Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Ashmon

With Luongo, i thought it was not about the regular season

202 posts in this topic

Getting to game 7 is not winning the cup sir !

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya, how dare our 5.3 million cap hit goalie didn't score for us when we need it the most?

Totally unacceptable!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why doesn't Luongo just start scoring? LOL people against him, you can't have a goalie with a weak team, and expect him to shut the door on the Bruins the whole series.

SCF- Did Luongo melt down, or just the team? Let's find out how Luongo must play for the Canucks to win every game.

Game 1- Luongo must get a shut-out of 36 shots

Game 2- Luongo must allow just 2 goals for 60 min+ (Assuming Canucks score in OT)

Game 3- Luongo must get a shutout

Game 4- Luongo must get a shutout for 60 min+ (Assuming Canucks score in OT)

Game 5- Luongo must get a shutout

Game 6- Luongo must let in 1 goal or less

Game 7- Luongo must get a shutoutfor 60 min+ (Assuming Canucks score in OT)

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not Luongo's job to put pucks in the net, it's his job to keep them out and he didn't do a good enough job of that in 4 of the 7 games in the 2011 SCF. Not to mention a few other series against Chicago.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canucks had no business even being in game 7 of the finals. Boston should've won in 4 or 5. In the 3 games we won Luongo only allowed 2 goals and two of those games were shutouts. In the 4 games they lost Canucks scored a measly 3 goals combined. Luongo won 2 arguably 3 games for the team when they had no business winning. How many games did the team win for him when he wasn't great?..... Answer: zero

If Luongo had gotten a shutout in game 7 he most likely takes home the conn smythe but because we lost its all his fault.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Should". "When".

A couple of things - and don't get me wrong, I'm ok with however this turns out and feel we're lucky to have this "problem".

Just because a goaltender has struggled in the playoffs doesn't mean he always will. There have been some great goaltenders who have had less than great performances, but we demand perfection?

...............

Goaltenders can't be "on" all the time and it's all about timing in the playoffs. I'd hate to imagine Lu's playoff redemption coming while playing on a different team.

...........

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end of the day, who cares? Canucks management obviously thinks Schneider is the better choice moving forward so why aren't you phoning and emailing Gillis and crying to him about Lui? Newsflash.... at some point your hero will be traded, get over it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Any color you like" is a song from the album. I got where you were going; I was just playing off of it. B)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canucks had no business even being in game 7 of the finals. Boston should've won in 4 or 5. In the 3 games we won Luongo only allowed 2 goals and two of those games were shutouts. In the 4 games they lost Canucks scored a measly 3 goals combined. Luongo won 2 arguably 3 games for the team when they had no business winning. How many games did the team win for him when he wasn't great?..... Answer: zero

If Luongo had gotten a shutout in game 7 he most likely takes home the conn smythe but because we lost its all his fault.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This argument fails to recognize that when your team is banged up, and your goalie completely s**ts the bed early, and you're down a few goals to the hottest goalie in hockey, you don't pour every last drop of your soul into the rest of that game. You still try, but deep down you need to save something for next game, when you actually have a chance.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This argument fails to recognize that when your team is banged up, and your goalie completely s**ts the bed early, and you're down a few goals to the hottest goalie in hockey, you don't pour every last drop of your soul into the rest of that game. You still try, but deep down you need to save something for next game, when you actually have a chance.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your right, I pulled this from another user last week and didn't double check it after checking it I can see that's its wrong. I apologize for posting something I didn't double check.

I double checked the Boston series and his save % was .832 for the last six games (even lower) then the info I pulled from the other member. I will update the compleat post with information I can verify in the morrning.

I had no intention of trying to mislead anyone and i should have double checked but I'm betting the save % I calculate will not be pretty.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No you do what the Canucks did best led by AV, when down by a couple goals you give up and end up getting blown out. Didn't anyone notice that when the canucks got down by a couple goals AV would panic and start double shifting and triple shifting the Sedins? And all they would do is make low percentage plays causing turnover after turnover leading to an insane amount of odd man rushes and before you knew it canucks were down by 4 or 5 goals. And I'm not just talking about the finals.

Even in the finals canucks had to score first and then the game plan was to sit on a 1-0 lead and hope your goalie can stop everything because we really will have trouble scoring another goal. Only chance canucks had in the finals was to score that first goal and hang on. Once Boston got the first one that self doubt set in and you knew the game was over and the cup was lost.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

even thats not accuate. his sv pct was .863 in the last six games. it conviently leaves out one of his shutouts. include game 1 a 36 save shut out its .891 considering the coach and defence hung him out to dry its quite an amazing feat.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I pulled the info wiki using the save % for each of the last six added it up and divided it by six.  Don't know how it could be wrong id bet your wrong. I'm not double checking it at this point as I could care less, you do it if its an issue to you.

Lou can play some amazing games we all know that you can get off your soap box.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Adding up save percentage and GAA across multiple games, then dividing, is not a good representation. Different games have different numbers of shots. Goaltenders do not necessarily play all 60 minutes. Etc, etc...

If you want the true save percentage for multiple, add up the total saves for all the games, and then divide that by the total shots.

True GAA is a little tougher. You need to add up minutes played, then divide by 60 to get the exact number of "games". Then divide that by the total number of goals allowed.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I pulled Lou's save % for each game not the teams so it should be good.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't understand. Each game has a different number of shots, so you can't add the save percentages together.

If a goalie posts a 40-shot shutout (save%: 1.000), and lets in 2 goals on 20 shots in the next (save%: .900), his save percentage for the two games is NOT .950.

It is 58 saves divided by 60 shots, for a save percentage of .967.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.