Management Thread | Regular Season Edition

[AwesomeInTheory]

Ya. I don't really recall there being issues with Cloutier during the regular season.

Other than the injuries, being mentally weak and prone to letting in softies, quick to anger and getting flustered, etc.

Yeah he absolutely should be spoken of in the same reverent tones as Brodeur and Roy, lmao.

 

[MS]

Other than the injuries, being mentally weak and prone to letting in softies, quick to anger and getting flustered, etc.

Yeah he absolutely should be spoken of in the same reverent tones as Brodeur and Roy, lmao.

In the history of this franchise, no one player has individually done more to cost this team a Stanley Cup during a period of competitiveness than Dan Cloutier.

Awful, awful goalie.

 

[Hit the post]

In Cloutier's defense, Crawford tended to emphasize "offense first" type of strategy which didn't lend itself to shielding the goalie. Though in Crawford's defense, he was merely playing with the cards he was dealt (that played to the strengths of the club at the time).

 

[SeawaterOnIce]

In Cloutier's defense, Crawford tended to emphasize "offense first" type of strategy which didn't lend itself to shielding the goalie. Though in Crawford's defense, he was merely playing with the cards he was dealt (that played to the strengths of the club at the time).

The Lidstrom goal was unforgiveable and remembered for being the turning point.

The thing is...the team came out and played a rather good Game 4, only surrending 14 shots. Defensively was a good game. Problem was Cloutier flubbed 3 routine saves.

 

[MS]

The Lidstrom goal was unforgiveable and remembered for being the turning point.

The thing is...the team came out and played a rather good Game 4, only surrending 14 shots. Defensively was a good game. Problem was Cloutier flubbed 3 routine saves.

2002-03 Western Conference Semi-Finals Game 2, Minnesota Wild vs. Vancouver Canucks Box Score: April 27, 2003 | Hockey-Reference.com

Get the latest box score updates on the Minnesota Wild vs. Vancouver Canucks game played on April 27, 2003 on Hockey-Reference.com

www.hockey-reference.com

This is a game nobody remembers but it possibly cost us a Cup in is on my list of the 5 most upsetting games in Canuck history. Game 2 against Minnesota in 2003.

Probably the best game I ever saw the WCE-era Canucks play. We absolutely demolished Minnesota, shots were 31-18, scoring chances 18-5, outhit and outskated them by a mile. And we lose 3-2 because Dan Cloutier simply can't make a save while Roloson stonewalled us at the other end.

If we win that game we would have swept Minnesota and been in the Conference Finals against the Ducks.

 

[sandwichbird2023]

2002-03 Western Conference Semi-Finals Game 2, Minnesota Wild vs. Vancouver Canucks Box Score: April 27, 2003 | Hockey-Reference.com

Get the latest box score updates on the Minnesota Wild vs. Vancouver Canucks game played on April 27, 2003 on Hockey-Reference.com

www.hockey-reference.com

This is a game nobody remembers but it possibly cost us a Cup in is on my list of the 5 most upsetting games in Canuck history. Game 2 against Minnesota in 2003.

Probably the best game I ever saw the WCE-era Canucks play. We absolutely demolished Minnesota, shots were 31-18, scoring chances 18-5, outhit and outskated them by a mile. And we lose 3-2 because Dan Cloutier simply can't make a save while Roloson stonewalled us at the other end.

If we win that game we would have swept Minnesota and been in the Conference Finals against the Ducks.

I remember us getting blown out for the 7-2 game where literally EVERYTHING they shot was going in*, and the team just never recover from that.

* Just checked, Cloutier let in 6 goals on 21 shots in game 5 for a S% of .714.
He then let in 5 on 23 shots in game 6 for a S% of .784.
And finally, he let in 4 on 16 shots in game 7 with a S% of .750 to seal our fate. We had a 2-0 lead, at home, half way through the game in an era where 2-0 lead is pretty much a lock, and still lose.
Naslund and Bertuzzi got a lot of criticism for that playoff, but how can they be expected to win if the team is only allowing around 20 shots a game, yet their goalie is literally saving only 3 out of every 4 shots?
Extra painful was that the Avs were knocked out early that year and the path to the final was fairly easy for Vancouver. We probably still lose to a red hot Giguere or against the Devils in the final, but we never even got a chance because of Cloutier.

 

[SeawaterOnIce]

I remember us getting blown out for the 7-2 game where literally EVERYTHING they shot was going in*, and the team just never recover from that.

