Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

Defense = Major Cause of So-called Luongo Breakdowns


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
323 replies to this topic

#271 D-Money

D-Money

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,779 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 20 June 2012 - 12:23 PM

Well, I didn't know those were the numbers, so, yes. It reveals to me that Ccory has better numbers in not only a small sample, but in a large sample as well. That tells me that if we're going to attribute Luongo's so called meltdowns to poor defense, we have to attribute Scheider's 1-4 play-off record to poor defense as well.

Does that make me a sheep?


In his last three playoff games, Schneider didn't let in more than a single goal in regulation. Conversely, in Luongo's last three playoff games, he's let in 4, 3, and 3.

The one before that, he let in 3 as well... ...in 8:35.

Edited by D-Money, 20 June 2012 - 12:23 PM.

Posted Image

#272 GradinToSmyl

GradinToSmyl

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 12

Posted 20 June 2012 - 12:34 PM

In his last three playoff games, Schneider didn't let in more than a single goal in regulation. Conversely, in Luongo's last three playoff games, he's let in 4, 3, and 3.

The one before that, he let in 3 as well... ...in 8:35.


So we should get Quick?
After a few days here, I am surprised half of you got the anti-bot question correct to register for this site.

#273 canacks1970

canacks1970

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,611 posts
  • Joined: 05-March 06

Posted 20 June 2012 - 12:34 PM

Seriously? Are you seriously saying that those basic stats have actually informed you of something new?

Schneider is 1-4 in playoff action. Revealing!?




One and four? Really do the math! He didn't lose in Chicago it was tied. Yes it wasn't Cory best game but considering he hasn't played in over a month and still kept the team in the game. Let see how long it took Loungo to get his game in gear. A month!!! Actually Cory playoff record is 1-2-1. What more do you want for a guy who came into an elimination situation for the last three games and let in a total of 4 goals! I guess we should expect Cory to score goals too.
What some people tend to forget is that when Loungo first came, the team played a defensive system. What choice did A.V have back then. We had an aging core group in offense ,and basically two thirds of our line were filled in with plugged players. Two year later we heard that Luongo was burnted out with no reliable back up .And AV should be fired because he's plays a trap system .
In comes Cory and with a little tweek here and there and the emergance of the Sedins, Burrows and Kesler and hello we opened up the game abit ,Became one of top offense teams in the league.We even had people saying we have a well rested Loungo who finally has a back up to push him. Now were blaming the Defense? Maybe its that Loungo isn't as good when his team in front of him doesn't play a defense first system. And if they do ,they blame the coach for boring hockey.

Edited by canacks1970, 20 June 2012 - 12:56 PM.


#274 GradinToSmyl

GradinToSmyl

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 12

Posted 20 June 2012 - 12:38 PM

In his last three playoff games, Schneider didn't let in more than a single goal in regulation. Conversely, in Luongo's last three playoff games, he's let in 4, 3, and 3.

The one before that, he let in 3 as well... ...in 8:35.


Lundqvist is awesome!!
After a few days here, I am surprised half of you got the anti-bot question correct to register for this site.

#275 GradinToSmyl

GradinToSmyl

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 12

Posted 20 June 2012 - 12:43 PM

One and four? Really do the math! He didn't lose in Chicago it was tied. Actually its 1-2-1. What more do you want for a guy who came into an elimination situation for the last three games and let in a total of 4 goals! I guess we shold expect Cory to score goals too.


What? 1-2-1? Did we get a single point for the OT loss? Man, the NHL is really screwing with your head.

You need to read the following: I love Schneider and want him as our starter. But your moronic attempts at reasoning need to stop. Why not defend Luongo in the SCF, was he supposed to score goals? We won 2 games by shutout. We set a modern day record for futility.

1-3, 1-4, whatever. If Schneider wasn't setting up Hawks goals we would have won that game, so he gets the loss from me. Luongo was the better of the 2 that night.

You disappeared in the sv% conversation, did the Lundqvist numbers change your mind on what's important? (BTW, the real answer in WINNING)
After a few days here, I am surprised half of you got the anti-bot question correct to register for this site.

