You don’t know what you’ve got until it’s gone


On Wednesday, one-time Edmonton Oilers starter Devan Dubnyk found himself on the move once again, joining his fifth NHL organization since the start of last season. Last year, he was so wretched that he ended up bouncing around; this season he’s been so good that his services are suddenly in demand.

And if not for Dubnyk’s history with Edmonton, one would think that the Oilers would be one of those teams interested in the goalie.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

Devan Dubnyk, Edmonton Oiler


Dubnyk was always (bizarrely) a controversial player in Edmonton. I’m not talking about the random people who crop up on the internet to complain that he lets in one softy per game, either; I’m talking about management. This is what general manager Craig MacTavish said in an availability in May 2013:

Devan, as I said last night to our season ticket holders, I’ve always believed with goaltending if you have to ask the question you really know the answer. I think the question is still very much out there whether Devan is a real legitimate number one goalie… [Devan] feels like he is a number one goalie, obviously, but there is a sense when you talk to Devan that he really realizes there is some significant growth for him, too. I think the question is still out there and I think Devan is trending in the right direction. What the feeling is and when he’s going to get there is another question, but it’s a position that we need to solidify and we’ll be working hard to do that.

That’s one example of a series of similar comments made publicly between April and June of 2013, and to this day it’s a comment that Oilers fans interpret differently. The view I hear most frequently is that it’s awfully silly of a general manager to go out in the summer and say publicly that he’s not convinced Goalie X is a No. 1 and then start the season with Goalie X in the No. 1 slot; it’s a view I happen to agree with, though I do think it’s excessive to say that MacTavish is to blame for undermining Dubnyk’s confidence and thereby wrecking him for 2013-14.

There are those out there who argue that because he wasn’t a lone starter (he was sharing the job with Nikolai Khabibulin) he never had to face the pressure of being a No. 1 and that he wilted when he was put in the role. There are others who think that Dubnyk was always a lousy goaltender and that the numbers never told the truth about him. I’m personally inclined to believe that Edmonton made some bad defensive tweaks in the fall of 2013 and corrected them too late to save Dubnyk.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

But all of those theories are just theories, things that haven’t been proven and shouldn’t be sold as fact. What is a fact is that for three seasons at the height of the Oilers’ rebuild Dubnyk delivered above-average goaltending for a terrible hockey team. If he let in a softy per game he must have been stopping an extra doozy to compensate for it because he’s been far-and-away the best goaltender on the team since Dwayne Roloson departed for greener (and more interested) pastures.

And Now?


On Wednesday, we talked about possible solutions to the Oilers’ goalie problems (the options out there really aren’t very pretty) and I mentioned in my preamble that I’d be inclined to hang on to Ben Scrivens for next season. The rationale I presented (he has a year left on his current deal and negligible trade value) was all correct but one point I didn’t press was Scriven’s long-term track record. He doesn’t have the same length of history that Dubnyk does, so it isn’t as solid, but it’s well worth noting that he’s been a much better goalie in previous years than he has been with Edmonton this season.

I don’t think it’s accurate to blame the Oilers’ defensive play for the struggles of Scrivens or Fasth this year; I say that because I’ve followed the scoring chances and seen the stinkers those goalies have allowed. Naturally, the reader’s mileage may vary there, and I’m open to being proven wrong on that. 

However, whatever the root cause of the problem, there have been countless examples of goalies with long track records having seasons that are either well above or well below their established level of ability, and unless age or serious injury is a factor in the vast majority of those cases that one season is an aberration before the goalie settles back into his regular level of performance.

After this season, I wouldn’t be confident going into an NHL campaign with Ben Scrivens as my starting goaltender. I am, however, confident that he’s a much better goalie than he’s shown this season and consequently think that it’s sensible to plug him into the backup job next year.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below


  • Ever the Optimist

    I have always thought that a contender has a very good goalie as part of there long term core group. We have some very good young forwards that would flourish elsewhere and if everyone is on the table would love to see an eberle or yakupov get moved for that young and talented goalie we could use for a decade.

    The thing is it will cost the moon and if we dont get a defense core that plays in front of him it will feel like an overpay.

  • Sean17

    He had a kid in the off season before his horrible year in Edmonton. I have a 9-month old at home and am often sleep deprived. At my job, I might forget to call somebody back. At Dubnyk’s job he let in soft goals.

  • Sean17

    The best teams live and die by the draft. Too much of our team is made up of very expensive free agents or trade for parts players. Dubynk and Petry are recent examples of good work developing NHL players from the draft only to have other teams benefit from the investment. In both cases it seems like we are going turn a home grown NHL asset into something less valuable.

    • Sean17

      You are right about live and die by the draft, however I thump the chest on player development with respect to Dubnyk because of the nonsense he went through when he turned pro.

  • Sean17

    For Pouliet’s second goal, if Scrivens had let it in it would have been hailed as a soft goal. All goalies let in soft goals. Most teams can recover from them. Oiler’s can’t.

    99 goals for. 149 goals against. In 27 of their 44 games they have scored 2 or less goals. (-50)

    Compare to Calgary. 123 goals for. 114 goals against. 21 of their 43 games they scored 2 or less goals. And they’re not even a good team. +9.

    Sure the goaltending has not been great but once they get their offense clicking and their defense working, I’m sure the goaltending will come around.

    • Tikkanese

      The irony here is Everyone on this team would be better with a change of scenery. The problem never was Dubnyk or Souray, or … but the creators of scenery. Until the scenery here in Edmonton changes everyone will look better with a change of scenery. The price of hiring Eakins and his swarm was confusion and Dubnyks loss. People grow and get better when the scenery is good. The fact that we have replaced our goal-tending coach tells me that this whole system is a mess. the only bright light I know of for sure is Todd N.

  • pkam

    Did any of you catch the death stare Scrivens doled out after the first goal last night (where Schultz – yet again – waved his stick in Stamkos’ general direction)?

    How many goals have Oiler goalies let in while Schultz is on the ice? I’m not good with the new stats, but he’s minus 8 and has 18 points (5 on PP) so does that mean 21 goals on his watch? This, with an inordinate amount of offensive zone starts? It would be interesting to see how much worse that is than the league average “defenceman”, but I suspect its pretty bad.

    Point being, with actual NHL defenceman I’m sure both Duby and Scrivens would be good enough. Corey Crawford or Jimmy Howard or a host of other “good enough” guys around the league would also be good enough here if we gave them some help. Until that happens it would take Dominik Hasek to make a difference.

  • pkam

    The Oilers plan to raise ticket prices?
    Didn’t Target just fold up and leave Canada b/c it had done such a bad job?
    Who would pay more to be subjected to unwatchably bad hockey?
    Does nobody in Edmonton have self esteem?