Why Vancouver Doesn't Have a Goalie Controversy

This post was originally an angry comment that I vomited all over this nhl.com article, but then it got such a positive response from other Canuck fans who have similarly grown bored of the persistent caterwauling of the lackadaisical effort put forth from the Canuck-covering media that I thought, "What the hell? Let's make a whole post out of my rant."

3...2...1...GO!

Have you heard the news? The Canucks have a Goalie Controversy! Just like last year! And the year before that! And the year before that!

In fact, since 2011, the word "Controversy" has been even more synonymous with the words "goalie" and "Vancouver" than "Graveyard" had been the previous 12 years or so.

For those of you who haven't read an article about the Canucks in 5 years, I'll summarize the "controversy" for you:

The goalie with the lower salary is playing better.

That's it. 

"So I guess we hate each other now, right?"

Photo Credit: www.theprovince.com

Every single season since 2012, that's been the case. Even in 2011, Schneider had a (barely) better save percentage than Luongo. As a Canucks fan, I'm sick of it. I'm sick of being told that there's a controversy when there isn't. If Lack is playing better, then just say that Lack is playing better. Stop saying "controversy" - it's become cliche. It's lazy journalism. Every hack reporter has commented on it fifty times by now. 

The only time in the past 4 years that things actually got controversial was when Lack started the Winter Classic instead of Luongo. And then Luongo was traded the next day. That's 1-2 days of actual goalie controversy, and 3-4 years of media-manufactured pseudo-controversy.

Here's a list of teams whose highest-paid goalie was outperformed by a lower-paid, younger goalie this season:

Senators (Hammond), Wild (Dubnyk), Blackhawks (Darling/Raanta), Rangers (Talbot), Red Wings (Mrazek), Stars (Enroth), Avalanche (Pickard), Lightning (Vasilevskiy), Canucks (Lack).

That's almost 1/3 of the league. It's a fairly common scenario. Having a young, talented goalie doesn't make you special just because he outperforms a veteran. 

And if you look into the numbers, it's not even especially surprising that Lack is the better goalie right now. Miller's numbers are slightly lower than his career average, but that's to be expected considering that he's almost 35. Even last year, Lack's save percentage was higher than Miller's is this year, and Lack was a rookie - chances were good that it would improve. 

If you want to talk about controversy, then ask the Vancouver management why they paid $18m for a goalie who would very likely be posting 2nd-rate numbers within a year. They were practically asking for a new "controversy". That's not Willie Desjardins' problem. Desjardins, as the coach, whose job it is to ice the best possible team, should not give two s#!ts about who is *supposed* to be the starter, or who has the higher salary. His job is to play the goalie who gives him the best chance to win. 

If Miller gets upset about having to sit on the bench, then it's his fault for not playing better. He's an adult. He's a professional. He's making $6m/year regardless. 

"But Lack doesn't have playoff experience!" you whine. You know what, Canuck fans, we're not winning the Stanley Cup this year anyway. How about we give Lack playoff experience now, so that we don't have an inexperienced goalie in 2-3 years when we might actually be contenders?

"But Miller has more shutouts!" Yeah, and somehow Lack still has a better goals against average. Do you know what it says about a goalie with a low GAA and a low number of shutouts? Consistency. If you don't get a lot of shutouts while maintaining a low GAA, it means that you don't get blown-out very often. 

"But Miller has more wins!" Do you know how 'wins' work when attributed to goalies? It's the goalie-of-record when the winning goal in the game was scored. It doesn't really say much about a goaltenders actual ability. 

The article under which this tirade was unleashed had opined that Canucks players should brace themselves to "expect to be answering more questions about goalie controversies".

Here's a rhetorical question: Why does the media even ask the players those types of questions?

Want to know the answer to my rhetorical question?

The answer is that because it's not the players' job to have any idea about the goaltending future of the team. As such, they're only going to give vague, enigmatic answers that provide fuel for more exaggerated tales of "controversy". If the media was actually interested in answers, they'd just ask Linden and Benning. But then, if they did that, they might have to put actual work into their jobs.

Guide to the Regular Season Finale

I haven't contributed to this blog in months. But there was so much action today with so few playoff brackets determined that I needed to create a schedule of games to follow. Just as I was finishing it, I thought, "Hey, maybe others could benefit from my handy summaries of last-day games". 