#276 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,122 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 20 June 2012 - 01:24 PM

You have the neutral posters and the biased idiots for or against Luongo (you know who you are).

You guys continue to argue like you're going to change each others opinions on Roberto.
Posted Image

#277 Vansicle

Vansicle

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,584 posts
  • Joined: 24-August 09

Posted 20 June 2012 - 01:53 PM

In his last three playoff games, Schneider didn't let in more than a single goal in regulation. Conversely, in Luongo's last three playoff games, he's let in 4, 3, and 3.

The one before that, he let in 3 as well... ...in 8:35.

I'm with you. I am 100% on the same page.

Snake Doctor, on 23 May 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:snapback.png

Miller is not on our list. It's Lack as our #1. There is no reason we would have traded both Schnieder and Luongo if we never intended to give Lack the #1 starting job.  Furthermore, the salary and term Miller is looking for is not in our favor.

 


#278 Gumballthechewy

Gumballthechewy

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,905 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 20 June 2012 - 02:00 PM

I think you need to think before replying. Rather than just respond to my rather sarcastic response, try to grasp the context. There is a group of dimwitted (or maybe just really young) fans on this site that are convinced on something that doesn't actually exist.


Ha ha, well then sorry, I didn't know you were being sarcastic, it's hard to tell on the internet sometimes.

I just hate how people are trying to pin this years playoffs of either goalie, it's been the terrible offense and it was like that nearly all year, how many games did we win in OT/shootouts? Too many to count...

Some people on this team need a smack and told to pull their head outta their a**! *cough*Kesler*cough*

Don't take anything I say seriously! EVER!


#279 Vansicle

Vansicle

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,584 posts
  • Joined: 24-August 09

Posted 20 June 2012 - 02:00 PM

You have the neutral posters and the biased idiots for or against Luongo (you know who you are).

You guys continue to argue like you're going to change each others opinions on Roberto.

Well, I would hesitate to call anyone biased for or against an idiot*, as there are varying degrees of bias - I, for one - am biased against Luongo - but I think you are absolutely correct in saying no-one is going to change anyone's mind.
Hopefully some kind of agreement can be achieved, wherein either Luongo or Schneider are moved for the supposed piece(s) that will come back to make this team a genuine SC contender soon, so these bratish name calling, back biting arguments can end.
And I say this knowing full well that at one point or another I have stooped to the same tactics. It's been a while, though, since I've done it, and in all honesty I feel stupid for having done it.

*And what I mean by that is, anyone but those who are so completely biased either way that they cannot accept any logical, rational, or reasonable statement from those they are in disagreement with.

Edited by Vansicle, 20 June 2012 - 02:07 PM.

Snake Doctor, on 23 May 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:snapback.png

Miller is not on our list. It's Lack as our #1. There is no reason we would have traded both Schnieder and Luongo if we never intended to give Lack the #1 starting job.  Furthermore, the salary and term Miller is looking for is not in our favor.

 


#280 Vansicle

Vansicle

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,584 posts
  • Joined: 24-August 09

Posted 20 June 2012 - 02:01 PM

Hug and make up?

That would imply that one or both of us was actually mad. You mad?

Snake Doctor, on 23 May 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:snapback.png

Miller is not on our list. It's Lack as our #1. There is no reason we would have traded both Schnieder and Luongo if we never intended to give Lack the #1 starting job.  Furthermore, the salary and term Miller is looking for is not in our favor.

 


#281 Moonshinefe

Moonshinefe

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,039 posts
  • Joined: 15-March 11

Posted 20 June 2012 - 02:06 PM

You have the neutral posters and the biased idiots for or against Luongo (you know who you are).

You guys continue to argue like you're going to change each others opinions on Roberto.


And you continue to visit these forums and complain. Both seem awfully pointless but at least the people you described are having a little fun doing it.

Edited by Moonshinefe, 20 June 2012 - 02:06 PM.


