop those.
Yes, 2001 was in the 1st round. I said in my other post Cujo is arguably the best 1st round goalie of all time. He egineered some nice upsets. But he was always money to burn out the next round. He never had that awe inspiring playoff year, not once. That is not going to get a goalie into the HHOF.

Quote:
I have a copy of "Total Stanley Cup 2006" and Joseph's OT record doesn't look out of line compared to other active goalies of the time:

Belfour: 22-20, .945
Brodeur: 8-18, .910 (do you think of Brodeur as clutch?)
Hasek: 13-12, .940
Joseph: 14-14, .927
Khabibulin: 6-6, .927
Kolzig: 6-7, .945
Lalime: 6-4, .932
Osgood: 3-6, .870
That's the one knock on Brodeur's career is his shabby OT playoff record (which I think is about 12-22 now). Other than that he's been a pretty good goalie in the postseason. Overtime is just a part of it.

Quote:
And please remind everyone how many goals St. Louis scored in game 7 in 1993, and how many Toronto scored in game 7 in 2001. These two teams were completely outclassed. You see it all the time, a series is closer than it should be, and the better team puts the underdog in its place in game 7. (see Detroit/Phoenix)
Those Game #7s were a 6-0 thrashing (1993) and a 5-1 drubbing (2001). Blame the players too, but Cujo let in some weak goals in that 1993 Game 7. He failed to make the big save when needed.

Other examples would be the 1999 Sabres. All of the sudden this otherwise popgun offense scored 21 goals in a quick 5 game series against Joseph and the Leafs. It is a classic example of how Cujo's level of play dropped the deeper he got in the postseason.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Here is a guy who most people who saw him first hand would agree played very well almost all the time in the playoffs. At times he pulled teams through series they had no business winning.

But he gets the choker label because he wasn't able to win it all while someone like Fuhr or maybe a better example would be Brodeur, who you point out played at a similarly high level as Joseph in the playoffs, but additionally "got it done" is a "clutch player".

As for the 1993 game 7 that Cujo played average in and lost. There is no way in a million years that series even goes to 7 without Cujo. The famous Gilmour goal in game 1 in double OT is a loss on Cujo's OT record but the Blues were outshot 60-30 something in that game, as an example.

He was standing on his head the whole series and gets the "choker" label for an average game 7. And I would point out that his team was also shutout in game 7 and pretty much dominated. They got blown out in game 7.

In the '01 series against New Jersey in game 7 the Leafs only managed 16 shots! The two earlier OT losses in that series that would have swung the series to the Leafs.. the Devils also outshot the Leafs by a comfortable margin. Joseph was not outplayed in that series by Brodeur in my opinion.

I'm pretty interested in how skewed our perceptions of who is a clutch player and who is a choker has nothing to do with an individual's actual performance (in some cases) but more to do with our memory focusing on the winners.

I'll put forward that I disagree with Big Phil that Cujo was a choker.
I bolded the two things that I would like to hear an explanation about. I'm wondering aloud who "most" of these people are who thought Cujo played well in the playoffs almost all the time. A major complaint about him is that he buckled under the pressure when the chips were down.

The other thing is calling his game 7 in 1993 an "average" performance. If you were a coach and your goalie allowed 6 goals on 36 shots would you be happy? I am talking about THE most important game of the season too. Cujo's performance in that game was similar to Fleury's poor performance last year vs. Montreal in Game 7. It was not a good game.

Also the thing that seperates Cujo from Fuhr and others is that Fuhr adjusted to the style of each game all the time. He might have allowed 4-5 goals in a game, but the game would be up tempo and filled with end to end rushes. The key would be to never allow the game winning goal. We saw this with Fuhr in the Oilers dynasty and most notably his spectacular performance in the 1987 Canada Cup. You might shrug a bit when you see the Soviets scoring 5 goals against him a game, but the way the style of those games were, there was going to be a lot of goals. Fuhr was always up to the task.

And outside of the playoffs Joseph was not good at all. He collapsed in the dying moments of the 1996 World Cup. USA scored 3 goals on him in 3 minutes. He did not have a sharp game in Game #3 of the 1996 World Cup. He faced 14 shots in the first two periods and allowed one goal, which is fine, but there wasn't a big save from him at all in that game. USA was totally outclassed by Canada that game yet Joseph was outplayed by another religiously inconsistent goalie - Mike Richter.

Say what you want about the 2002 Olympics, but he was terrible in that game against Sweden - his only game. The whole team had a collapse as well but he also failed to make that "big" save they needed. This is why he was never let back in the net after that game and Canada won without him. Look, I'll give Joseph credit, he was always a constant selection on Team Canada. But the sad truth is teams didn't win with Joseph, they just didn't.

Lastly, while it isn't a crime to not win a Cup as a goalie there isn't one in the HHOF by my count who didn't at least lead his team to the final. Esposito did it twice not to mention was the best goalie in the 1972 Summit Series. Giacomin did it once. Rayner took a bad team to within one goal of the Cup. All three goalies also had a better regular season resume than Joseph and yet I wouldn't even consider either one of them to be legendary playoff performers if this explains anything.

Big Phil 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 12:56 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.