There Is No Goalie Controversy

by Joe @ MHH on Apr 28, 2008 11:05 AM MDT in News Comment 40 comments

There is no controversy. Jose Theodore has gone 28-36 (saves-shots) against Detroit. Peter Budaj has gone 39-40. Peter Budaj is clearly the better goalie at this moment and should start game 3, without a doubt.

And that is exactly why Coach Quenneville will do the opposite:

Quenneville said Jose Theodore will start Game 3 for Colorado. He has allowed eight goals on 36 shots. Peter Budaj has stopped 39-of-40 shots. But Theodore deserves another start, Quenneville said.
"He's our guy, and he had a good stretch for us. I think these extra couple days of rest are going to do wonders for him," Quenneville said.

Lest anyone forget, Coach Q is not a very good coach, and is most certainly the wrong one for the Colorado Avalanche. Just in case anyone had convinced themselves that maybe he was doing an okay job, shame on you.

There is a fine line between principled consistency and flat-out, floor-licking insanity. I just hope Theodore can find his Pimp Cane. He knows he left it somewhere.

0 recs | Comment 40 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

It not just in the goalie.

Q's ineptitude goes beyond playing a goalie with the FLU. It goes as far as playing the same 0 and 4 against the Wings that they played in the regular season. I thought Q was over this crap after the Minny series. If Foppa is out Q clamps the team down. Shoot me now.

Never trust the lunch lady.

by Hardshell_Taco_del_Lowayne on Apr 28, 2008 12:02 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

count me as one...

...of the people that was happy with Q's performance recently. Let's be fair, some of the major criticisms leveled at him were fixed:

Lines. He made few line changes, and when he did make them they were smart line changes (not earth shattering line explosions, and at the right time).

He picked a damn goalie. Nuff said.

They played more aggressively. He had them out looking for the first goal every game, not sitting back in a defensive shell to start.

And, in addition to fixing these issues, he called 2 brilliant timeouts that changed the course of the series.

But now? Well, the lines are still pretty decent and aren't being exploded completely in the face of injuries. And he's sticking to Theo, though he went too far with it.

Starting a sick goalie was a terrible idea though. Inexcusable. I'm not sure that starting Budaj would have meant the difference between winning and losing the first game...but it might have. Awful choice.

More than anything though, the major beef I have with him is that he's gone back to passive hockey in the face of team struggles with injury. It didn't work midseason, particularly against the wings, and it isn't working now. To not be able to see that a team like the wings FEEDS off of passive, trapping hockey is flat inexcusable.

so that's how I feel. It's a combo of 3 main factors:

Theo sick, not making big saves (coach decision)

Passive play (coach decision)

Stellar play by the Wings

2 of those fall on Q.

by thedoctor on Apr 28, 2008 12:47 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: count me as one...

Dude whatever. I think the blame for number 3 rests on Q's shoulders, too, since I'm a blogger and I don't need a reason.

by Joe @ MHH on Apr 28, 2008 12:57 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: count

I thought his coaching had been better recently. Not this series, but I still feel he out-coached Lemaire in the Wild series

by Jibblescribbits on Apr 28, 2008 1:29 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

yep

i agree, but he's getting 100% outcoached in this series.

by thedoctor on Apr 28, 2008 1:43 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Count

I've already gone on record as saying that Theodore should be Game 3 starter. I just haven't seen a convincing argument to the contrary. I know that Avs Nation only begrudgingly got behind Theodore because of how he was playing, and that any hiccup, no matter how small, would send them flying off that bandwagon. I'm fine with that - we just disagree about that particular thing.

But you are 100% correct that Theodore should not have started Game 1. There are well-documented instances in the past where a goalie has had a severe flu and performed out of his mind brilliantly. Patrick Roy comes to mind. But a couple exceptions here and there does not invalidate the rule that you don't start a sick player in the playoffs. Injured? Sure. If he says he can gut it out, fine. Sick? Never. You're risking him passing that on to everyone else.

That all said, what kind of Mickey Mouse operation doesn't require all their athletes to get flu shots before the season?

by Neptune on Apr 28, 2008 4:11 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Count

Not that a flu shot would have really helped this year...

http://www.ohio.com/news/18324369.html

by Joe @ MHH on Apr 28, 2008 5:08 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I didn't....