#282 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,122 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 20 June 2012 - 02:38 PM

And you continue to visit these forums and complain. Both seem awfully pointless but at least the people you described are having a little fun doing it.


That's right, I do continue to visit. But complain? That wasn't even close to a complaint
Posted Image

#283 GradinToSmyl

GradinToSmyl

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 12

Posted 20 June 2012 - 02:46 PM

That would imply that one or both of us was actually mad. You mad?


I just have something in my eye.
After a few days here, I am surprised half of you got the anti-bot question correct to register for this site.

#284 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,122 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 20 June 2012 - 02:51 PM

Well, I would hesitate to call anyone biased for or against an idiot*, as there are varying degrees of bias - I, for one - am biased against Luongo - but I think you are absolutely correct in saying no-one is going to change anyone's mind.
Hopefully some kind of agreement can be achieved, wherein either Luongo or Schneider are moved for the supposed piece(s) that will come back to make this team a genuine SC contender soon, so these bratish name calling, back biting arguments can end.
And I say this knowing full well that at one point or another I have stooped to the same tactics. It's been a while, though, since I've done it, and in all honesty I feel stupid for having done it.

*And what I mean by that is, anyone but those who are so completely biased either way that they cannot accept any logical, rational, or reasonable statement from those they are in disagreement with.


Well, there are certainly a few people here that are that wont accept any logical, rational or reasonable statement from those they are in disagreement with. Those people are biased without a doubt. Especially those that refer to him as a 'grease ball' and etc. Nobody should take seriously what those people say because it is biased right off the bat. Plus, you already know what they're going to say without even reading their post. A lot of the crap here I disregard because it is biased. And it's not just this thread, but in past threads about Luongo, other current threads and undoubtedly future threads about him.

I would also call it biased when people blame him as the major factor for the Canucks last two series defeats. I've seen that here and in other threads. They'll will completely ignore the fact that the defense was sloppy at times, he was left out to dry at times as well, special teams sucked and the biggest fact of all is that this team has averaged a whopping 1.33G/G over the last 12 playoff games -- most of the team didn't play up to par. And we're actually blaming Luongo as the biggest contributor to our defeats? Yeah, he deserves some blame and he sure as hell wasn't as good as he needed to be at times but he deserves no more blame than anyone else. But again, stupid fans just look at the score sheet and go 'Geez, Luongo is the reason why we lost'.

So, perhaps they aren't intentionally biased, but just stupid in general when it comes to hockey. I mean, you're either biased, or just stupid, or both. Take your pick. It's one or the other quite frankly.
Posted Image

#285 GradinToSmyl

GradinToSmyl

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 12

Posted 20 June 2012 - 02:52 PM

Ha ha, well then sorry, I didn't know you were being sarcastic, it's hard to tell on the internet sometimes.

I just hate how people are trying to pin this years playoffs of either goalie, it's been the terrible offense and it was like that nearly all year, how many games did we win in OT/shootouts? Too many to count...

Some people on this team need a smack and told to pull their head outta their a**! *cough*Kesler*cough*


It is easiest for some to pick one side and then cherry pick useless stats to convince themselves they are right.

Kesler will get a free pass for 2 more years because he had 1 great series. Take that one away and Markus Naslund looks like Conn Smythe candidate compared to him. Outside of the Nashville series, Kesler has 4 goals in in 46 playoff games. But some still consider him untradeable.
After a few days here, I am surprised half of you got the anti-bot question correct to register for this site.

#286 ABurrows14

ABurrows14

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 418 posts
  • Joined: 25-May 12

Posted 20 June 2012 - 03:12 PM

Well, there are certainly a few people here that are that wont accept any logical, rational or reasonable statement from those they are in disagreement with. Those people are biased without a doubt. Especially those that refer to him as a 'grease ball' and etc. Nobody should take seriously what those people say because it is biased right off the bat. Plus, you already know what they're going to say without even reading their post. A lot of the crap here I disregard because it is biased. And it's not just this thread, but in past threads about Luongo, other current threads and undoubtedly future threads about him.

