Jovo trade?

[Fred]

I have to say although Cooke offers some intangibles and his agent told any one with a pair of ears he would put up better numbers, I have my doubts if he will ever justify a greater salary than Sedins's, Linden, Carter, Salo and a few more Hey even the boards favourite player Allen, is he worth 2 Allens I can't see it

[MinnesotaCanuck]

I am a Lalime fan, but his game 7 meltdown against the Leafs last season was the biggest goaltender choke in recent memory.

For the record, Lalime's career stats read as follows:
Regular season: 331 games, 169-117 W-L, 2.42 GAA, .908 Sv%, 33 SO
Playoffs: 41 games, 21-20 W-L, 1.77 GAA, .930 Sv%, 5 SO
Lalime's play-off stats are weighted heavily by a very successful run by the team in 2001-02, where he accumulated 4 SO in 12 games.

Cloutier's career stats:
Regular season: 314 games, 128-123 W-L, 2.66 GAA, .902 Sv%, 15 SO
Playoffs: 22 games, 9-12 W-L, 3.43 GAA, .866 Sv%, 0 SO
Cloutier's play-off numbers appeared to be taking a turn last season prior to injury. He only played in 2+ games.

I would say that, based on the numbers, Cloutier should have made approximately $2.3M, which is a $200k gaffe by the front office. Probably not the difference between retaining Jovo or seeing him leave, but still a sizable error.

Tantalum-

Without reengaging our famous goalie arguments, let me point out that Cloutier is the most criticized player on the team without question. I do not see him getting unconditional support from the fans. It's probably about 50:50.

[tantalum]

Lalime's play-off stats are weighted heavily by a very successful run by the team in 2001-02, where he accumulated 4 SO in 12 games.

Not completely true. His worst year was his first playoff year. His other were actually pretty darn good.

2000-1 2.39 GAA, 0.899
2001-2 1.39 GAA, 0.945
2002-3 1.82, 0.924
2003-4 1.96, 0.906

If Cloutier had those type of stats in the playoffs the canucks have a couple of final four births i think.

I would say that, based on the numbers, Cloutier should have made approximately $2.3M, which is a $200k gaffe by the front office.

No it's a 400k gaff because he siad he would accept $2.1 mil or his qualifier. As well Lalime isn't the only comparable. He is the most expensive comparable but other goaltenders with 30 win (or near 30 win) season with average stats, no awards or award consideration, with little playoff experience or playoff failures exist. Lalime is the highest paid of those guys. Many of the other make considerably less. Not only did Nonis give an unnecessary 400k raise and an unwarranted extra year there were cheaper options available that he probably could have had. Does that 400k mean losing Jovo? Well it very much depends but there is certainly a difference in being able to offer the same $4 mil he is making now and being able to offer a 10 % raise to $4.4 mil. But my point wasn't really that type of thing is preventing Jovo from getting re-signed. it was more that Cloutier was overpaid.

Why? Well I'm not completly convinced Jovo will be hard to re-sign if he takes a critical look at salaries around the league. There are also only 6 Dmen paid more or the same (Leetch, Aucoin, foote, Neidermayer, Rafalski and Zubov) as Jovanovski in the NHL. All UFA contracts from the past couple of years. Does jovo demand more than Aucoin ($4 mil), or Leetch ($4 mil) or Foote ($4.6 mil) or Zubov ($4 mil) or Rafalski ($4.2 mil)...I honestly think that somewhere around what he is making now is pretty much what he will demand on the open market. Unless of course he wins or is a finalist for the Norris which i don't find likely.

Without reengaging our famous goalie arguments, let me point out that Cloutier is the most criticized player on the team without question. I do not see him getting unconditional support from the fans. It's probably about 50:50.

Only recently. And while that may be true of fans I was particularily talking about management running Lalime out of town while canucks management rewards injury, average regular season play and mediocre playoff play with unnecessary raises and extra years.

[MinnesotaCanuck]

Touche on the management point. I agree with almost everything you said.

