Joe LaCour writes:
>> Hauser -- he wins the 2002 Scott Clemmenson award (kudos to J. Michael
Neal
>> who predicted this award).  Never (at least since 4/2001) has a much
>> maligned goalie won so much doing so little.  One goal was nice (#1) ,
one
>> goal was UGLY (#3) and one was an oops (#2).   I am tempted to venture
that
>> Minnesota won in spite of the goaltender, not because of him.

Erik Biever replied:
>That's stretching it a bit far.  Hauser was not stellar, yet he made 42
saves
>in the national championship game.  That was sufficient to give the team a
>chance to win.  Adam got the job done.  Give it a rest.

Adam didn't have the best game, nor the worst.  The oops #2 goal was
actually a deflection from the replay, and that is what made him miss it,
not a glaring mistake on his part.  Maybe another goalie would have stopped
it, I don't know.  He did give up a bad goal for the #3, and I'm sure he
would have been a goat had the 3-2 Maine lead held up to the end of the
game.

As Erik says, though, he did enough to give his team a chance to win, and
they did.  So he is a championship goaltender, despite ups and downs over
his career.

And if the way Scott Clemmensen played goaltender in March/April is the
model for "won so much doing so little", then I'll take that every time.
Sure he had a good team, sometimes great team in front of him, and they did
a lot to protect him.  But his record in playoffs was 15-1 in Hockey East
(3 championships), and 10-3 in NCAA (4 Frozen Fours, 3 title games, 1
championship.)  He was 2.11 GAA and .915 save pct in HE playoffs, 1.98 GAA
and .930 save pct. in NCAA, both better than his overall career stats
(though not a lot better than his junior/senior season stats, where he
played much better than his first 2 years.)

You can say, and I have been told this before, that he could have won 2 or
3 NCAA titles if he had been a better goaltender.  I don't know if that is
true or not, and there is no way to tell.  He was not spectacular, and as a
standup-style keeper with height he had issues with certain types of shots
when he started.  But all goaltenders have their weaknesses, and some
improve and some do not.  Scott improved a great deal in his 4 years, and
was rewarded with a title.  There have been others who were consistently
lauded as much better goaltenders, yet they did not win the big games, or
not often enough.  Folks often talk about statistics as not being true
indicators of how a player or a team played; that "it all comes down to
winning."  Well, based on that standard, Scott Clemmensen was one of the
all-time best at winning tournament games, and frankly, most people who
criticized him (and continue to do so) haven't given him his due.

In Hauser's case, as Erik said, he made 42 saves, so he had to do some
work.  He also played well for most of the game against Michigan in the
semi-final.  I'll give him his due for this set of games, and admire him
for his abilities.  Is he the best?  Far from it.  But he is a winner.  And
there are 59 other Div I teams who wish they could say the same this year.

-- Rick M