Burnsey Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 We already know it's a big risk. But Schneider has been tested over, and over, and over again and he has come through each time. If Schneider plays like he has been, he will be one of the best goalies in the league. Even if his numbers drop off a bit he will still be one of the best in the NHL. He's been developed properly and he has a good head on him. All the signs point to him being the real deal. It's a risk the Canucks have to take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Get real canuck fans Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 He has been tested as a back-up. We have yet to see him play 10 games in a row, it's a very different situation. I'm confident he will be able to cope but the one thing I was think to myself is, why fix something that isn't broken? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownUndaCanuck Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Lou has had some great games in the playoffs. He's also been terrible in others. Inconsistency is the worst trait a goalie can have, and Luongo has been up and down every single year in the playoffs. Jonathan Quick only had 4 playoff wins before winning it all this year. Antti Niemi had no wins at all, and Chicago did just fine. As for Game 6, Luongo gave up the losing goal in that one, so once again, it's a poor example. Cory has been successful at every level he's played at, including in the NHL. It's obvious the Canucks agree, because they gave him a new contract. It should also be noted that Cory helped the Canucks win a game against LA this season in the playoffs, and LA was nearly unstoppable, losing only a handful of games all post season. Lou blew a lead against the Slovaks and nearly lost that game for Canada, Demitra just happened to shoot wide on what would have been the tying goal. People always seem to forget that. I didn't know that Patrick Roy played on Team Canada with Luongo....Marty Brodeur has won a lot of games, but he doesn't have Patrick's 3 Conn Smythes so... He made a big save on Sharp in Game 7, for sure. Then again, he also allowed several softies to get them there. Luongo Game 4 vs. Chicago : 6 GA, .786 SV% Yeah he was a part of the problem too, let's not be delusional. Here's some bulletpoint responses for all of this dribble: -Luongo helped dig the hole against Chicago, and thankfully Burrows scored before he allowed another softie -The saves on Hossa and Sharp are NOT the biggest saves in franchise history. The Canucks never should have been in Game 7 to begin with, but Luongo couldn't inspire his team's confidence in him to end the series early, just like the two years prior against Chicago.(Poor play for the 3rd consecutive series against Chicago) -Luongo did not almost win a Cup single handedly, where do you get this crap from?? He had soft goals against Chicago, Nashville (they were banking them in from behind the net) and Boston (Just like Chicago, after winning 3 games, the wheels fell off the wagon) -The franchise has many stars on this team, including 2 Art Ross Winners, one of the best defensive centres in the NHL and a defensive core that is easily one of the best in the NHL. Luongo has all the advantages a goaltender could ask for, and yet during the playoffs he seems to struggle more often than a goalie of his calibre should. He's had his chances but I have said it before and I will say it again. He's done in Vancouver, time to move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dasein Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 I feel bad for Lou, but yet, more comfortable with Schneids in net. Even when Vancouver lost game five, there was no animosity toward Schneider. It was still aimed toward Lou even though he hadn't played in three games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf47 Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Inconsistency is far from the worst trait a goalie can have - consistently poor play is. The old adage is that a goalie should only have to win 2 games of a playoff series by himself, the team should be able to at least pull out the other two. I'm not going to lie, Luongo let in a few bad goals but they were in the less important games - he came up huge every time it mattered the most. Game 6 is not a "must-win" by any stretch of the imagination, but Game 7 was and he was our best player. This alone shows how clutch a player Luongo is. Ok, if you want to use Quick as an example then lets - Quick bombed out badly in his first 2 playoff seasons after taking the starting job in L.A and playing well in the regular season. A very similar situation to Schneider. The problem is, not only was L.A's team absolutely stacked and playoff-built last season, but we cannot afford 2 seasons for Schneider to go through the same playoff development that Quick did. Quick learned from his bad losses and mistakes in the first 2 playoffs, and then put it all together last season. If we have to wait 3 seasons until Schneider is "playoff-ready" the rest of our core will be old and decimated. The Sedins will be far from effective, Kesler will be a shell of his former self after all these surgeries and Hamhuis-Bieksa won't be able to maintain their physical game. Our team needs to win NOW and right now, Luongo is our best option for the playoffs. He, like Quick, has been through the losses and has learned and gotten better every single playoffs. He's just putting it all together now and is on the cusp of winning the cup so lets not be naive and give up on him now. As for Niemi, he was playing on one of the most stacked teams to enter the playoffs ever, so much so that they couldn't keep them all together. Chicago found a loophole in the cap and ended up with 20 goal scorers across their 3rd line, they could have had anyone in net and won. On the flipside, look at a guy like Thomas. People complain about Luongo's lack of technicality or positional saves, and then Tim Thomas comes along and wins a cup that way. He, like Luongo, has been through much hardship and supposedly peaked years ago, then felt competition from Rask and stepped up his game to win a Cup. Boston never gave up on Thomas, they stuck with him and look what he did for that team. Now the Canucks need to show the same faith and loyalty in their star goalie. As for the Olympics, he made a save on Demitra with his pad I believe who was left wide open by the defence. Don't forget, most of those games, including the Gold Medal Game, were 2-1. 2 goals scored by essentially an All-Star team is a disgrace but Luongo persevered and kept Canada in it long enough for Crosby to seal it. Canada really didn't play that well and Luongo had to bail his team out a few times, but their defence played well at times. Luongo's play really didn't change much from the Olympics to the playoffs - the main difference was the defence and team in front of him. Oh and there's no question about it, Brodeur is the best goalie in NHL history, not Roy. You don't mesure success on 1 trophy (Conne Smythe), you measure it on the record books. Brodeur has surpassed Roy in just about every stat, the most important IMO being wins. That's like points for a goalie, and Brodeur has put up numbers that will probably never be seen again. He is the Gretzky of goaltending. Then he went ahead and stole just about every single goaltending record in the book. I would say Luongo played his worst in the Chicago series and probably lost the Canucks 2 games by himself, yes. He let in some bad goals in games 4 and 5, but these games were far from "must-wins". Then Schneider comes in for Game 6 and played the worst I've ever seen - the pressure got to him and he made bad mistakes like giving up a goal from behind the net. He injures himself (clearly not ready enough) and Luongo plays amazingly in relief despite all the pressure put on his shoulders. Then he plays exceptionally in Game 7. Let's just look at that series shall we? - Game 1, Luongo stands on his head. 32 save shutout - Game 2, Luongo plays averagely (3 goals against), gets the win - Game 3, Luongo plays great (0.938 %) - Game 4 and 5 Luongo played terribly, 10 goals allowed in 60 minutes combined - Game 6 Luongo comes in and plays amazingly and only allows the game winner - Game 7 Luongo lets in 1 goal (an amazing one, disgusting defence on the powerplay on this one) and keeps us in it Then look at the Nashville series. Luongo VS Rinne, and Lu finishes with a GAA of 1.83 and save % of 0.933. Not 1 bad game the entire series. On to San Jose. Luongo doesn't have a bad game all series, no meltdowns or bad goals against and finishes with a tidy 0.931%. Now Boston which really needs to be broken down. - Game 1, Luongo wins for us and there's no question about it. 36 save shutout, 1 goal for and Boston are getting quality chances against us. After Hamhuis' injury the defence absolutely crumbled in front of Luongo and he still got it done. - Game 2, sure Burrows' heroics got us the win but people forget that Luongo only let in 2 goals on 30 shots. Of those 2 goals, 1 was a powerplay goal by Recchi and the other was a rebound batted in by Lucic who was uncontested by the defence. He was too big for our tiny D to stop, not Luongo's fault. - Game 3, this is the one you guys love to remember. Luongo lets in 8 goals but 2 short-handed goals against is a clear sign that the defence is awake. Edler and Ehrhoff finished a combined -7, Salo was a +1. If all of those goals were the goalies fault there would be an even +/- rating across the defence, so this just shows how badly our top pairing played. They couldn't contest the physical Bruins forwards and they left Luongo out to dry with odd-man rushes against him all game long. - Game 4, Canucks still up 2-1 so not yet a must win. That being said, the Canucks get shutout and their team lays an egg. This was the game the Canucks lost their cool and got scrappy, clearly not focussing on scoring goals anymore. Meanwhile, Hamhuis' loss was most felt here and the PP went completely dry after being given so many opportunities. -Game 5, in a tied series Luongo comes up biggest when he has to. Again, no help from his team and he puts up a 31 save shutout with 1 goal for. -Game 6, Luongo lets in 2 bad goals but that's it really. I'll admit though that this was an early hole he dug his team so he lost the Canucks this game. - Game 7, a complete breakdown by the entire team. The Canucks were dominating the game in the 1st period but typically their offence wasn't good enough and couldn't score. Then our defence capitulates. Bergeron gets a shorthanded breakaway once again and you blame Luongo, not the powerplay? SHG are all the defender's fault and shows that they're not concentrating. Marchand gets a shot away, saved by Luongo and then gets to skate around the back of the net uncontested by any defenders and tuck it in on the other side. That's the defence's responsibility and they weren't quick enough. No forward should be able to move from one post to the other via the back of the net. Luongo did not lose us Game 7, our team did. No offence, brutal defence and that's it. So at the end of the day, when looking at that old adage of "a goalie must win 2 games, the team wins the other 2", let's see what happened. Luongo won us 2 games (Game 1 and Game 5), the team won us Game 2 and that was it. On the flipside, Tim Thomas won Game 4 and Game 7, and the Bruins team took care of Game 3 and Game 6. Quite simply, that was the difference. So as you talk about Luongo having "all the luxuries a goalie can have" just look back to this series where the Art Ross winners (my 2 favourite players but I'll be objective here) were dominated by the Bruin defence and completely disappeared. That Selke winner was banged up and played terribly. Our #1 powerplay was the biggest hinderance to Luongo that he could have, letting up breakaway after breakaway. And the highly touted defence was injured and broken down to the point that they just couldn't keep it up anymore. Ehrhoff was brutal, Edler played with a broken hand, Rome and Hamhuis were out and Ballard was coming in completely rusty. Face it, the team was terrible and Luongo is the only reason we came as close as we did. Without him, the Bruins win in 5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vapourstreak Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 ancient history and only your take on it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf47 Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 You keep replying to long, thoughtful posts backed with facts with a one-liner, which usually doesn't even try to contradict the presented evidence, but attacking the poster. Stop. I don't mind you arguing your side, but it's impossible to argue with your one liners, and in turn, you think you've won the argument. EDIT: So it's ancient history to you, and his take on it, so what is your take on it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf47 Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 The guy is only trying to substantiate his passion for Lou by posting the best and leaving the other side of the coin buried. He knows nothing about goaltenders and gives these long winded posts to satify his need to praise Lou Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Beware the Unproven Goalie. Every proven goalie was once one. Schneider is next in that line. Beware indeed. (funny thing - how many teams do you think would hesitate to run with Schneider?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownUndaCanuck Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 His posts get longer and longer...like a mechanic using a bigger hammer because the small one isn;t working...logic does not prevail...just passion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westcoasting Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 This is still a very realistic probability of Cory Schneider. What tells us that he will be a great goalie anywhere? What tells us that he will win a Vezina anywhere? Stop jumping the gun everybody, he is still as unproven as they come and to hitch our wagon onto this guy is a huge gamble and nothing else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Get real canuck fans Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 If you have any valid arguments against mine then please, I'd love to hear them, because if you can't disprove what I'm saying then I must be correct. I know everyone compares Schneider to the greats like Roy, Brodeur, Quick, Rinne, Lundqvist and Luongo, sure, but the probability of him turning out into one of these great goalies of the game is very unlikely. Open your eyes CDC and look at the other side of the coin. Just look at a guy like Andrew Raycroft for example. He toiled in Boston as a backup for a few seasons and played well (as has Schneider), then had an amazing season where he won the Calder Trophy and was destined to become Boston's go-to-guy. He put up a GAA of 2.05, save % of 0.926, 3 shutouts and 29 wins in just 55 starts. The next season he tanked badly and has never become a starter around the league. This is still a very realistic probability of Cory Schneider. What tells us that he will be a great goalie anywhere? What tells us that he will win a Vezina anywhere? Stop jumping the gun everybody, he is still as unproven as they come and to hitch our wagon onto this guy is a huge gamble and nothing else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf47 Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 You are absolutely cluesless. That is your comparison? Raycroft was a 5th round pick whom played in 26 games against non teenagers in the AHL before landing in Boston AS A 20 YEAR OLD. Raycroft was the starter at age 23 with a whopping 21 games NHL games under his belt. Cory was a 1st round pick whom played 4 years in College against older competition and had 136 games in the AHL before seeing regular duty. Cory has 76 games of NHL experience and when he takes over the reigns next season he will be 26. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riviera82 Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Yeah, playing for more than 10 years in the NHL, being nominated twice for Vezina, winning the Jennings and an Olympic gold medal. Definitely hasn't proven himself in the NHL. I guess the only goalies that might have been proven in the NHL would be Roy and Brodeur. Also, don't give me that BS about the playoffs when we know that he is capable of allowing the team to go to the finals. I say allow, because you people will say that we went to the finals in spite of Luongo, just like how team Canada won the gold in spite of Luongo. But don't come crying for Lu if he gets traded and god forbid Schneider couldn't handle the 70 games and the intense pressure coming from the rabid Canucks fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Get real canuck fans Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 You have listed some excellent regular season and non-NHL accomplishments. About the playoffs. We went to the SCF one time, every other year we were knocked out in round 2. When we went to the Final, what series was Luongo especially brilliant in? I cant think of any. Round 1 - We build up a 3-0 series lead, Luongo was very good in the first 3 and then the meltdowns happened. The series went down to the wire when it should've been over in 5 at most. Round 2 - We need 6 games to take down a team that cant score, no meltdowns but Luongo gives up some odd ones from behind the net throughout the series. Round 3 - We wipe out an injured San Jose team in 5 that we beat with ease during the season, Luongo was great in game 5 but still had a GAA that was pushing 3.00. Round 4 - Luongo was fantastic in 3 games, completely the opposite in the other 4 for some reason. Guess he cant go more than 2 rounds without crashing and burning at some point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drybone Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Lui has been a stellar goalie his whole career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimberWolf Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 If you have any valid arguments against mine then please, I'd love to hear them, because if you can't disprove what I'm saying then I must be correct. I know everyone compares Schneider to the greats like Roy, Brodeur, Quick, Rinne, Lundqvist and Luongo, sure, but the probability of him turning out into one of these great goalies of the game is very unlikely. Open your eyes CDC and look at the other side of the coin. Just look at a guy like Andrew Raycroft for example. He toiled in Boston as a backup for a few seasons and played well (as has Schneider), then had an amazing season where he won the Calder Trophy and was destined to become Boston's go-to-guy. He put up a GAA of 2.05, save % of 0.926, 3 shutouts and 29 wins in just 55 starts. The next season he tanked badly and has never become a starter around the league. This is still a very realistic probability of Cory Schneider. What tells us that he will be a great goalie anywhere? What tells us that he will win a Vezina anywhere? Stop jumping the gun everybody, he is still as unproven as they come and to hitch our wagon onto this guy is a huge gamble and nothing else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westcoasting Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 It would seem that there are more than a few others that find DownundaCanucks views off the mark and fruitless. Maybe if enough posters tell him..it just might just sink in that hes way off the mark...we can hope anyway ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riviera82 Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 in this scenario it may indeed not be his fault, but that wont stop fans from wanting to pin it all on him after a couple bad goals/games. luongo did the best he could.. for some that wasnt good enough, which is fair, however I choose to look at it from the team perspective and as a goalie myself in soccer I know without a doubt that a goalie can only be as good as the team in front of him.. sure, a goalie can raise their game to superhuman levels at times, but sooner or later when the team starts to buckle , the goals will start going in. i have faith in schnieds and believe keeping him is the right future concious choice. Im just nit excited to see him be lambasted by the loser fans we have here is vancouver.. hope it doesnt turn out that way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riviera82 Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 I feel bad for Lou, but yet, more comfortable with Schneids in net. Even when Vancouver lost game five, there was no animosity toward Schneider. It was still aimed toward Lou even though he hadn't played in three games. To me, at least, it seemed whenever Lou was in net I never knew which goalie we were gonna get; The unbeatable, almost superhuman stopper or the lax, almost uncaring version. With Schneids, I always felt confident that, win or lose, he was gonna give it 110% effort and I think the fans got that sense even in the playoff losses. In the end I like Schneids as our #1. He was drafted by Vancouver, He was developed by Vancouver, and now he's reaping the rewards of being patient and taking the appropriate steps to becoming a top goaltender in the NHL. I like the fact that we are beginning to trust a bit more in our system and relying less on the UFA market. With prospects like N.Jensen, J.Schroeder, K.Connauton and A.Polasek developing nicely, it's hard not to be positive about our future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.