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This topic has been archived.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

#301 Vansicle

Vansicle

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,610 posts
  • Joined: 24-August 09

Posted 21 June 2012 - 11:19 AM

I just have something in my eye.

I loled.

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.

 


#302 Vansicle

Vansicle

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,610 posts
  • Joined: 24-August 09

Posted 21 June 2012 - 11:29 AM

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

But as I said, they often don't tell the whole story. And GTS got it right when he said they "are a horrible tool in the hands of people who have no idea how to apply them". I'm not accusing you of this, I'm just saying that the same set of data can be used to support two diametric views in any given debate, like in a court case, for example. The stats are just numbers, and in themselves don't lie, but what they mean can easily be transmogrified to suit your needs, and *can* tell an incomplete story.

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.

 


#303 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 21 June 2012 - 11:58 AM

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...




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.


Edler and Bieksa actually gave the puck away far more than Ballard did in the playoffs. Edler going tape to tape with Kopitar.

Ballard looked more in control than both during the run

In regards to Edler, he was still nominated an All-Star last season and posted top 10 numbers for a d-man. So his value will still be high when considered culmulatively.

It's not his numbers that are concerning, but his tenacity and physicality. They took a vacation during the playoffs. That is fact, no matter what you think.

And calling someone a moron for stating their opinion just belies the fact that you really don't have much else to offer, does it?

Edited by Canuck-a-nuck, 21 June 2012 - 12:09 PM.

Posted Image

#304 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 21 June 2012 - 12:04 PM

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.


No. Kesler has proven to be an elite player. How he played against Nashville during the glorious Cup run was unprecedented. I would never trade Kesler. Although AV's comments must not be doing the relationship much good.

Edler was playing quite well during the regular season, laying out punishing hits, kind of proving he was physically able to do so.

His inconsistency is the issue. One game he goes coast to coast on the Blue Jackets, another he's back passing to the most dangerous forward on the Los Angeles Kings.

You can't blame back surgery for that. Sorry
Posted Image

#305 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 21 June 2012 - 12:07 PM

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??


I was supporting both goalies. Too many times during the season, the Vancouver defense gets caught in their own end. Maybe what I am saying is that Vancouver desperately needs a couple of large, stay at home defenseman. Maybe not.
Posted Image

#306 GradinToSmyl

GradinToSmyl

    Comets Star

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

Posted 21 June 2012 - 12:09 PM

No. Kesler has proven to be an elite player. How he played against Nashville during the glorious Cup run was unprecedented. I would never trade Kesler. Although AV's comments must not be doing the relationship much good.

Edler was playing quite well during the regular season, laying out punishing hits, kind of proving he was physically able to do so.

His inconsistency is the issue. One game he goes coast to coast on the Blue Jackets, another he's back passing to the most dangerous forward on the Los Angeles Kings.

You can't blame back surgery for that. Sorry



Outside of the Nashville series, Kesler has 4 goals in 46 playoff games. That is awful. But sure, let's trade Edler and hope Tanev and MAG will work out.
After a few days here, I am surprised half of you got the anti-bot question correct to register for this site.

#307 derr12

derr12

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 230 posts
  • Joined: 02-October 11

Posted 21 June 2012 - 12:10 PM

Defence always make "Gaffs" or the opposition's offence, out-plays them. If that didn't happen, you wouldn't need goalies.

If a goalie only makes the saves he's supposed ot make when the rest of the team all do their jobs to perfection, you could use a cardboard cutout in net.

Lu has failed to be the difference maker when it mattered and has too often been outplayed by the other goalie. Tim Thomas "was" that difference last year. Quick, "was" that difference this year against the Nucks.

Lu is a good goalie but has failed to raise his level of play to the necessary level when it matters most. Not all teh time, but enough to be the difference on the down side of the equation.

IN all seven games last year, Thomas did not let in any untimely or easy goals...LU did. Thomas made some incredible, timely saves that gave his team the momentum to go on and win, Lu did not.



Burrows on thomas in overtime says hi.

#308 GradinToSmyl

GradinToSmyl

    Comets Star

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

Posted 21 June 2012 - 12:12 PM

Burrows on thomas in overtime says hi.


Then we lost 4/5 badly.
After a few days here, I am surprised half of you got the anti-bot question correct to register for this site.

#309 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 21 June 2012 - 12:13 PM

Outside of the Nashville series, Kesler has 4 goals in 46 playoff games. That is awful. But sure, let's trade Edler and hope Tanev and MAG will work out.