I would also call it biased when people blame him as the major factor for the Canucks last two series defeats. I've seen that here and in other threads. They'll will completely ignore the fact that the defense was sloppy at times, he was left out to dry at times as well, special teams sucked and the biggest fact of all is that this team has averaged a whopping 1.33G/G over the last 12 playoff games -- most of the team didn't play up to par. And we're actually blaming Luongo as the biggest contributor to our defeats? Yeah, he deserves some blame and he sure as hell wasn't as good as he needed to be at times but he deserves no more blame than anyone else. But again, stupid fans just look at the score sheet and go 'Geez, Luongo is the reason why we lost'.

So, perhaps they aren't intentionally biased, but just stupid in general when it comes to hockey. I mean, you're either biased, or just stupid, or both. Take your pick. It's one or the other quite frankly.

Well, there are certainly a few people here that are that wont accept any logical, rational or reasonable statement from those they are in disagreement with. Those people are biased without a doubt. Especially those that refer to him as a 'grease ball' and etc. Nobody should take seriously what those people say because it is biased right off the bat. Plus, you already know what they're going to say without even reading their post. A lot of the crap here I disregard because it is biased. And it's not just this thread, but in past threads about Luongo, other current threads and undoubtedly future threads about him.

I would also call it biased when people blame him as the major factor for the Canucks last two series defeats. I've seen that here and in other threads. They'll will completely ignore the fact that the defense was sloppy at times, he was left out to dry at times as well, special teams sucked and the biggest fact of all is that this team has averaged a whopping 1.33G/G over the last 12 playoff games -- most of the team didn't play up to par. And we're actually blaming Luongo as the biggest contributor to our defeats? Yeah, he deserves some blame and he sure as hell wasn't as good as he needed to be at times but he deserves no more blame than anyone else. But again, stupid fans just look at the score sheet and go 'Geez, Luongo is the reason why we lost'.

So, perhaps they aren't intentionally biased, but just stupid in general when it comes to hockey. I mean, you're either biased, or just stupid, or both. Take your pick. It's one or the other quite frankly.


No one is blaming Lou for the Loss vs LA, just that Schnieds is now outplaying him, better goalie and cheaper. On the way up vs. on the plateau/way down.

As for the Finals, momentum matters in sports, mental parts are often just as important as physical if not more. Lou has repeatedly broken down and turning point moments in playoff series in the last 3 years. Key moments that impact the psyche of the team and the players in front of him. If you've played competitive hockey you'd understand what the difference belief in your goalie to make a big save makes vs. being worried. If people want to argue that the nucks play different in front of Schnieds vs Lou, look no deeper than that comment.

Players will never say it out loud, they will never not support a guy publicly. But when a goalie repeatedly can't make a save WHEN the team needs it, and instead folds they lose faith in him. He showed it vs. Chicago two years in a row, Boston on and on.

Game four in the SCF was the turning point in the series. It was the defining moment of Lou's career. AV went back with him after his disaster in game three. He had to find a way to keep the team in the game and more importantly just not let in a softy.

The first goal in that game was a breakaway between the five hole. Ok, breakaway, adv shooter so no blame. The next goal and I remember it vividly, was a shot by ryder, a floater from above the left circle because he had no options, a throw at the net play. No screen, not a hard shot, Lou goes down and its in the net. The team deflated, the opposition gained momentum and the rout was on. Series changed.

Game seven, first goal, knuckleball, lucky bounce. Again, turning point moment, needs to keep the team in. The rat Marchand pulls a wrap around that Lou chirped Thomas about. The team sunk. I was there, I could see heads drop on the bench. And it was the first period.

Why? Because:

1. Lou repeated drained/sapped the team from not making saves when he HAD to and often not tough ones.
2. They knew (canucks) the other guy does do that (makes the saves).

Boston knew they had won the cup in the first period, and so did the Canucks and everyone watching. Why? Because on the other side was a guy who just doesn't collapse mentally. He will hold his team in the game. Boston played confident, we played defeated from that moment on.