I believe (although I have no evidence to support it) that the Nucks were trying to show support of Cloutier by signing him to the deal. The way I see it, these were their options:

1) Sign a free agent goalie. Short of letting Cooke, Morrison, and/or Naslund leave, they could not afford to sign a "better" goalie (i.e.-Khabibulin). They might have been able to save money on a relatively unproven guy (Thibault, Prusek, Markkanen), but they wouldn't gain much to offset the loss in continuity. A couple of experienced guys were also available (Osgood, Burke, Joseph, Hasek), but I don't think they would have added much to the team (except maybe CuJo, $900k).

2) Trade for a goalie. Again, those viscous Luongo rumors. Maybe also Belfour? I don't see any options here that wouldn't have crippled part(s) of the lineup.

3) Resign Dan.

Assume, for the sake of my argument, that resigning Dan is the least of all evils...

Signing Dan to a one-year deal would be like telling him he needs to win the Conference Championship to stay with the team. I don't think the team wanted to put him in that position. He is not the type of goalie who will steal you a lot of wins, so why put undo pressure on him all year. The team needs a guy who is solid, not necessarily spectacular. Try to get him to play with some confidence.

If the best way to optimize his play was to show support in him, I think the team was well justified to offer him the raise. I can't guarantee that Nonis went through this thought process, but it seems like one of few logical explanations.

Looking forward to your response, Tant.

[tantalum]

Touche on the management point. I agree with almost everything you said.

1) Sign a free agent goalie. Short of letting Cooke, Morrison, and/or Naslund leave, they could not afford to sign a "better" goalie (i.e.-Khabibulin). They might have been able to save money on a relatively unproven guy (Thibault, Prusek, Markkanen), but they wouldn't gain much to offset the loss in continuity. A couple of experienced guys were also available (Osgood, Burke, Joseph, Hasek), but I don't think they would have added much to the team (except maybe CuJo, $900k).

This was the way i would have went as I mentioned when the offseason began. My thoughts are if you can receive the same goaltending in the regular season, have the same question marks (injury and/or playoff play) why not do it for one million less? That allows the team to upgrade the third pairing for example which is a sore spot.

2) Trade for a goalie. Again, those viscous Luongo rumors. Maybe also Belfour? I don't see any options here that wouldn't have crippled part(s) of the lineup.

For trade it would be along the same lines as point 1...find this years Kiprusoff. Of course it takes luck to find that, however, there are second stringers begging for a chance to become starter that can be had for cheap. And while Garon hasn't been good (about as good as Cloutier in all honesty), Gerber after a rough couple of games has performed well in his action this year (I know Ward is technically the starter right now but based on his recent play and age that will change IMO). Those were the guys I was interested in...the Noronen's, Toskala's,Garon's and Gerber's of the league. I thought it was very much time to roll the dice on a cheaper option with the same question marks because quite frankly this team has not needed spectacular goaltending in the regular season to get to the playoffs. There is a good chance that some of these goaltenders come playoff time will be able to turn their game up a notch or atleast keep it where it is. The other possibility was perhaps Martin biron...a guy of similar age, similar salary but who hasn't had the playoff chances to fall on his face. A guy who doesn't have the baggage that Cloutier carries. Like it or not If Cloutier's numbers continue to be at the bottom of the list people are going to start putting pressure on him (media, fans etc..) and he hasn't responded real well to those things in the past.

3) Resign Dan.

Assume, for the sake of my argument, that resigning Dan is the least of all evils...

Signing Dan to a one-year deal would be like telling him he needs to win the Conference Championship to stay with the team. I don't think the team wanted to put him in that position. He is not the type of goalie who will steal you a lot of wins, so why put undo pressure on him all year. The team needs a guy who is solid, not necessarily spectacular. Try to get him to play with some confidence.

If the best way to optimize his play was to show support in him, I think the team was well justified to offer him the raise. I can't guarantee that Nonis went through this thought process, but it seems like one of few logical explanations.

I disagree. If you have to coddle your starting goaltender and handle him with gloves and give him an extra year to get him to perform, you are not going to the conference finals with him between the pipes. If your goaltender doesn't have the mental fortitude or ability to step it up and have a career year when on a last chance one year deal you should be looking for a different goaltender. Based on his play and history (injuries, playoffs) the vote of confidence came when they qualified him and didn't trade him....many teams wouldn't have qualified him or if they did they would have tried to move him (like Chicago did with Thibault and Ottawa did with Lalime).