So you'd trade Kesler. Ah I see. Just say it. Show some cajones!

Edler should only be traded for a better defensman. Most likely in conjunction with another roster player or two.

But if you just want to see him traded for nothing in return...........go ahead. I hope that works for ya.
Posted Image

#310 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 21 June 2012 - 12:16 PM

I was supporting both goalies. Too many times during the season, the Vancouver defense gets caught in their own end. Maybe what I am saying is that Vancouver desperately needs a couple of large, stay at home defenseman. Maybe not.

I don;t disagree with you but the topic here is that the D are responsible for Lous

I was supporting both goalies. Too many times during the season, the Vancouver defense gets caught in their own end. Maybe what I am saying is that Vancouver desperately needs a couple of large, stay at home defenseman. Maybe not.

...and I'm not disagreeing with you but the topic here is that the D are responsible for Lous problems and I disagree with that, because Schneids has played better in front of same D.

#311 GradinToSmyl

GradinToSmyl

    Comets Star

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

Posted 21 June 2012 - 12:16 PM

So you'd trade Kesler. Ah I see. Just say it. Show some cajones!

Edler should only be traded for a better defensman. Most likely in conjunction with another roster player or two.

But if you just want to see him traded for nothing in return...........go ahead. I hope that works for ya.


Do you not have a scrap of short term memory?
After a few days here, I am surprised half of you got the anti-bot question correct to register for this site.

#312 ABurrows14

ABurrows14

    Comets Regular

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

Posted 21 June 2012 - 12:19 PM

I loled.



Question

Do you have anything intelligent to say?

#313 GradinToSmyl

GradinToSmyl

    Comets Star

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

Posted 21 June 2012 - 12:22 PM

Question

Do you have anything intelligent to say?


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

#314 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 21 June 2012 - 12:28 PM

I don;t disagree with you but the topic here is that the D are responsible for Lous
...and I'm not disagreeing with you but the topic here is that the D are responsible for Lous problems and I disagree with that, because Schneids has played better in front of same D.


There is belief out there that Luongo throwing teammates under the bus has haunted him. They play positionally unsound when he backstops.

I do find this hard to believe though. They were within one game of the Cup, and they purposely played badly to get him traded?

No. They left both to hang during regular season and playoff games. Bieksa is the turnover king on the Canucks. I forget who it was but he got his pocket picked twice in the same period, and Luongo stopped both breakaways.

Edler disappeared during the regular season, and was so absent during one game that Vigneault actually stated "I don't know where he is right now."

Edler is going to want more money that I don't think he's worth.

Luongo has made more mental errors than Schneider, and that is why sadly letting him go seems the fitting decision.

Defense needs to be issued or else we go into the next season completely figured out by the rest of the league, and now undersized.

I don't know if anyone noticed but its seems like the Canucks are shrinking.

Edited by Canuck-a-nuck, 21 June 2012 - 12:34 PM.

Posted Image

#315 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 21 June 2012 - 12:30 PM

Do you not have a scrap of short term memory?


Yes I have mounds of it. What's your point, chum?
Posted Image

#316 GradinToSmyl

GradinToSmyl

    Comets Star

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

Posted 21 June 2012 - 12:43 PM

Yes I have mounds of it. What's your point, chum?


I shouldn't have to tell you, but I never said trade Kesler. I am not sure where you got that from. Just simply pointed out his brutal playoff numbers outside of 1 series. You are the one wanting to deal players based on a series.
After a few days here, I am surprised half of you got the anti-bot question correct to register for this site.

#317 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 21 June 2012 - 01:06 PM

I shouldn't have to tell you, but I never said trade Kesler. I am not sure where you got that from. Just simply pointed out his brutal playoff numbers outside of 1 series. You are the one wanting to deal players based on a series.



Thanks Dad. Edler needs to be dealt for an elite defenseman because of his inconsistency.

His numbers and an All-Star nomination are excellent, but they don't parlay into clutch capabilities.

The Canucks need clutch players who can handle the pressure.
Posted Image

#318 GradinToSmyl

GradinToSmyl

    Comets Star

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

Posted 21 June 2012 - 01:11 PM

Thanks Dad. Edler needs to be dealt for an elite defenseman because of his inconsistency.

His numbers and an All-Star nomination are excellent, but they don't parlay into clutch capabilities.

The Canucks need clutch players who can handle the pressure.


Ahh, I see. Let's trade for Edler for ????