So you see a erratic goaltender plays in the heads of both your own team and the opposition. Just as a guy who makes the big save does.

Erratic
Own team -worry, play tight, deflates
Opposition- gain momemtum, confidence

Make the big saves
Own Team, confident, gain momemtun
Opposition- get in their heads, frustrations etc (Quick, Thomas, Roy, Hasek, Brodeur)

It is not bias. It is fact.

Edited by ABurrows14, 20 June 2012 - 03:14 PM.


#287 Vansicle

Vansicle

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,584 posts
  • Joined: 24-August 09

Posted 20 June 2012 - 03:57 PM

So, perhaps they aren't intentionally biased, but just stupid in general when it comes to hockey. I mean, you're either biased, or just stupid, or both. Take your pick. It's one or the other quite frankly.

Don't get me wrong. There is a mountain of bias. I just meant that not everyone who is biased is an idiot. that's all. It's all in how you present your position and wheather or not you are able to look at the situation as objectivily as you can knowing you are biased.
Well put, btw.

Snake Doctor, on 23 May 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:snapback.png

Miller is not on our list. It's Lack as our #1. There is no reason we would have traded both Schnieder and Luongo if we never intended to give Lack the #1 starting job.  Furthermore, the salary and term Miller is looking for is not in our favor.

 


#288 Vansicle

Vansicle

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,584 posts
  • Joined: 24-August 09

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:00 PM

But again, stupid fans just look at the score sheet and go 'Geez, Luongo is the reason why we lost'.

A big reason why I think stats can be complete bull$irt.
They do come in handy, though, often, and almost never outright "lie".


And see Aburrows14's post above mine to see why so many give so much blame to Lou in losing. I agree with his assessment, and I think I am far from stupid.

Edited by Vansicle, 20 June 2012 - 04:01 PM.

Snake Doctor, on 23 May 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:snapback.png

Miller is not on our list. It's Lack as our #1. There is no reason we would have traded both Schnieder and Luongo if we never intended to give Lack the #1 starting job.  Furthermore, the salary and term Miller is looking for is not in our favor.

 


#289 canacks1970

canacks1970

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,611 posts
  • Joined: 05-March 06

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:14 PM

What? 1-2-1? Did we get a single point for the OT loss? Man, the NHL is really screwing with your head.

You need to read the following: I love Schneider and want him as our starter. But your moronic attempts at reasoning need to stop. Why not defend Luongo in the SCF, was he supposed to score goals? We won 2 games by shutout. We set a modern day record for futility.

1-3, 1-4, whatever. If Schneider wasn't setting up Hawks goals we would have won that game, so he gets the loss from me. Luongo was the better of the 2 that night.

You disappeared in the sv% conversation, did the Lundqvist numbers change your mind on what's important? (BTW, the real answer in WINNING)



Well I didn't realized that leaving a playoff game tied is considered a loss. Calling me moronic? Well after reading some of your threads seems to me your making an moronic attempt of defending Luongo. Are we finish calling names now.
I didn't realized there was a save percentage conversation. Actually I didn't realized you even brought up Lundqvist. I'm sorry was I suppose to read every thread and every page? I didn't realized that this conversation was so important to you that I would have to stop working to supporting my wife and family. Maybe if you bother to read the rest of that thread you would understand what I was getting at instead of reading a small portion of it.
Now first off I get what you were saying. And most of it I agree with. If you even bothered I have defended both goaltenders in the past. Look at the thread topic. Its states defense is the problem. But is it really? Thats what were getting at. Like I stated earlier. Loungo IMO was a better goaltender when they played a defensive team style like the trap in his first year.Other then that we would have been complaining about boring hockey. Again pros and cons. They opened up the game abit the last couple of years and it seems to me Loungo isn't the same goaltender like he was in his first year. Also noted that over the years we heard the excuses on both pro and cons on both goaltenders. So no its not about me defending Cory its just as much everybody will defend Loungo. Yes he won two games with shutouts in the finals but was he consistent like Thomas the whole series? Answer to that was NO! Lundqvist numbers wouldn't changed a thing.He still lost. And through the whole playoffs, You really can't say the Rangers had a picnic in any series.
Gradin to be honest with you I RATHER have a conversation in person. Being on a computer can cause a person to misunderstand what is being said. And I'm guilty as anybody else.

Edited by canacks1970, 20 June 2012 - 05:38 PM.


#290 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,948 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 10

Posted 20 June 2012 - 10:05 PM

The defence plays tighter in front of Schneider. The canucks on average score about a goal a game less when Schneider is playing. Now at first that might make Schneider look even better because he was winning games with less offensive support, but lets look at why the Canucks were scoring less..... because they were playing more defensively! I don't know if it is because they have less faith in Schneider and feel that they need to protect him, or maybe his style if goaltending is more suited to that (like quick, who is very positional).

It's something to think about at least.

Actually, the Canucks give up one shot per game more when Schneids is in goal and give up fewer goals !

#291 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,948 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 10

Posted 20 June 2012 - 10:08 PM

A big reason why I think stats can be complete bull$irt.
They do come in handy, though, often, and almost never outright "lie".


And see Aburrows14's post above mine to see why so many give so much blame to Lou in losing. I agree with his assessment, and I think I am far from stupid.

stats are a measurement of performance..good or bad...its like a report card from school !

#292 GradinToSmyl

GradinToSmyl

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 12

Posted 20 June 2012 - 10:14 PM

Calling me moronic?


I didn't call you moronic, I called your attempts. And something was rather screwy because your post showed as DMoney for me. Not sure why. He was trumpeting Lundqvist. So really the post doesn't apply to the matter at hand at all.

Except of course quoting Schneider's record as 1-2-1. That's worse than me saying 1-4.
After a few days here, I am surprised half of you got the anti-bot question correct to register for this site.

#293 GradinToSmyl

GradinToSmyl

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 12

Posted 20 June 2012 - 10:15 PM

stats are a measurement of performance..good or bad...its like a report card from school !


Stats are a horrible tool is the hands of people who have no idea how to apply them.
After a few days here, I am surprised half of you got the anti-bot question correct to register for this site.

#294 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,948 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 10

Posted 21 June 2012 - 09:15 AM

Stats are a horrible tool is the hands of people who have no idea how to apply them.

The whole Nhl management system use stats daily . It is a measurement of performance and you obviously know squat to make such a statement. Schneider is now a better goalie than Lou .....and his stats verify his superiority.

#295 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,193 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 21 June 2012 - 09:51 AM

Stats! Stats! Stats! Numbers! Numbers! Numbers!

We seem to have lost our way here. Getting back to the issue at hand. The Canucks major gaping wound of an issue is defense. Pure and simple. Our defense has proven to be anemic.

Our best defenseman are: Dan Hamhuis (the best Canucks defenseman)............Sami Salo (who may not be returning), and Keith Ballard (who played better than almost every other blueliner during the playoffs). However Ballard is for some reason in the moronic AV doghouse. Another alarming fact? Salo is the largest of all three.

Edler has been touted as the franchise defenseman of the Canucks for a season or so now. Although after his pathetic showing in the playoffs, it's obvious he won't be. Trade him now while his value is at it's peak, and get someone who can be the franchise defenseman.

While Bieksa wasn't nuch better than Edler, he still should be considered.

Tanev and MAG are young enough that they can develop.

The defense is far too timid and positionally challenged to get us very far into the playoffs anymore.

Sorry but blaming either goaltender (both of whom stood on their heads) is ignorant. Both were hung out to dry on numerous occasions, both during regular season play and the playoffs.

The team doesn't need a rebuild, but defense does.
Posted Image

#296 D-Money

D-Money

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,779 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 21 June 2012 - 10:37 AM

Our best defenseman are: Dan Hamhuis (the best Canucks defenseman)............Sami Salo (who may not be returning), and Keith Ballard (who played better than almost every other blueliner during the playoffs). However Ballard is for some reason in the moronic AV doghouse. Another alarming fact? Salo is the largest of all three.


No, Ballard did not play better than almost any other defenseman. He played better than he has for us in the past, but that is not saying much.

He's in AV's doghouse because he generally gives the puck away more than any other defenseman, and yet his risky plays result in offense far less than any other defenseman. Saying he does not belong in a doghouse is the only moronic thing here.

Funny thing - this playoffs was the first time any defenseman had more giveaways per minutes played than Ballard (no one had come even close before). And yet, based on that 5-game sample size, some morons want to dump allstar Edler and promote doghouse Ballard...

On that note...


Edler has been touted as the franchise defenseman of the Canucks for a season or so now. Although after his pathetic showing in the playoffs, it's obvious he won't be. Trade him now while his value is at it's peak, and get someone who can be the franchise defenseman.


First off, after some glaring errors in the playoffs that make it "obvious he won't be" a franchise defenseman, why would his value be now at it's peak? Wouldn't it be lower now than...pretty much any time over the past season?

Secondly, in the past, Edler has been very solid in the playoffs. For whatever reason, he had a rough 5 games this year. But he just turned 26, he's still on the upward trajectory.
Posted Image

#297 GradinToSmyl

GradinToSmyl

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 12

Posted 21 June 2012 - 10:43 AM

Edler has been touted as the franchise defenseman of the Canucks for a season or so now. Although after his pathetic showing in the playoffs, it's obvious he won't be. Trade him now while his value is at it's peak, and get someone who can be the franchise defenseman.


I'd have been far more impressed by your idea to trade Edler if it wasn't following an early playoff loss where he was coming back from back surgery and you felt the need to deflect attention.
After a few days here, I am surprised half of you got the anti-bot question correct to register for this site.

#298 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,193 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 21 June 2012 - 10:47 AM

I'd have been far more impressed by your idea to trade Edler if it wasn't following an early playoff loss where he was coming back from back surgery and you felt the need to deflect attention.


What impresses you Gradin, is of absolutely no interest to me.
Posted Image

#299 GradinToSmyl

GradinToSmyl

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 12

Posted 21 June 2012 - 11:05 AM

What impresses you Gradin, is of absolutely no interest to me.


That's a decent defensive response. You are seriously going to judge Edler on 5 games coming off of back surgery? You must be BEGGING to trade Kesler.
After a few days here, I am surprised half of you got the anti-bot question correct to register for this site.

#300 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,948 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 10

Posted 21 June 2012 - 11:14 AM

Stats! Stats! Stats! Numbers! Numbers! Numbers!

We seem to have lost our way here. Getting back to the issue at hand. The Canucks major gaping wound of an issue is defense. Pure and simple. Our defense has proven to be anemic.

Our best defenseman are: Dan Hamhuis (the best Canucks defenseman)............Sami Salo (who may not be returning), and Keith Ballard (who played better than almost every other blueliner during the playoffs). However Ballard is for some reason in the moronic AV doghouse. Another alarming fact? Salo is the largest of all three.

Edler has been touted as the franchise defenseman of the Canucks for a season or so now. Although after his pathetic showing in the playoffs, it's obvious he won't be. Trade him now while his value is at it's peak, and get someone who can be the franchise defenseman.

While Bieksa wasn't nuch better than Edler, he still should be considered.

Tanev and MAG are young enough that they can develop.

The defense is far too timid and positionally challenged to get us very far into the playoffs anymore.

Sorry but blaming either goaltender (both of whom stood on their heads) is ignorant. Both were hung out to dry on numerous occasions, both during regular season play and the playoffs.

The team doesn't need a rebuild, but defense does.

I don;t disagree that our D can use a tweak, but to think that the D is responsible for Lou's problems is just nuts. Schneider plays for same defense and is miles better than Lou. Saying the D plays better with Schneider is suggesting that our defense is better than people say, because they respond to Schneider and he only gives up 1.96 goals per game. so, wheres the argument for lou??




Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.