Puckspeak: Brent Johnson
Q: Do you agree with Boston's Tim Thomas that goalies in their 30s have advantages that younger ones don't?
A: I would agree with Tim 100 percent. Once you reach a certain age -- and I don't know what that was for me, but it was a few years ago -- you think you can get away with a lot more in the offseason. And you can't. A guy like Tim plays an awful lot more than I do, but for any goaltender, once you reach that maturity age, you know what you have to do in the offseason, and you almost know the game better. It's stuff you wouldn't think of when you're younger. It's not just making the saves anymore.
Q: What link do you see between your experience and the way you were able to handle the recent goaltender controversy?
A: I don't know what the linkage is, but there is one. Everything is linked in that way. I'm not always the best on life lessons or whatever, but it goes to maturity level and paying attention to everything you do and maybe realizing that playing is a privilege with all these young guys out there.
Q: What were you like as a younger goalie in terms of mental approach?
A: When I was in St. Louis (from 1998 to 2004), I really had no perception of anything possibly going wrong. I think I was living in a bubble. Everything would be, "You'll win a few games, you'll lose a few games, but you'll always be here." You were there already. You didn't have to work at it that hard -- at least you didn't realize it then. It doesn't come to you on a silver platter, and you don't realize that as a younger player.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.