And let's dump Kesler too, he has been useless in the playoffs. Let's move him for someone better. AND let's trade the Sedins for players that have been useful throughout the playoffs. Let's trade our players for better players.
After a few days here, I am surprised half of you got the anti-bot question correct to register for this site.

#319 canacks1970

canacks1970

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,650 posts
  • Joined: 05-March 06

Posted 21 June 2012 - 03:03 PM

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.


Thats is strange. You said I was showing up a DMoney!!

#320 D-Money

D-Money

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,785 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 21 June 2012 - 04:21 PM

Edler and Bieksa actually gave the puck away far more than Ballard did in the playoffs. Edler going tape to tape with Kopitar.

Ballard looked more in control than both during the run

In regards to Edler, he was still nominated an All-Star last season and posted top 10 numbers for a d-man. So his value will still be high when considered culmulatively.

It's not his numbers that are concerning, but his tenacity and physicality. They took a vacation during the playoffs. That is fact, no matter what you think.

And calling someone a moron for stating their opinion just belies the fact that you really don't have much else to offer, does it?


I have a helluva lot more to offer than "Ballard looked more in control".

Minutes played per giveaway:
(10-11 reg - playoffs - 11-12 reg - playoffs)

Edler - 52 - 48 - 38 - 15
Bieksa - 36 - 21 - 27 - 31
Ballard - 37 - 20 - 25 - 15

(I won't bother linking points to giveaways, as Ballard is so far behind it's not even funny.)

So, really, Ballard gave it away just as much (prorated for icetime) as Edler did these past playoffs. And Edler's brainfarts were definitely an anomoly, whereas it is more standard with Ballard. The difference is, Edler's stand out more, because of the opposition he had to face. AV wouldn't be caught dead leaving Ballard out on a Kopitar forecheck.
Posted Image

#321 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,747 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 22 June 2012 - 01:26 AM

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.


MANY people blamed him for us losing to LA. Had I known this was actually going to be disputed I would have quoted those people. Of course AV is going to go back to Roberto after game 3. The entire team blew chunks; should AV sit the entire team and have Gillis call up the Moose? Like I've said before, perhaps you should be getting on AV's ass instead of blaming Roberto for being forced to play two games he was clearly not into after the first few goals. He does have the final say after all. But to call game 4 the defining moment of his career is a complete load of crap -- that's just proof people only look at score sheet. Where was the Canucks offense at any point in these games? Perhaps the Canucks putrid offense DEFLATED Luongo. No, it's just easier to blame the goalie. Roberto in both game 3 and 4 only allowed a single goal in the combined two first periods. Where was the Canucks offense? Too busy allowing more short handed chances than chances they actually created ON the power play.

I don't recall half the goals but I guarantee I can re-watch every single goal and point out defensive laps on the part of the team and not him. (And in fact I will just to prove my point) Compounded with the fact the team COULD NOT score a more than a goal and a half on average, it was basically over after the first Bruins goal. They're own lack of offense was their biggest god damn problem. Doesn't matter if Roberto stands on his head because the rate of the Canucks offense, he needed to post a shut out every second game for this team to even have a chance in hell of winning.

1.33 G/G over the last two series. Blame Luongo. Praise Schneider despite the same result. That sure as hell sounds like bias to me.
Posted Image

#322 Heisenberg

Heisenberg

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 617 posts
  • Joined: 18-July 11

Posted 22 June 2012 - 01:45 AM

When comparing the Canucks defenders to other teams I notice ours aren't very mean outside of Bieksa. Other team forwards whack away at our goalies and screen them and aren't punished at all. We need someone physical on our defence to protect our goalies and pound some forwards really hard.

#323 Dildo Faggins

Dildo Faggins

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 609 posts
  • Joined: 05-April 11

Posted 22 June 2012 - 02:16 AM

Yes ladies and gentlemen there we have it, the perplexing mystery of the so-called "Luongo breakdowns" has been finally unravelled. Its because the defense has sucked all those times when Luongo seemed to have gotten lit up, nothing more than that. This idea that Luongo might have been responsible for some of the goals that went in all those times has been exposed as completely false.

Edited by Heli_Kopitar, 22 June 2012 - 01:39 PM.


#324 Vansicle

Vansicle

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,610 posts
  • Joined: 24-August 09

Posted 22 June 2012 - 08:54 AM

Question

Do you have anything intelligent to say?

Often. But sometimes I like to just joke around. It's fun. Why so . . . oh nevermind.

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.

 





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.