You folks all know I've been around this franchise since 1974 when I was seven-years-old and went to my first game in Springfield, MA.
In all those years, I've written a *lot* of stuff about the WhalerCanes, on the ice and off, some of it for money, a lot of it for free, and about all of it worthless. These last few weeks I've fallen down a rabbit hole of old hockey highlights on YouTube and something hit me like an absolute ton of bricks. It's nothing new, we all know it. We say stuff like "organizational blind spot" and "we can always improve," but I don't think anything we've ever said even begins to understand the depth of the issue.
In nearly 50 seasons of hockey going back to 1972-73 ... it's *always* been about goaltending.
I know, I know, not exactly rocket science, and it's *always* always been about goaltending for every team. But this is totally unique, and I dare anyone to prove any differently. I don't think any team in any sport has ever ignored a critical position as much as we've done with our goaltending position for nearly 50 years.
I knew the Whalers of the early-80s were terrible. I went to a lot of the games. I remember the scores. I remember their record. They were 21-41-18 in 1981-82. There's no possible spin for that. Except that I just watched nearly all of two games from that season, at TOR (John Garrett in net) and vs. PHI (Greg Millen). They lost 7-4 (scoring two late garbage goals to make it look closer than it was) and 5-2 (with an empty-netter against), respectively.
But here's the thing. They were *very good* in both games. Shockingly so. They moved the puck quickly and with precision. They crashed the net. They were fast and responsible defensively. Way better than I remembered them. It's just that every single shot against went in. And on the off-chance the goalies stopped the first chance, their rebound control was atrocious. Garrett in particular would get benched in my kid's league if he kicked out rebounds like he did in this game. Millen was the up-and-coming, 24-year-old stud that season, playing 55 games and posting a .872 sv. pct. and a -0.62 goals saved above average.
The next season was an absolute disaster. Most people -- including myself -- pinned the 19-54-7 record on what was then the worst trade in franchise history, sending Mark Howe to PHI for Risto Siltanen and Greg Adams. And yeah, that hurt. But the offense added Mark Johnson and got a full season of the blossoming Ron Francis, and Siltanen wasn't *that* bad. But Millen -- in 60 games -- had an .863 sv. pct. and a ludicrous -26.25 GSAA. Again, in watching another game against Philly from this season, they flat-out looked like the better team *until* Philly put a shot on net.
Anyhow, it occurred to me that, if anything, I'd been *understating* the WhalerCanes lack of goaltending during their entire existence. It's beyond possible that the entire franchise history of failure is really all about the goalies. All the articles, all the analysis, two of the worst trades in NHL history, all the GMs and coaches and owners, the move from Hartford. It all comes down to one thing: We've never had a goalie.
I know Mike Liut was great in 1986-87, we won the division and he was second in the Vezina voting (and third in the Hart), and Cam had a great 2008-09 (finishing seventh in the Vezina voting). But that's it, in terms of elite goaltending. Two one-off seasons.
I know this isn't exactly breaking new ground, but I think the takeaway here isn't that we've never had consistently good goaltending, it's how good this franchise has been *with the exception of goaltending* from the beginning. My entire childhood has been rocked. Instead of joking about how the Whalers sucked when I was growing up, I'm wondering how good they could have been if they only had Patrick Roy, or Mike Richter, or even Liut for his entire career, instead of 3 1/2 seasons in his 30s.