I didn't watch the 2nd game, but it's not like Budaj stood on his head in the first one. To be honest, as I was watching the game, I could have sworn he only had to stop 4 shots the whole game, that's how bad we started pressing the Wings. I have no idea who credited the Wings with 20 shots on Budaj, there's no way that happened. Well... maybe they were all from outside the zone, like dump-ins on goal or something (shots I could have even stopped). The point is, I saw Budaj make 4 saves in the first game, that's it. As for the 2nd game, I don't know if he really did have those 19 saves or not, I'll just assume he did. What I'm trying to say is that you can't use "Budaj has stopped 39 of 40 shots in this series" it's much more like "Budaj has stopped 23 of 24 shots in this series". I'm just apalled at the fact that they gave the Wings credit for putting 20 more shots on him in game 1. That's ludicrous.

Theodore was horrible in the games however, and I really don't see any reason to start him again. The 28 of 36 statistic, is not skewed in any way at all. It's just terrible, there's no excuse for that. I don't understand what Quenneville is doing. Either way though, if Forsberg doesn't play, we're most likely gonna lose.

by Mike the Avs Fan on Apr 28, 2008 1:00 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

Soccer fans the best, and worst, fans

From Deadspin:

a death threat in the form of a mysterious white powder toward Grant from the Chelsea faithful who continue to serenade him (Chelsea Coach Avram Grant) with "You Don't Have A Clue."

Ok the Death Threats---very very bad.

But If the Can breaks into a chorus of "You don't have a clue" for Quenneville on Tuesday I will consider this season a complete success even if the Avs are swept. (I tried to find it on YouTube, but no luck)

by Jibblescribbits on Apr 28, 2008 1:44 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

But

Would the media praise Avram Grant if Chelsea routed Arsenal or Manchester United soon?

by InYoFace on Apr 28, 2008 2:00 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Quenville and goalies

O.k. so I'm a Wings fan, let's get that out of the way. I just have to wonder about Q here. I know he is hard on goalies. I'm just wondering why he doesn't start Flanders on Tuesday? (I am personally fine with him leaving #60 in there but that is because I see that as an advantage to the Wings, I'm trying to talk rationally here). In Round 1 when it was clear that Hasek wasn't getting it done, Babcock made the switch to Osgood. I'm not comparing coaches or teams, I'm just wondering what does he have to lose by playing Budaj? Might it give the players a lift? Switching goalies is not always the answer, see Keenan, Mike for that one.

Probably a strange post from a Wings fan, just interested in people's thoughts. I know from the past that it is not wise to get too confident when leading 2-0 (see 1999, ouch.).

by hockeychic on Apr 28, 2008 2:42 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

Coach Q

I don't think any of us really know why he is making certain decisions. He has confused us all season.

All I can say is Jose better know what he is being given. Maybe we (Avs fans) should remind him that he is now playing for a contract. Sad, that money might be his best motivation.

by InYoFace on Apr 28, 2008 3:21 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

$

Has anyone lost more money in 2 games that Theodore? he can get it back by being brilliant and leading the Avs back, but if the Avs flame-out here Theo went from "Redeemed" to "inconsistant" in the span of 2 games. Probably not fair, considering he has been good this season, but that's the playoffs for you.

by Jibblescribbits on Apr 28, 2008 3:25 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

yeah

It feels like his new contract is dropping a million per loss.

by InYoFace on Apr 28, 2008 3:32 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: yeah

If being sick causes someone to have a couple bad games, and that in turn causes them to lose millions on their next contract with us, well, cool. We get the guy we were going to re-sign for a couple mil less than we were going to pay? That's a positive long-term.

by Neptune on Apr 28, 2008 4:05 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: yeah

As long as his performance returns to the level it has been since January, of course.

by Joe @ MHH on Apr 28, 2008 5:10 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

And

And why wouldn't it?

by Neptune on Apr 28, 2008 5:33 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: And

How am I supposed to know one way or the other? He was a great goalie and won the Hart, then got lousy, and now is pretty good again. He's been inconsistent over his career.

How do we know that the long-awaited meltdown we all (except maybe for a few true believers) have been expecting for a long time hasn't just happened?

There's no way to know for sure either way. He could be amazing next season, or he could be horrible. I won't pretend to predict the future.

by Joe @ MHH on Apr 28, 2008 6:48 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's not rocket science.

It's not rocket science. He was pretty consistent over the course of his career until he lost his confidence in Montreal. He was traded to Colorado and got jerked around by Quenneville and didn't regain his confidence until this year. He's been absolutely lights out since then. He got sick and played a couple of poor games as a result.

The whole idea of a "meltdown" is ridiculous. Unless you have some evidence that he's lost his confidence again, I don't see how you could argue that he won't continue playing at his present stellar form. He might fall back a little bit, as it would be extremely uncommon for a goalie to continue to play at the level at which he has been playing lately, but there's no evidence that a "meltdown" is going to occur.

