Are Elliott and Leclaire the worst Senators goalie tandem ever?
When this season started, most assumed that goaltending would be the least of the Senators' worries. Brian Elliott had played solid (though unspectacular) hockey last year for the Senators, and Pascal Leclaire was prematurely labeled the best goaltender in Ottawa Senators history by Pierre McGuire, a statement that was often repeated before this season began. Why Senators fans listened to Pierre is beyond me, although it likely stems from that burning desire for a true franchise goaltender, something the Senators have never had for an entire season.
Unfortunately, neither Pascal Leclaire nor Brian Elliott is that franchise goalie, or at least not yet. Here are their stats, including where they ranked in the league for save percentage on the season:
| Name | GP | GAA | SV% (Rank) |
| Leclaire | 26 | 3.07 | .890 (47) |
| Elliott | 26 | 2.91 | .893 (45) |
Those stats aren't just mediocre, they're flat out terrible. The only goalies with worse save percentages than Leclaire or Elliott are Steve Mason (46th) and Vesa Toskala (48th).
Looking at NHL.com's stats page, there hasn't been a goalie tandem in Ottawa Senators' history that comes close to posting such bad stats. The worst insult around these parts is to call a goaltender's play Gerber-esque, but it pains me to say that even Martin Gerber never had as poor of numbers as these two goalies.
For comparison's sake, here are the other worst goaltending performances in Ottawa since the 97-98 season (I've only included those with save percentages worse than .900):
| Name (Season) | GP | GAA | SV% (Rank) |
| Martin Gerber (2008-09) | 14 | 2.86 | .899 (33) |
| Ray Emery (2007-08) | 31 | 3.13 | .890 (43) |
| Ron Tugnutt (1999-2000) | 44 | 2.54 | .899 (18) |
Obviously, it's hard to compare pre-lockout goalie stats with those post-lockout, but sinking below the .900 level is a sure sign of a poor year for a goalie, and a team can't survive if both keepers are below that line. In no other year have both main keepers been below .900, and usually there's one who was above .910. The only comparable season to the current is 1999-2000, where Patrick Lalime posted a 2.33 GAA and .905 SV% the same season that Tugnutt fell under .900. Yet in that season, Tugnutt and Lalime were 18th and 22nd in league SV%, not near the bottom feeding that Leclaire and Elliott are currently doing.
To answer the question I posed in the title: I don't believe they are, but they are certainly playing like it. Both Elliott and Leclaire have the talent to perform much better than they are, yet their mental focus is highly questionable and the Ottawa Senators defence are making their numbers even worse than they should be. However, no amount of excuses can justify the frequency of soft goals currently allowed by these two.
If Ottawa wants to hold on to its current playoff spot (they're tied for 8th in the East), then goaltending is something that will have to improve. If it doesn't, one will have to assume that Bryan Murray will either have to make a move, or goalie coach Eli Wilson will be headed out of town after failing to keep any of the team's goaltenders performing at acceptable levels in the past few seasons. (After writing this article, but before it was posted, Eli Wilson was fired).
0 recs |
10 comments
|
Comments
They are definitely playing like the worst Senators goalies in recent history
But come on… Daniel Berthiaume?
by Peter Raaymakers on Jan 14, 2010 11:12 AM EST reply actions
Ya I agree that focus and intensity is a big thing here. Elliott is more even-keeled in this regard (but probably still lacking) and Leclaire seems to ebb and flow with his.
I think Leclaire has the skill to play at an elevated level, similar to the stretch he had before he broke his face. Compared to Gerber I’d say Leclaire’s bad goals are more a result of laziness/lack of focus as opposed to the bad positioning/technique/awkwardness that plagued Gerber. But in the end the guy is a pro, he has to be self-motivating and no amount of goalie coaches can help him with that.
Cannot play with 'em, cannot win with 'em, cannot coach with 'em. Cant do it.
Defence?
You did mention it at the end, but the big elephant in the room here is defence. Lalime and company were blessed with a stellar defence, whereas our dynamic duo this year has been cursed with a sub-par, injury ridden D. I believe this more than explains the stats. And now it looks like the lack of support on and off the ice is taking it’s toll. These guys look rattled. I hope they can pull out of it with our with out the support of their defense, fans and media. Otherwise Ottawa will have confirmed its growing “goalie killer” rep. Killing coaches is one thing, but when good players don’t want to come to town or have to be over-paid to do so, we’ve got big problems folks…
I agree
If our goaltenders were the only weak point for this team, I’d be happy to point the finger at them. But the fact is, the ENTIRE team is struggling right now (be it due to injuries or poor defensive play, whatever). Sure, our goaltenders are struggling, but so is everyone else. These guys are skilled, and I don’t doubt that they’ll pull through it and be the goaltenders we know they can be. They’re both young and have a lot to learn. It certainly doesn’t help when they get shit on every time the TEAM plays like crap. Give it some time.
I’ve long debated the Leclaire choice. Was Murray right to make that trade? I’m of two minds:
1) Sure. You’re a small market team, you need a new starting G, you’re looking at a relatively limited field of UFAs, and some big market players (Toronto, Philly) are looking to open their wallets to do the same. If there’s no one in the system and no hope of competing financially, what do you do? Murray saw an opporunity to make a salary-neutral move and get a pick along with it, and he took it. Considering the circumstances, it made sense.
2) Absolutely not. Any of Roloson, Anderson, Biron, Legace, Fernandez and more could have been had for next to nothing. And while they probably would not have been the answer, they would have been cheaper and couldn’t be playing much worse than Leclaire is now. If Murray had been patient he could have signed one of them for about $1M a year. Instead he opted for a goalie that, in terms of contract, prior success and playoff experience is just like Gerber, the guy he let go. Except now it’s for another couple of seasons, and for even more money, and he has injury problems.
In fact, come to think of it, he could still go out and offer Fernandez a pro-rated one year contract at league minimum…
Having said all that, Leclaire has only played 20-some games after a lot of time off, so maybe it takes time to get rolling.
by Percussivepiano on Jan 14, 2010 3:21 PM EST reply actions
Easy easy
LeClaire kept us in quite a few games at the start of the season and was being hailed as having the potential to be our best goalie ever in franchise history!
Now we are ripping the guy to bits, he’s just come back from injury, as an AHL defence in front of him (exclu Philips and A-Train) and a team that is not generating any offence.
Yeah the last few weeks have been bad, but so as the D in front…..We will still make these playoffs, I wished the olympics started tomorrow to let the sens re-group.
I agree.
Not being able to score goals and a woeful defence puts huge pressure on Leclaire and Elliott. Not to mention Leclaire has struggled with injury which doesn’t help to get a rhythm going. I think once everyone is healthy we will be back to playing competitive hockey.
I don't think we're ripping him to shreds... opposing shooters are!
But seriously, I don’t think anyone here is giving up on the guy. I know I’m not. Sadly, though, the numbers don’t lie. As Oman and Kevin E point out above, some of the fault for those numbers lies with the defense as well.

by 



