* Just checked, Cloutier let in 6 goals on 21 shots in game 5 for a S% of .714.
He then let in 5 on 23 shots in game 6 for a S% of .784.
And finally, he let in 4 on 16 shots in game 7 with a S% of .750 to seal our fate. We had a 2-0 lead, at home, half way through the game in an era where 2-0 lead is pretty much a lock, and still lose.
Naslund and Bertuzzi got a lot of criticism for that playoff, but how can they be expected to win if the team is only allowing around 20 shots a game, yet their goalie is literally saving only 3 out of every 4 shots?
Extra painful was that the Avs were knocked out early that year and the path to the final was fairly easy for Vancouver. We probably still lose to a red hot Giguere or against the Devils in the final, but we never even got a chance because of Cloutier.

It's a shame the WCE era teams get seen as choke artists. The players in front of the goalie would often have positive starts. It became a reoccuring gag when you would see 1 stinker against just lead to immediate catastrophe right after.

You could pinpoint moments during those years when players would just become deflated after a goal against. I remember the moral and vibe with the team was actually quite good prior the Minny series. After? The team ended having a good regular season campaign but something felt off until it all went to hell.

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

In the history of this franchise, no one player has individually done more to cost this team a Stanley Cup during a period of competitiveness than Dan Cloutier.

Awful, awful goalie.

Eh, Malkin concussing Mitchell and the ensuing butterfly-effect like repercussions is up there.

 

[MS]

Eh, Malkin concussing Mitchell and the ensuing butterfly-effect like repercussions is up there.

I was referring to Canuck players hurting us internally. But yeah, f*** Malkin.

 

[sandwichbird2023]

It's a shame the WCE era teams get seen as choke artists. The players in front of the goalie would often have positive starts. It became a reoccuring gag when you would see 1 stinker against just lead to immediate catastrophe right after.

You could pinpoint moments during those years when players would just become deflated after a goal against. I remember the moral and vibe with the team was actually quite good prior the Minny series. After? The team ended having a good regular season campaign but something felt off until it all went to hell.

Yea, there is no way to play with any confidence if you cannot count on your goalie, knowing that any routine shot could end up in the back of the net.

Reflecting on the WCE era, I'm not as mad at Cloutier for the Lidstrom goal in the 2001-02 playoff. Even if we somehow win that series, I'm not convinced we can take Colorado or St Louis that year. But 2002-03 was the best chance for that core to make a deep run, and maybe get lucky and win a cup. But Cloutier made sure that wasn't going to happen with that Minny series.

 

[SeawaterOnIce]

Eh, Malkin concussing Mitchell and the ensuing butterfly-effect like repercussions is up there.

Duncan Keith taking out Daniel Sedin pisses me off more.

Ugh...pisses me off more now knowing how scummy that franchise was behind the scene.

 

[theguardianII]

Duncan Keith taking out Daniel Sedin pisses me off more. Pisses me off more now knowing how scummy that franchise was behind the scene.

Alberts career was ended by Calgary that is one reason Trots (he knew) went ballistic because their coach's starting line up was to intimidate and that coach smiled at him. He started the player that ended Alberts NHL career.
Then there is Raymond and the Bruins breaking his back. If reviewed by the NHL they would have seen the puck was 42' away and traveling away, at least 2+ seconds late and in view of Rome's hit being less than a second late, but they did hand out a 2 minute minor though.

Still Bure's hit on Churla would be a crime now, half a season easily.

Moore would have had 10+ games for his diving elbow head shot on Naslund or cross check into the boards of StLouis head first. Both players were 1 and 2 in league scoring at the time. IMO Nasland was never the same after.

It took Daniel over a year to totally recover from Keith.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

In the history of this franchise, no one player has individually done more to cost this team a Stanley Cup during a period of competitiveness than Dan Cloutier.

Awful, awful goalie.

I never understood the attachment people had to him, but, I will say, the zealousness Cloutier fans had in defending their boy prepared me well for the Benning years, lmao.

 

[RandV]

I never understood the attachment people had to him, but, I will say, the zealousness Cloutier fans had in defending their boy prepared me well for the Benning years, lmao.

As someone who supported Cloutier back in the day some bad takes here. No one was "zealous" about defending Cloutier, and no one was under the impression he was a great goalie or anything.

Rather for a modern perspective, imagine you're the current Edmonton Oilers with terrible goaltending the last x years and suddenly they produce the Canucks version of Eddie Lack. You're not going to have any delusions that he's great or anything but you're going to appreciate the guy.