Performance is a function of ability, motivation, effort and confidence. Once a player has shown the ability to do something, unless he has an injury that keeps him from being able to do it again, he has that ability until he hits his natural decline. Theodore is a long way from that decline stage, and he doesn't have a major injury (that we know about, anyway). He's never shown any hint of a lack of effort at any point in his career, so that's not an issue, nor is there any lack of motivation. For Theodore to have been so good for so long in Montreal of all places, on those awful teams, speaks volumes about his self-motivation.

The only issue is confidence. He had one major bout with confidence in his career, but as we know, he bounced back from that. He's still got Vezina ability. Theres no logical reason to assume he's going to fall back any time soon.

by Neptune on Apr 28, 2008 7:43 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: It's not rocket science.

Okay.

by Joe @ MHH on Apr 28, 2008 10:12 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

ahhhh-chooooo

Starting a sick goalie was a terrible idea though.

that's assuming you actually believe that BS that he was sick.

by PaulinMiamiBeach on Apr 28, 2008 3:03 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

just like

assuming the BS that you are intelligent?

by Bob in Boulder on Apr 28, 2008 4:13 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: just like

Don't feed the trolls.

by Joe @ MHH on Apr 28, 2008 5:10 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bash Q

Bash Q all you want. Please, really, do it. As much as possible. Call in the radio shows, write in to the newspapers. FG appears to the the first person in the history of the Avs organization who listens to the fans. I don't think he should, but he does. Voice your discontent with Q as loudly as possible. The inept SOB needs to go ASAP.

But this time, he's making the right call. You can't blame Theodore for either loss. The guy was sick. Theodore was balls out to get us here. He put the entire team on his back and carried them when nobody else was playing well. He's earned the right to a couple bad games without losing his starting job, especially when you consider that he was too sick to have been playing in the first place.

Theodore is the Avs' #1. You don't start your backup when your starter is healthy. Assuming Theodore is now healthy, it's a no-brainer. He starts.

Contrary to what our friends in the tacky red-and-white would have you believe, there are no parallels between this situation and Detroit's. Hasek has not been Detroit's #1 since the end of last year. Hasek is 54 years old and lost his first step five years ago. Osgood had taken his starting job long ago (which is scary if you're a Wings fan), and for Hasek to have been given the starting job to begin the playoffs was a mistake in the first place. Hasek stunk up the joint the entire first round. Theodore was lights out in the first round, got the flu, and had a couple bad games because of it.

Theodore is the starter. Thankfully, someone CC'ed Q on that memo.

by Neptune on Apr 28, 2008 4:02 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Bash Q

Your argument only makes sense if Theodore was sick in the second game as well. I've heard nothing to that effect. If you have a link or some other kind of reference, please share it. I may have missed it.

by Joe @ MHH on Apr 28, 2008 5:12 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Flu

I got the flu for the first time in my life this past winter. I had two really bad days where I felt worse than I ever had in my entire life, then a day where I felt like I was about 75%. I went out and ran some errands and the next day I was back to where I was before. Ended up taking a week and a half to get better.

If he had the flu, it didn't go away overnight.

by Neptune on Apr 28, 2008 5:35 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Flu

Right, "if" being the operative term. All anecdotes aside, I'd like to see a quote from him or the medical staff. Otherwise I can only speculate.

by Joe @ MHH on Apr 28, 2008 6:49 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well...

...I'd like to see a quote where he said he was 100% going into Game 2. Otherwise, Occam's Razor would indicate that he wasn't.

by Neptune on Apr 28, 2008 7:32 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Well...

Okay, except that I still don't know for sure and can only speculate.

by Joe @ MHH on Apr 28, 2008 10:13 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Guess we...

...have our answer now. He was sick for Game 2.

You should have a little bit of confidence in the guy. He's been lights out since Jan 1st.

by Neptune on Apr 29, 2008 12:31 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Guess we...

I know he's been great. I've been complimenting the hell out of him for four straight months.

by Joe @ MHH on Apr 29, 2008 12:42 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well,

Well, then have a little more confidence in him until he gives you a reason not to.

by Neptune on Apr 29, 2008 1:46 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Bash Q

I can understand why people still want Theo to start game 3 because he was sick in the first two games but i believe it's the wrong decision. If it was the regular season then i wouldn't have a problem with Theo starting a third game after being pulled in the first two but its the playoffs and were down 2-0 against a quality opponent. If Theo starts this game and has another shocker then we go down 3-0 and it's pretty much over. While Theo might play one of the best games of his career its still a pretty big risk IMO to play him when we have a good backup who can take his place and has stopped the Wings from scoring at will against us.

by Savage33 on Apr 28, 2008 5:15 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs