Dan Cloutier

[Hobnobs]

Cloutier was a backup-calibre goalie who ended up with the opportunity to be the starter on an elite team for an extended period of time, and sunk that team's chances of legitimately contending for a Cup.

Was consistently a below-average starter but the team around him was strong enough that it could carry him to 30 wins and a strong GAA during the regular season despite his continually iffy save %. When the playoffs hit, he was completely exposed. His performances in 2002 and 2003 were some of the worst playoff goaltending in NHL history, especially his performance against Minnesota in '03 where he pretty much single-handedly threw away the series (and potentially a Cup for Vancouver) through his ghastly play.

Injury prone as well, which just added to the issues.

He was a great guy and a great teammate, and you had to love his passion ... which is probably why Burke (who could never evaluate goalies to save his life) and Crawford stuck with him for so long when it was obvious that the team couldn't win with him.

Always have to wonder what would have happened if Burke would have made a move for Khabibulin (who was holding out in Phoenix) instead of Cloutier back in 2000.

Osgood was miles better. In terms of ability, comparable to Brent Johnson, who also once produced nice-looking numbers behind a great team in the same era but was for the most part just a decent backup. Johnson just didn't get as long of a run as starter in St. Louis because their management weren't as blind as Vancouver's.

I wont blame Cloutier for all of the Canucks playoff fiascos. That team lacked so much depth. They had one offensive line and nothing else but four good d-men.

Näslund - Morrison - Bertuzzi
Sedin - Sedin - Klatt
Cooke - Linden - Ruuttu
May - Chubarov - Letowski

Jovanovski - Öhlund
Sopel - Salo
Baron - Malik

Cloutier
Auld

 

[tony d]

The guy had talent but then Lidstrom scored on him from centre ice and that prevented him from getting any better.

 

[seventieslord]

I wont blame Cloutier for all of the Canucks playoff fiascos.

No. But blame him for allowing a lot of goals on not very many shots. Creating a tied series where there was once a two-game lead, and creating in-game deficits that would have taken miracles to overcome.

 

[Bougieman]

For the most part I think Canucks fans remember Cloutier being worse than he actually was. For a while there (I believe it was a 2 or 3 year period), he won more games than any goalie in the NHL, and that wasn't JUST because he had the west coast express on his team -- as many Canucks fans will tell you. He wasn't an all-star or anything, but he was a servicable, middle of the pack, number one goalie with enough talent to keep his job for a number of years. To call him anything else is simply exaggerating his faults and failures.

We had a LOT of far worse goalies on the Canucks in the time between Kirk McLean leaving and Luongo coming in, I can you that.

I mean, HELLO:
-Bob Essensa
-Corey Schwab
-Kevin Weekes
-Petr Skudra
-Johan Hedberg
-Corey Hirsch
-Tyler Moss
-Mika Noronen
-Maxime Oulette

And you never hear nearly as much about how bad they were. Maybe you would if they had a made a single you-tubeable mistake that was as well remembered as the Lidstrom goal from center ice.

 

[MS]

For the most part I think Canucks fans remember Cloutier being worse than he actually was. For a while there (I believe it was a 2 or 3 year period), he won more games than any goalie in the NHL, and that wasn't JUST because he had the west coast express on his team -- as many Canucks fans will tell you. He wasn't an all-star or anything, but he was a servicable, middle of the pack, number one goalie with enough talent to keep his job for a number of years. To call him anything else is simply exaggerating his faults and failures.

No, that's pretty much exactly why he won so many games.

We heard all this crap at the time - 'he doesn't suck, he has 3 STRAIGHT 30 WIN SEASONS!!!'.

Then he got hurt, and guess what? Career backup Alex Auld won 30 games too.

Hockey history is loaded with backup-calibre goalies who won 30+ games behind a good team. Brent Johnson is one I mentioned before.

Cloutier was a below-average starter. He produced below-average numbers. He was terrible in the playoffs. He outright cost the team a chance to win the Cup in 2003.

We had a LOT of far worse goalies on the Canucks in the time between Kirk McLean leaving and Luongo coming in, I can you that.

I mean, HELLO:
-Bob Essensa
-Corey Schwab
-Kevin Weekes
-Petr Skudra
-Johan Hedberg
-Corey Hirsch
-Tyler Moss
-Mika Noronen
-Maxime Oulette

And you never hear nearly as much about how bad they were. Maybe you would if they had a made a single you-tubeable mistake that was as well remembered as the Lidstrom goal from center ice.

Those guys were all signed to be backups or were minor-league fill-in types. That's why nobody complains about them - they were signed to fill a role where they were expected to be bad, or mediocre at best. Cloutier was signed (and paid) to be a quality NHL starting netminder.

Of course Cloutier was better than those guys. He wasn't AHL-calibre. But that doesn't mean he was a quality NHL starter, either.

 

[Hobnobs]

For the most part I think Canucks fans remember Cloutier being worse than he actually was. For a while there (I believe it was a 2 or 3 year period), he won more games than any goalie in the NHL, and that wasn't JUST because he had the west coast express on his team -- as many Canucks fans will tell you. He wasn't an all-star or anything, but he was a servicable, middle of the pack, number one goalie with enough talent to keep his job for a number of years. To call him anything else is simply exaggerating his faults and failures.

We had a LOT of far worse goalies on the Canucks in the time between Kirk McLean leaving and Luongo coming in, I can you that.

I mean, HELLO:
-Bob Essensa
-Corey Schwab
-Kevin Weekes
-Petr Skudra
-Johan Hedberg
-Corey Hirsch
-Tyler Moss
-Mika Noronen
-Maxime Oulette

And you never hear nearly as much about how bad they were. Maybe you would if they had a made a single you-tubeable mistake that was as well remembered as the Lidstrom goal from center ice.

I would take Essensa, Weekes and Hedberg over Cloutier anytime.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

I would take Essensa, Weekes and Hedberg over Cloutier anytime.

i disagree about weekes, but essensa and hedberg both visibly outplayed cloutier in the years they were together. noronen probably would have had he been given more than a one game audition.

 

[seventieslord]

I would take Essensa, Weekes and Hedberg over Cloutier anytime.

All three of them definitely had their moments over Cloutier. Essensa with four top-10s in sv% I'd take over Cloutier for sure. Weekes had a couple better regular seasons than he ever had. and Hedberg had that one great playoff (one more than Cloutier) and a good long career as an above average backup.

Essensa is AA draft material, Weekes and Hedberg somewhere even further down, and Cloutier behind them.

 

[Jumptheshark]

Dan Cloutier as a player always intersted me, but I did not get to see him much since he was out of the NHL when I was nine. What are people's opinions on him?

Love the fact the nucks got two second rounders for him(I think)

 

[Royal Canuck]

He was a pretty poor goalie in my opinion. Technically, he seemed to have a fair amount of holes. To me, he looked to be clearly trained before the "goalie revolution" that seemed to occur in the mid-90's when goaltending really started to evolve into what we see today...unfortunately for Cloutier he got "pre-1994" (just to assign a year to it, it could be '95 or '96, doesn't matter) but emerged in the NHL post-1994.

He was able to hold the fort in the regular season for some of those really good Vancouver teams, but when it got down to brass tacks and good teams got to him in a seven game series, Cloutier was taken to task...Lidstrom's famous center ice goal on Cloutier sums up his playoff resume rather well, in my opinion.

I'm not sure, talent-wise, how much different he was than Chris Osgood actually. I wonder if he could have been dragged along for the ride by Lidstrom and a strong cast just as Osgood was for all these years...

But even when (more accurately, especially when) he was putting up decent regular season numbers, I was not sold on him being anything more than an average NHL goalie at his best.

But I'm sure opinions will vary...

Plus he had a short temper and could really fight.

But yeah, you covered it all pretty well.

 

[Royal Canuck]

For the most part I think Canucks fans remember Cloutier being worse than he actually was. For a while there (I believe it was a 2 or 3 year period), he won more games than any goalie in the NHL, and that wasn't JUST because he had the west coast express on his team -- as many Canucks fans will tell you. He wasn't an all-star or anything, but he was a servicable, middle of the pack, number one goalie with enough talent to keep his job for a number of years. To call him anything else is simply exaggerating his faults and failures.

We had a LOT of far worse goalies on the Canucks in the time between Kirk McLean leaving and Luongo coming in, I can you that.

I mean, HELLO:
-Bob Essensa
-Corey Schwab
-Kevin Weekes
-Petr Skudra
-Johan Hedberg
-Corey Hirsch
-Tyler Moss
-Mika Noronen
-Maxime Oulette

And you never hear nearly as much about how bad they were. Maybe you would if they had a made a single you-tubeable mistake that was as well remembered as the Lidstrom goal from center ice.

You forgot Sean Burke, Felix Potvin and Arturs Irbe.

 

[IComeInPeace]

As an avid 'Nucks fans, I'd like to say I think Cloutier was largely a scapegoat for the failure of those teams to accomplish anything in the playoffs.

Those teams were built to fail in the playoffs. A one line team with barely a hint of a 2nd line. Further, at a time when tight defence prevailed (esp in the playoffs) those 'Nucks teams were prone to HUGE defensive lapses giving up odd man rushes like they were the 80's era Oilers teams. The Oilers could win that way because of all their firepower. The Canucks could not.

Cloutier's goal from center ice via Lidstrom is overrated. A horrific goal, but if your team is so mentally fragile that one goal can cause you to collapse, you're not very strong mentally, and you are going to find a way to collapse sooner or later anyways. If it's not a bad goal, it will be a bad call, an injury...

Those Canucks teams were fun to follow after a run of putrid hockey. They were the prototype for a playoff team built to choke though. Was Cloutier part of the problem? Yes, for sure. (I agree he appeared to be mentally weak, but, just like the rest of his team appeared to be).
How many guys on that team played their best hockey in the playoffs. Naslund was horrific in the playoffs. He became nothing more than a PP specialist. Morrison failed to elevate his game at all, and he too was only truly effective on the PP come playoff time. A prime Bertuzzi brought a great playoff attiutude, but when he wasn't getting the calls, man he was easy to frustrate. Another sign of the mental weakness that seemed to be the defining trait of those teams.

One line teams generally accomplish nothing in the playoffs. One line teams playing against a team that plays stifling defence is a recipe for a playoff 'choke'. The goalie is the easiest guy to point the finger at, but I'd suggest if you put either of Luongo or Schneider b/w the pipes on those teams the result would have ultimately been the same. Maybe we win a few more games, but we still never get a sniff playing careless defensive hockey in the height of the trap era.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

As an avid 'Nucks fans, I'd like to say I think Cloutier was largely a scapegoat for the failure of those teams to accomplish anything in the playoffs.

Those teams were built to fail in the playoffs. A one line team with barely a hint of a 2nd line. Further, at a time when tight defence prevailed (esp in the playoffs) those 'Nucks teams were prone to HUGE defensive lapses giving up odd man rushes like they were the 80's era Oilers teams. The Oilers could win that way because of all their firepower. The Canucks could not.

Cloutier's goal from center ice via Lidstrom is overrated. A horrific goal, but if your team is so mentally fragile that one goal can cause you to collapse, you're not very strong mentally, and you are going to find a way to collapse sooner or later anyways. If it's not a bad goal, it will be a bad call, an injury...

Those Canucks teams were fun to follow after a run of putrid hockey. They were the prototype for a playoff team built to choke though. Was Cloutier part of the problem? Yes, for sure. (I agree he appeared to be mentally weak, but, just like the rest of his team appeared to be).
How many guys on that team played their best hockey in the playoffs. Naslund was horrific in the playoffs. He became nothing more than a PP specialist. Morrison failed to elevate his game at all, and he too was only truly effective on the PP come playoff time. A prime Bertuzzi brought a great playoff attiutude, but when he wasn't getting the calls, man he was easy to frustrate. Another sign of the mental weakness that seemed to be the defining trait of those teams.

One line teams generally accomplish nothing in the playoffs. One line teams playing against a team that plays stifling defence is a recipe for a playoff 'choke'. The goalie is the easiest guy to point the finger at, but I'd suggest if you put either of Luongo or Schneider b/w the pipes on those teams the result would have ultimately been the same. Maybe we win a few more games, but we still never get a sniff playing careless defensive hockey in the height of the trap era.

totally agree. not that cloutier wasn't bad and sometimes completely awful, but it's very easy for naslund/bertuzzi apologists to point to cloutier for their lack of success.

some very knowledgable posters on HOH have suggested that with a good goalie, that canucks team could have gone to the finals. unless that good goalie was roy or brodeur or '03 giguere, i don't think there's any way that happens. that team was extremely flawed in many respects outside of cloutier's crease.

 

[darkhorse686]

I'm finding the Osgood-Cloutier comparison very interesting. What no one has mentioned is that Osgood himself gave up a horrible center ice goal in the '98 WC semi, an OT winner for the Stars. Unlike Cloutier, Osgood clearly dismissed his howler; he shut out the Stars in the next game and the Wings go on to win a second straight cup.

Cloutier faltered because he was unable to deal with bad incidents like the Lidstrom goal.

 

[Edge]

Some excellent points here that I agree with.

1. He was a goalie designed to play in the 1980s or even the early 90s. However, by the time he made it to the pros, there was a clear shift in how goalies needed to play and what traits they needed to have. It's why so many of those goalies from the 93-96 draft classes went bust, they were caught in a transition period. Some adjusted, many did not.

2. He never quite put it all together. It seemed like a general lack of concentration, but the reality is that he really wasn't developed as well as he should've been. He went from being used sparringly as a rookie backup in NY, to being thrust into a starting role in Tampa during. In hindsight, a slower phasing-in period probably would have been better.

3. Injuries and other problems absolutely killed his career. When your body starts breaking down in your 20s, it's usually not a sign of a long career.

Still, there was always something about Cloutier I really liked. He could've been more successful on a team that hid his flaws better, but he ideally a very good backup on a top team.

 

[jkrx]

totally agree. not that cloutier wasn't bad and sometimes completely awful, but it's very easy for naslund/bertuzzi apologists to point to cloutier for their lack of success.

some very knowledgable posters on HOH have suggested that with a good goalie, that canucks team could have gone to the finals. unless that good goalie was roy or brodeur or '03 giguere, i don't think there's any way that happens. that team was extremely flawed in many respects outside of cloutier's crease.

I agree, Canucks problems were deeper than just the goalie. People seem to point that Cloutier couldn't handle letting Lidströms shot in but truth is that the whole canucks team crumbled.

 

[MS]

totally agree. not that cloutier wasn't bad and sometimes completely awful, but it's very easy for naslund/bertuzzi apologists to point to cloutier for their lack of success.

some very knowledgable posters on HOH have suggested that with a good goalie, that canucks team could have gone to the finals. unless that good goalie was roy or brodeur or '03 giguere, i don't think there's any way that happens. that team was extremely flawed in many respects outside of cloutier's crease.

Disagree with this entirely.

The Canucks were up 3-1 in the 2nd round vs. Minnesota, and the only game they lost was Game 2 - which was the result of a poor goaltending performance from Cloutier in a game Vancouver dominated.

Then Cloutier basically threw the series away in the last 3 games. 2 of the 3 losses were directly his fault, especially the game 7 debacle.

With an average goaltending performance, the Canucks are in the 3rd round against the powerhouse 2003 Anaheim Mighty Ducks. They would have been the odds-on favourite to win that series, and go to the Finals.

There was a clear road for that team in 2003, and the goaltending crashed the bus.

 

[begbeee]

Canucks vs. Devils in 2003 would be interesting.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Disagree with this entirely.

The Canucks were up 3-1 in the 2nd round vs. Minnesota, and the only game they lost was Game 2 - which was the result of a poor goaltending performance from Cloutier in a game Vancouver dominated.

Then Cloutier basically threw the series away in the last 3 games. 2 of the 3 losses were directly his fault, especially the game 7 debacle.

With an average goaltending performance, the Canucks are in the 3rd round against the powerhouse 2003 Anaheim Mighty Ducks. They would have been the odds-on favourite to win that series, and go to the Finals.

There was a clear road for that team in 2003, and the goaltending crashed the bus.

i'm not saying cloutier didn't suck. i'm just saying that if cloutier didn't suck, i still don't think those '03 canucks make it to the third round, let alone the finals.

it's the same question with luongo's '11 finals meltdowns. yeah, he melted down in three games, and wasn't very good in game 7 either. but those guys didn't have enough left in the tank to beat the bruins even if luongo hadn't melted down. they scored 8 goals in 7 games.

that's the way i feel about games 5-7 against minnesota. game 5: 1 assist by naslund, 0 points by bertuzzi. game 6: 1 assist by naslund, 0 points by bertuzzi. game 7: 0 points by naslund, 1 goal by bertuzzi. the team as a whole scored 5 goals in those 3 games. even against a jacques lemaire team, that's not going to be enough.

and being that the '03 ducks beat far far far better teams in detroit and dallas, i don't see a one line team where that one line is a crunch-time non-factor winning against giguere playing completely out of his mind.

Canucks vs. Devils in 2003 would be interesting.

scott stevens vs. bertuzzi? scott niedermayer playing the best hockey of his life vs. a team with no forecheckers outside of cooke and ruutu? markus naslund vs. martin brodeur with something on the line?

 

[BigGoalBrad]

Average goalie.

In terms of fighting ability might have been one of the toughest and best. It was reputed that he could have fought and won against plenty of skaters. Remember a Rangers-Isles game on Fox where he tried to fight the Isles bench!

 

[MS]

i'm not saying cloutier didn't suck. i'm just saying that if cloutier didn't suck, i still don't think those '03 canucks make it to the third round, let alone the finals.

it's the same question with luongo's '11 finals meltdowns. yeah, he melted down in three games, and wasn't very good in game 7 either. but those guys didn't have enough left in the tank to beat the bruins even if luongo hadn't melted down. they scored 8 goals in 7 games.

that's the way i feel about games 5-7 against minnesota. game 5: 1 assist by naslund, 0 points by bertuzzi. game 6: 1 assist by naslund, 0 points by bertuzzi. game 7: 0 points by naslund, 1 goal by bertuzzi. the team as a whole scored 5 goals in those 3 games. even against a jacques lemaire team, that's not going to be enough.

In Game 7, Vancouver was ahead 2-1 going into the 3rd period, and limited Minnesota to 6 shots with the series on the line. Cloutier let 3 of those 6 shots in, including an unscreened effort from the blueline.

That was a goaltending loss, pure and simple. Vancouver carried the play, was the better team, was leading after 2 periods. Then their goalie shat the bed and couldn't stop a beachball.

Same in Game 2 - that game might have been the best game the WCE-era Canucks ever played. Outshot Minnesota 31-16, outchanced them something like 18-5, out-hit them by a wide margin, just generally dominated. And Cloutier just puked the game away.

Cloutier tossed up an .855 save % in that series, and the Canucks were still leading after 2 periods in game 7. They should never have lost, and with average goaltending would have been in the Conference Finals.

In the playoffs, you need to be able to win 2-1 games where your stars don't get points against good defensive teams. Cloutier made that impossible.

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

... oh?. 10,000 Maniacs wreaking havoc on the streets of downtown Vancouver might beg to differ. Any random Canucks fan might challenge your assertion. However, Hawks & Bruins fans Im sure would agree with you. Trade Schneider, keep Louie, long-term.

You are downright wrong in every aspect of your comment here, at least to this Canucks fan. That said, I wasn't one of those rioting jag-offs either.

As for Luongo melt-downs vs. Cloutier melt-downs...Cloutier's are bigger but Luongo's are more dramatic. In terms of sheer, WTF we should have won that game game 7 vs. Minnesota is up there. There was a contested effort by the team and like MS said the Canucks were taking it to the Wild and then Cloutier blew up.

I'm sure he's a nice guy and I hate to see him get boo'ed at Nazzy's jersey retirement but man, just frustrating to think back to that Minny series and Detroit series which I think is the reason fans give more malice to him than he deserves.