So if you're feeling overwhelmed by the abundance of hockey today, here's a handy schedule for you. We even tell you which games to catch, and which to skip: 

12:30 PM

Ottawa at Philadelphia

Ottawa: If Ottawa gets at least one point, they make the playoffs. If they win, they have a chance to play the second-seeded Atlantic team (Montreal/Tampa Bay) in the first round instead of a division winner (Montreal/New York) depending on whether Detroit loses in regulation. If they lose, then they have a chance of missing the playoffs depending on whether Boston wins, and Pittsburgh picks up at least one point.

Overall Incentive to Win: High

Philadelphia: They’re not going to the playoffs, and they’re three points removed from the closest team in the standings. This is a meaningless game.

Overall Incentive to Win: None

Game Watchability: 9/10 – Ottawa’s working on a miracle run, and has a chance at punching out the Bruins. Even if Philadelphia isn’t into it, this game has major implications.

Rangers at Washington

New York: They’ve clinched 1^st in the league and are trying to stay rested for the playoffs.

Overall Incentive to Win: None

Washington: If they win, they secure home-ice advantage for the 1^st round. If they get one point, the Islanders can pass them with a non-shootout win. If they lose, the Islanders can pass them with any win.

Overall Incentive to Win: Medium

Game Watchability: 5/10 – Not the highest stakes, but Washington has been hot and a win could give them a major confidence boost heading into the playoffs – especially if it leads to home-ice advantage.

3:00 PM

Calgary at Winnipeg

Calgary: If they win, they have a chance at home-ice advantage for the 1^st round, as long as Vancouver loses in regulation.

Overall Incentive to Win: Medium

Winnipeg: They’re guaranteed to play the best team in the conference regardless of what happens.

Overall Incentive to Win: None

Game Watchability: 6/10 – Again, this isn’t the most meaningful game. But the Winnipeg crowd is already catching playoff fever, and we should get a good preview of the post-season atmosphere.

San Jose at Los Angeles

San Jose: They’re not going to the playoffs, and three other teams are close to them in the standings.

Overall Incentive to Win: Negative

Los Angeles: They’re not going to the playoffs, and only the Bruins (who are trying to win) are close to them in the standings.

Overall Incentive to Win: None

Game Watchability: 1/10 if you care about the standings. 10/10 if you want to listen to the commentators mask their disappointment for 2 hours.

Minnesota at St. Louis

Minnesota: If they win, they have a chance at playing Nashville in the 1^st round (instead of St. Louis/Anaheim) if Chicago loses in regulation. If they don’t, then they play St. Louis if Anaheim wins, which they almost certainly will.

Overall Incentive to Win: Medium

St. Louis: If they win, then they have a chance to play Winnipeg in the 1^st round if Anaheim loses, otherwise they play Minnesota. If they get one point, they still have a chance to play Winnipeg if Anaheim loses in regulation, otherwise they play Chicago if they lose in regulation or else Minnesota. If they lose in regulation, then they play Chicago if they lose in regulation or else Minnesota.

Overall Incentive to Win: Medium-High

Game Watchability: 8/10 – This game has the highest potential to be a 1^st-round matchup, though both will be playing to avoid each other. Either way, you’ve got a good match.

7:00 PM

Pittsburgh at Buffalo

Pittsburgh: If they win, they’ll make the playoffs. They’ll definitely be a wild-card team, but they could avoid the Rangers if Ottawa didn’t win earlier, or if Detroit loses in regulation. If they get one point, they could miss the playoffs if Ottawa got at least one point AND Boston wins before the shootout. If Boston doesn’t win before the shootout, then they’ll play the Rangers if Ottawa got at least one point. If they lose in regulation, then they’ll miss the playoffs if Boston wins; otherwise they’ll play the Rangers.

Overall Incentive to Win: Very High

Buffalo: They’ve clinched last place.

Overall Incentive to Win: None

Game Watchability: 7/10 – Despite being a very important game for Pittsburgh, it’s impossible for a game in Buffalo to be any higher than 7/10 in watchability.

Montreal at Toronto

Montreal: If they get at least one point, they win the division and play the higher wild-card team, also securing home-ice advantage for the first two rounds. If they lose in regulation, and Tampa Bay wins, they play the 3^rd place Atlantic team and are only guaranteed home-ice advantage in the first round. There isn’t much discrepancy between the 3^rd place Atlantic team and the higher wild-card team.