To illustrate the situation for the Canucks, this is the summation of our time out of the playoffsfrom 96-97 to 99-00, when we did make it back with Cloutier as backup:

Player

S/C

GP

GS

W

L

T

OT

SA

Svs

GA

Sv%

GAA

Garth Snow

L

109​

98​

33​

52​

11​

--

2,752

2,479

273​

0.901​

2.86​

Kirk McLean

L

73​

70​

27​

35​

7​

--

2,047

1,812

235​

0.885​

3.39​

Felix Potvin

L

69​

68​

26​

30​

10​

--

1,820

1,632

188​

0.897​

2.84​

Bob Essensa

L

39​

33​

18​

12​

3​

--

854​

762​

92​

0.892​

2.68​

Corey Hirsch

L

60​

49​

15​

28​

7​

--

1,559

1,390

169​

0.892​

3.28​

Arturs Irbe

L

41​

32​

14​

11​

6​

--

982​

891​

91​

0.907​

2.73​

Kevin Weekes

L

31​

25​

6​

15​

5​

--

718​

637​

81​

0.887​

3.2​

Dan Cloutier

L

16​

14​

4​

6​

5​

--

348​

311​

37​

0.894​

2.43​

Mike Fountain

L

6​

4​

2​

2​

0​

--

135​

121​

14​

0.896​

3.43​

Sean Burke

L

16​

13​

2​

9​

4​

--

396​

347​

49​

0.876​

3.51​

Corey Schwab

L

6​

4​

2​

1​

1​

--

115​

99​

16​

0.861​

3.57​

Alfie Michaud

L

2​

0​

0​

1​

0​

--

27​

22​

5​

0.815​

4.32​

A 5 year span were the only good goalie we had was Irbe, but that was the Keenan year and we didn't keep him. So as a teen who just left the bandwagon attitude to take an dedicate active interest in the team right for the start of that period, Cloutier was the first stable starter we'd had in years so there was a certain amount of appreciation there. At the same time I started on message boards, it felt like there were a lot of fans jumping on the bandwagon now that the Canucks were good again who never really appreciated how bad things were prior and made Cloutier their scapegoat.

You also have to keep in mind this was the end of the dead puck era, and prior to the salary cap. The league was dominated by top tier goalies, and those goalies were owned by the top salary teams. The Canucks were 'good', but we were operating on like a $40M team salary while the Wings & Avs were more like $70-80M. For as much as people complained about Cloutier we weren't about to outbid Detroit on Curtis Joseph or Toronto on Ed Belfour. Off the top of my head I think the only viable alternative would have been to get in a time machine and tell Burke to nab Kipper before the Flames got him.

 

[God]

I mean, just because the rest of the goalies we had were crap doesn't mean we can give the best of the crap goalies any sort of credit. He was still crap. And it's partly his fault, partly team finance's fault, and partly Burke's fault for not being able to find a goalie and defaulting to the "goalie graveyard" phrase. But he still sucked ass.

 

[Petey But Really Jim]

I mean, just because the rest of the goalies we had were crap doesn't mean we can give the best of the crap goalies any sort of credit. He was still crap. And it's partly his fault, partly team finance's fault, and partly Burke's fault for not being able to find a goalie and defaulting to the "goalie graveyard" phrase. But he still sucked ass.

At least he isn't Jim.

 

[HighAndTight]

Outside of one month in November 2003, Cloutier generally sucked in the regular seasons, too.

The guy plateaued as an OK backup-level goalie who got to spend multiple years as an NHL starter because the GM and coach liked that he was a hothead who got in fights.

And fans latched on to this '3 straight 30 win seasons!' thing as if winning 30 games from 60 starts on an elite team was a big accomplishment.

Oh I don't disagree with this post.

But to add onto this and what FAN said:

Cloutier actually did have tons of questions about him in the regular season. It wasn't until his first full year in Van that he had a winning season.

His numbers then progressed every single year. So I understand why management thought he could improve as he had been doing it up until the end with the Canucks. I'm not saying I agreed at all but I can see why a decision like that was made when the guy is already in the system.

 

[geebaan]

Anyway, what would it take for us to get Anderssen out of Calgary?

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

As someone who supported Cloutier back in the day some bad takes here. No one was "zealous" about defending Cloutier, and no one was under the impression he was a great goalie or anything.

