Minnesota Wild should be bold with using Alex Stalock in over-time

A very interesting idea is floating around on Twitter and in the media, particularly pertaining to the usage of the Minnesota Wild goaltending duo; mainly pertaining to Alex Stalock’s ice-time.

The gist of the idea, as described by Judd Zulgad on 1500 ESPN, is that you bring Alex Stalock off the Minnesota Wild bench for over-time periods, even if Devan Dubnyk has started and held the team in the game until that point.

It’s bold though, given teams typically view a backup goalie as just that. They don’t normally see ice-time unless it’s a lesser opponent, the second of two back-to-back games or if the starter is performing poorly enough to be pulled.

To institute such a bold shift in thinking, you need a coaching staff that is willing to adapt and adjust with the times. Thing is, for the Minnesota Wild, I don’t see Bruce Boudreau as that cutting-edge, liberal-thinking type coach.

I see him as a bit of an archetype of the old-school mentality of ‘work hard and win on stamina and work rate alone’, skill be damned.

Alex Stalock, in the win over Tampa Bay, was a difference-maker in limiting the Lightning’s potent offensive talents from finding the net, but also with his aggressive offense.

More from Editorials

• Another Stanley Cup Final comes with the Minnesota Wild watching. When will that change?
• Story remains the same: Minnesota Wild flame out in first round
• Believe it or not: Minnesota Wild backs are against the wall, again
• The Minnesota Wild are in the postseason again. Is this the year they can make a run?
• Wild vs. Kings: Where does Minnesota go from here?

Not only did he push far out from the net, limiting angles and almost acting as a fourth man on the 3-on-3 overtime, but he also dished a pass on the game-winning goal.

He is exactly the sort of goalie I could see netting a much-vaunted ‘goalie goal’, based on his ability to saucer the pass up ice.

Obviously a lot of rules have been put in place around a goaltenders’ ability to be too involved in the play, courtesy of guys like Martin Brodeur and their impact historically as puck playing net-minders.

However, there is still a margin there whereby someone like Alex Stalock can dish the goods for the Minnesota Wild.

You’ll see arguments for and against the concept. A goalie shouldn’t come into over-time cold. Why wouldn’t you stick with a hot goalie? It’s unfair to credit a win to a goalie that sees less than five minutes’ game-time. Why fix what’s not broken?

Realistically though, every single point counts for something come season end.

One extra point gained in overtime by making a bold move such as switching goalie at the end of sixty, could be the difference between a wild-card spot or not.

Play Devan Dubnyk to his strengths; low-risk goaltending and he’ll get you through the sixty. Play Alex Stalock to his strengths; making bold plays aggressively in over-time.

It may not always work out, but it’s a risky play that I think could end up favouring the brave.

I’m all for pushing forward with a new way of thinking; making your goaltending a partnership and not a number one, number two.

After all, it’s not unusual to roll four forward lines; why shouldn’t it be a thing to roll both your goaltending options in a game.