Overall Incentive to Win: Medium-low

Toronto: They’re not going to the playoffs, and they’re nowhere near anybody else in the standings.

Overall Incentive to Win: Zero

Game Watchability: 3/10; though the send-off from the Leaf fans could bump this up to 7/10.

New Jersey at Florida

New Jersey: Not going to the playoffs, and nowhere near anybody.

Overall Incentive to Win: Zero

Florida: Not going to the playoffs, and close to four other teams.

Overall Incentive to Win: Negative

Game Watchability: 0/10 – Watching this game will cut your time in Purgatory by six years.

Columbus at Islanders

Columbus: Not going to the playoffs, and close to three other teams.

Overall Incentive to Win: Negative

Brooklyn: If Washington won earlier, then this is a meaningless game. If Washington lost in regulation, then a win will get the home-ice advantage over Washington. If Washington picked up one point, then a non-shootout win will get the home-ice advantage.

Overall Incentive to Win: Zero to Medium

Game Watchability: 3/10 – That’s an average of 1/10 to 5/10 depending on the Washington result.

Detroit at Carolina

Detroit: A regulation loss could possibly result in a first-round matchup against the Rangers. Otherwise, they’ll either finish 3^rd in the Atlantic or the higher wild-card spot. One of those teams faces Tampa Bay and the other faces Montreal, but it’s not yet determined which. Detroit’s not at home either way.

Overall Incentive to Win: Low

Carolina: No playoffs. No close teams.

Overall Incentive to Win: Zero

Game Watchability: 2/10 – Remember when these teams met in the Stanley Cup Final? Me neither.

7:30 PM

Boston at Tampa Bay

Boston: If they lose in any fashion, they miss the playoffs. If Ottawa lost in regulation earlier, then a win in any fashion will make the playoffs. If Ottawa didn’t lose in regulation, then they need to win and hope that Pittsburgh loses. If Pittsburgh picks up a point, then they need to win before the shootout.

Overall Incentive to Win: Extremely high

Tampa Bay: A win will take top spot in the Atlantic if Montreal loses in regulation. There likely won’t be much difference in which team they play, but they’ll get home ice advantage in the first two rounds. However, they have a huge revenge opportunity as it was only four years ago that Boston beat them in a Game 7 Overtime in the Eastern Finals.

Overall Incentive to Win: High, if only to play spoiler to Boston.

Game Watchability: 10/10 – LA missing the playoffs was great, but Boston missing would be legendary.

8:00 PM

Nashville at Dallas

Nashville: They’ve secured 2^nd seed in the Central and aren’t going anywhere.

Overall Incentive to Win: Zero

Dallas: They’re not going to the playoffs, and they’ve got two teams nearby.

Overall Incentive to Win: Negative

Game Watchability: 1/10 – The best games are over, and the rest of the night isn’t much better.

9:00 PM

Chicago at Colorado

Chicago: If Minnesota won earlier, then one point will be the difference between playing Nashville and playing St. Louis in the first round. If Minnesota lost, then they’ll play Nashville for sure.

Overall Incentive to Win: Zero to Low

Colorado: No playoffs. Three teams close by.

Overall Incentive to Win: Negative

Game Watchability: 3/10 – These are entertaining teams, so they’ll give us a game. But in terms of playoff implications, this is much more of a dud than it should’ve been.

Anaheim at Arizona

Anaheim: They look at how many points St. Louis picked up in their game. If they can match that number, then they play Winnipeg in the first round. If they can’t, then they play Minnesota in the first round.

Overall Incentive to Win: Zero to Medium

Arizona: They lost the tank-battle to Buffalo and are just playing out the season.

Overall Incentive to Win: Zero

Game Watchability: 4/10 – There’s not a lot of suspense towards the outcome of this game, nor are playoff implications particularly high, but it’s one of the best versus one of the worst – so at least a shellacking is in order, right?

10:00 PM

Edmonton at Vancouver

Edmonton: Just playing for pride…I guess…

Overall Incentive to Win: Zero

Vancouver: If Calgary won earlier, then they need a point for home-ice advantage in the first round. Otherwise, this is just a pregame skate before the playoffs.

Overall Incentive to Win: Zero to Medium

Game Watchability: 3/10 – By this point, you’ll have been watching hockey for 10+ hours. Even as a Canucks fan, I’ll probably call it a night.