Yeah, uh, this is straight up not true. There were massive arguments over Cloutier back in the day.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about: CDC had like 4 active threads about Cloutier. It was very similar to the Kool Aid Benning Supporters were drinking.

To illustrate the situation for the Canucks, this is the summation of our time out of the playoffsfrom 96-97 to 99-00, when we did make it back with Cloutier as backup:

Tell me you fell for Brian Burke's 'goalie graveyard' rhetoric without telling me you fell for Brian Burke's 'goalie graveyard' rhetoric.

You also have to keep in mind this was the end of the dead puck era, and prior to the salary cap. The league was dominated by top tier goalies, and those goalies were owned by the top salary teams. The Canucks were 'good', but we were operating on like a $40M team salary while the Wings & Avs were more like $70-80M. For as much as people complained about Cloutier we weren't about to outbid Detroit on Curtis Joseph or Toronto on Ed Belfour. Off the top of my head I think the only viable alternative would have been to get in a time machine and tell Burke to nab Kipper before the Flames got him.

Yet teams like the Wild, Tampa Bay, Calgary (as you mentioned), Anaheim, etc. managed to snag competent goalies in that timeframe.

Hell, the one good goalie that Burke did pick up (Hedberg) was criminally misused because of Crawford's fixation with French Goalie.

The biggest issue is that Burke sucked at assessing goaltending talent, Crawford made Cloutier his ride or die, and Cloutier was not a particularly great goalie.

 

[andora]

2002-03 Western Conference Semi-Finals Game 2, Minnesota Wild vs. Vancouver Canucks Box Score: April 27, 2003 | Hockey-Reference.com

Get the latest box score updates on the Minnesota Wild vs. Vancouver Canucks game played on April 27, 2003 on Hockey-Reference.com

www.hockey-reference.com

This is a game nobody remembers but it possibly cost us a Cup in is on my list of the 5 most upsetting games in Canuck history. Game 2 against Minnesota in 2003.

Probably the best game I ever saw the WCE-era Canucks play. We absolutely demolished Minnesota, shots were 31-18, scoring chances 18-5, outhit and outskated them by a mile. And we lose 3-2 because Dan Cloutier simply can't make a save while Roloson stonewalled us at the other end.

If we win that game we would have swept Minnesota and been in the Conference Finals against the Ducks.

Oh I remember that vividly. I remember how frustrated it was watching that, how frustrated I was with Minnesota players and then every play holding your breath hoping it got out of the zone

 

[Hodgy]

2002-03 Western Conference Semi-Finals Game 2, Minnesota Wild vs. Vancouver Canucks Box Score: April 27, 2003 | Hockey-Reference.com

Get the latest box score updates on the Minnesota Wild vs. Vancouver Canucks game played on April 27, 2003 on Hockey-Reference.com

www.hockey-reference.com

This is a game nobody remembers but it possibly cost us a Cup in is on my list of the 5 most upsetting games in Canuck history. Game 2 against Minnesota in 2003.

Probably the best game I ever saw the WCE-era Canucks play. We absolutely demolished Minnesota, shots were 31-18, scoring chances 18-5, outhit and outskated them by a mile. And we lose 3-2 because Dan Cloutier simply can't make a save while Roloson stonewalled us at the other end.

If we win that game we would have swept Minnesota and been in the Conference Finals against the Ducks.

At the time I thought that this was a “cup squandering moment” as well, but after watching the Ducks dismantle the Wild and then lose to the Devils I quickly realized we had like zero chance of winning the cup that year save and except if we had like Hasek instead of Cloutier. Otherwise, this was very much the dead puck era, and Minnesota was playing that style of hockey and getting good results against us, but Anaheim and New Jersey were on different levels of playing that style and the Canucks just weren’t going to beat both of those teams. We weren’t good enough overall like the Red Wings and Avalanche, for example, to win playing an offensive game.

You also have to keep in mind this was the end of the dead puck era, and prior to the salary cap. The league was dominated by top tier goalies, and those goalies were owned by the top salary teams. The Canucks were 'good', but we were operating on like a $40M team salary while the Wings & Avs were more like $70-80M. For as much as people complained about Cloutier we weren't about to outbid Detroit on Curtis Joseph or Toronto on Ed Belfour. Off the top of my head I think the only viable alternative would have been to get in a time machine and tell Burke to nab Kipper before the Flames got him.

Or just kept Sean Burke.

Yet teams like the Wild, Tampa Bay, Calgary (as you mentioned), Anaheim, etc. managed to snag competent goalies in that timeframe.

A lot of it was just systems though, and in particular, I mean Giguerre, Roloson and Fernandez.

 

[MS]

As someone who supported Cloutier back in the day some bad takes here. No one was "zealous" about defending Cloutier, and no one was under the impression he was a great goalie or anything.

Rather for a modern perspective, imagine you're the current Edmonton Oilers with terrible goaltending the last x years and suddenly they produce the Canucks version of Eddie Lack. You're not going to have any delusions that he's great or anything but you're going to appreciate the guy.

To illustrate the situation for the Canucks, this is the summation of our time out of the playoffsfrom 96-97 to 99-00, when we did make it back with Cloutier as backup:

Player

S/C

GP

GS

W

L

T

OT

SA

Svs

GA

Sv%

GAA

Garth Snow

L

109​

98​

33​

52​

11​

--

2,752

2,479

273​

0.901​

2.86​

Kirk McLean

L

73​

70​

27​

35​

7​

--

2,047

1,812

235​

0.885​

3.39​

Felix Potvin

L

69​

68​

26​

30​

10​

--

1,820

1,632

188​

0.897​

2.84​

Bob Essensa

L

39​

33​

18​

12​

3​

--

854​

762​

92​

0.892​

2.68​

Corey Hirsch

L

60​

49​

15​

28​

7​

--

1,559

1,390

169​

0.892​

3.28​

Arturs Irbe

L

41​

32​

14​

11​

6​

--

982​

891​

91​

0.907​

2.73​

Kevin Weekes

L

31​

25​

6​

15​

5​

--

718​

637​

81​

0.887​

3.2​

Dan Cloutier

L

16​

14​

4​

6​

5​

--

348​

311​

37​

0.894​

2.43​

Mike Fountain

L

6​

4​

2​

2​

0​

--

135​

121​

14​

0.896​

3.43​

Sean Burke

L

16​

13​

2​

9​

4​

--

396​

347​

49​

0.876​

3.51​

Corey Schwab

L

6​

4​

2​

1​

1​

--

115​

99​

16​

0.861​

3.57​

Alfie Michaud

L

2​

0​

0​

1​

0​

--

27​

22​

5​

0.815​

4.32​

A 5 year span were the only good goalie we had was Irbe, but that was the Keenan year and we didn't keep him. So as a teen who just left the bandwagon attitude to take an dedicate active interest in the team right for the start of that period, Cloutier was the first stable starter we'd had in years so there was a certain amount of appreciation there. At the same time I started on message boards, it felt like there were a lot of fans jumping on the bandwagon now that the Canucks were good again who never really appreciated how bad things were prior and made Cloutier their scapegoat.

You also have to keep in mind this was the end of the dead puck era, and prior to the salary cap. The league was dominated by top tier goalies, and those goalies were owned by the top salary teams. The Canucks were 'good', but we were operating on like a $40M team salary while the Wings & Avs were more like $70-80M. For as much as people complained about Cloutier we weren't about to outbid Detroit on Curtis Joseph or Toronto on Ed Belfour. Off the top of my head I think the only viable alternative would have been to get in a time machine and tell Burke to nab Kipper before the Flames got him.

I'm not sure what the list of bad goalies years before has to do with anything.

And yeah, there were incredibly zealous Cloutier defenders. The guy was the biggest talking point on the roster for nearly 5 years and THREE STRAIGHT 30 WIN SEASONS! was a hilarious precursor to THREE STRAIGHT CALDER FINALISTS! as an argument people screamed at the top of their lungs when they were ignoring all logic and reason.

Cloutier was a journeyman backup-level goalie who put up the same sort of numbers as journeyman backups like Hedberg/Essensa/Skudra/Auld did on those teams.

And there were absolutely other options. Burke passed on trading for Khabibulin to target Cloutier, for starters. Ed Belfour was available in free agency in 2002. We had both Sean Burke and Arturs Irbe and let them go. Even a journeyman starter like a Mike Dunham or a Chris Osgood would have been preferable.

Oh I don't disagree with this post.

But to add onto this and what FAN said:

Cloutier actually did have tons of questions about him in the regular season. It wasn't until his first full year in Van that he had a winning season.

His numbers then progressed every single year. So I understand why management thought he could improve as he had been doing it up until the end with the Canucks. I'm not saying I agreed at all but I can see why a decision like that was made when the guy is already in the system.

He was basically crap from start to finish as a Canuck aside from a blip at the start of the 03-04 season, after which he then regressed back to being a sub-.900 sieve in the second half of that year.

At the time I thought that this was a “cup squandering moment” as well, but after watching the Ducks dismantle the Wild and then lose to the Devils I quickly realized we had like zero chance of winning the cup that year save and except if we had like Hasek instead of Cloutier. Otherwise, this was very much the dead puck era, and Minnesota was playing that style of hockey and getting good results against us, but Anaheim and New Jersey were on different levels of playing that style and the Canucks just weren’t going to beat both of those teams. We weren’t good enough overall like the Red Wings and Avalanche, for example, to win playing an offensive game.

Minnesota were not a good team and should never have come close to beating us aside from Cloutier, and I think we would have given Anaheim a much better series assuming we had competent goaltending.

NJ, yeah, they would have been tough.

 

[Hodgy]

Minnesota were not a good team and should never have come close to beating us aside from Cloutier, and I think we would have given Anaheim a much better series assuming we had competent goaltending.

NJ, yeah, they would have been tough.

Agreed that Minnesota wasn’t good compared to New Jersey or Anaheim. But that’s my point. Their system, was worse but similar to the other two systems and it absolutely did give the Canucks troubles.

The Wild and Canucks tied the season series that year but the Wild out scored the Canucks in that series. And the Wild held the Canucks to two goals in each of the last four games of the series with the Canucks going 0-2-1 over the last three games. The Wild matched up well against the Canucks, and this isn’t surprising as this was the dead puck era where strong and tight defensive teams always trumped offensive teams other than the dynasty type offensive teams like Colorado and Detroit.

And the Ducks and Devils were on a different level in terms of executing that defensive system, and I absolutely think they would have shut down our offense and it wouldn’t have mattered that we got “competent” goaltending.

 

[MS]

Agreed that Minnesota wasn’t good compared to New Jersey or Anaheim. But that’s my point. Their system, was worse but similar to the other two systems and it absolutely did give the Canucks troubles.

The Wild and Canucks tied the season series that year but the Wild out scored the Canucks in that series. And the Wild held the Canucks to two goals in each of the last four games of the series with the Canucks going 0-2-1 over the last three games. The Wild matched up well against the Canucks, and this isn’t surprising as this was the dead puck era where strong and tight defensive teams always trumped offensive teams other than the dynasty type offensive teams like Colorado and Detroit.

And the Ducks and Devils were on a different level in terms of executing that defensive system, and I absolutely think they would have shut down our offense and it wouldn’t have mattered that we got “competent” goaltending.

We outplayed Minnesota from start to finish in that series and the only reason Minnesota won was because our goalie dropped one of the biggest turds in playoff history. In the playoffs you're going to have to win some 2-1 games (especially in the DPE) and Cloutier made that impossible. And I'd also add that I think the sucky goalie sucked the wind out of the sails of the team as that series went along.

I think with a decent goaltender we beat both Minnesota and Anaheim without much trouble. NJ would probably have been a different story, yeah. That was a really good Devils team.

 

[Hodgy]

We outplayed Minnesota from start to finish in that series and the only reason Minnesota won was because our goalie dropped one of the biggest turds in playoff history. In the playoffs you're going to have to win some 2-1 games (especially in the DPE) and Cloutier made that impossible. And I'd also add that I think the sucky goalie sucked the wind out of the sails of the team as that series went along.

I think with a decent goaltender we beat both Minnesota and Anaheim without much trouble. NJ would probably have been a different story, yeah. That was a really good Devils team.

My point isn’t that the Wild were a better team than the Canucks, only that they matched up very well against the Canucks and the regular season proved this. And my point isn’t that the Canucks with “competent goaltending” couldn’t beat the Wild because I believe they could. My point is that the Canucks “with competent goaltending” did not have a shot at the cup although it did feel that way during the Wild series.

Again, the Ducks and Devils were basically playing the Wild’s system but on another level entirely. And sure, the Ducks may have captured lightning in a bottle, but they were playing the trap to perfection during that run and getting great goaltending. This is very clearly shown by their utterance dominance against the west during their playoff run. And they took the Devils, who I think you acknowledge as being a great team, to game 7 of the Stanley Cup finals. So ya, do I think it was likely that an offensive team in the dead puck era with “competent goaltending” was going to be able to beat two of the best trapping teams ever in back to back series? Ya, no chance. Defense won out time and time again during the dead puck era which is why it was the dead puck era.