Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community
  • entries
    12
  • comments
    7
  • views
    4,819

Stanley Cup Game 4 Recap: The Luongo Question Mark


TheCanuckleheads.ca

371 views

 Share

It's understandable that Vancouver Canuck fans are freaking out a little bit. The team has a 40-year history without conquering Lord Stanley, and after two great games on home ice, we were all dreaming of coming home for Game 5 with either the Stanley Cup or a 3-1 series lead.

But now that it's 2-2 and Luongo has looked fragile and the power play has been listless and the momentum has swung in favour of the Bruins, it's no time to jump ship. The series is still there for the taking, and there's no reason to think Vancouver doesn't have the moxy to overcome this adversity. After all, nobody wins it all without going through some tough times.

But let's not sugarcoat it. There's a lot to feel miserable about when your team is outscored 12-1 in two of the most important games in franchise history. We can start with the fact that Bobby Lou has given up 12 goals on 58 shots for a woeful .793 save percentage — numbers that are eerily reminiscent of the Chicago series when he was shredded for 10 goals on only 40 shots in Games 4 and 5 for an even uglier .750 save percentage.

The question heading into Game 5 is whether Luongo can regain his composure and confidence. It's a question Vigneault will no doubt be asking himself right up to game time on Friday. Unlike the Chicago series, though, I don't think there's any reason to consider putting Cory Schneider between the pipes. As Alain Vigneault has already stated, "Louie is going to be fine. He's one of the best goaltenders in the league. We've got a lot of trust and faith in him…in his ability to play well."

On the other hand, it must be said that Vancouver could have won both games in Boston if Tim Thomas had been in their net. The Canucks out-shot Boston in both games, and they carried the play in the first period of both games. Had they managed to put an early one past Thomas in either game, we're probably not talking about Luongo.

In Game 4, unable to score early on, the snowball was put in motion by a pair of bad breaks when Edler's stick broke (leading to a seeing-eye shot from Andrew Ference) and Kesler re-directed a Mark Recchi pass past Luongo. But the fact is that after a couple fluke goals, Luongo has made very few big saves, while Thomas has been rock solid.

This is why Luongo gets so little credit when Vancouver wins and a lot of blame when they lose. During a six-week stretch against Chicago (Game 7), Nashville, San Jose, and Boston (Games 1 and 2), Vancouver was the better team and Luongo was part of the equation. But it would be hard to argue that Luongo has stolen a game for Vancouver in these playoffs. Either way, six weeks of solid goaltending is nothing to sneeze at. And then, all of a sudden, after a couple bad bounces, he's playing as if shell-shocked and his mental fortitude is once again a big-time concern.

Of course, Vancouver has plenty of other culprits. The Sedins have played decent 5-on-5 hockey, but haven't been scoring on the power play. Kesler hasn't been playing like the beast he was against the Predators. As a group, the defense hasn't been adding much to the offense, while the forwards haven't supplied enough traffic in front of Thomas or produced enough second chances. Finally, lady luck seems to be on Boston's side. But as Tommy Larscheid would point out, "you've gotta be good to be lucky, and lucky to be good". Having success begins with trusting your keeper to make a few clutch saves when the defense breaks down. And that's not happening right now.

In the first period of last night's game, Vancouver out-shot Boston 12-6. Boston had two quality scoring chances. The first came on a Rich Peverley breakaway. On the play, Peverley made no deke or fake. He skated in and fired a wrist shot right at Luongo, who initially had his stick covering the five-hole, only to inexplicably remove it when the shot was released, thereby opening the door to the back of the net. Sure, it was a defensive breakdown, but it was a very makeable save.

The second scoring chance came in the closing minutes of the period when Michael Ryder undressed Christian Ehrhoff and snapped a wrist shot short-side on Luongo that, despite a tight angle, rang off the post. Two days after the 8-1 debacle, you could tell Luongo wasn't sharp, and any team, no matter how confident and cohesive, will lose energy and focus when they're wondering if their keeper is rattled. As any Canuck fan knows, if Luongo's mind isn't sharp, neither is his technique; and he's not an athletic scrambler who can overcome poor technique and a frantic mindset.

On the second goal, with Vancouver still carrying the play (not by a long shot, mind you), Ryder stepped over the blue line and fired a 60-foot wrist shot that found the back of the net. Yes, the puck took a slick deviation off Sami Salo's stick at the release point, causing the puck to dip slightly. But an NHL goaltender has to make that save. It's one thing if the deflection happens right in front the net and you have no time to react, but from that distance, Luongo had the time to pick it up, but his glove remained a foot higher than the puck's trajectory. If he's locked in and focused, it's easy pickings.

On the third goal by Brad Marchand, there was mass confusion between Ballard and Bieksa. Ballard had a nightmare of a game, and after losing the puck once, he was tripped behind the net, which led to Marchand finding the puck on his stick right in front of the net. Again, Vancouver needed a save to keep the game within reach, and they didn't get it. By 4-0, Vigneault had no choice but to pull Luongo — which he also should have done after the second period in Game 4 to save Luongo from digging the puck out of his net four more times.

In any case, heading into Game 5, Canuckleheads near and far will be wondering whether Schneider will see any more action in these playoffs. Stability in goal is a prerequisite to winning the Stanley Cup, and my guess is that Luongo will start Game 5 and Vancouver will play so well and be so hungry for a win that Luongo won't face much action early on. But if Boston weathers the early storm and starts getting their chances, we'll find out very quickly how confident Luongo is by his rebound control and his ability to catch the puck cleanly. And if Vancouver gets behind the 8-ball, I'd expect Vigneault to have a quick hook, especially with the knowledge that Schneider played well in Game 6 against Chicago…despite a pair of costly puck-handling gaffes.

And so it comes down to this: if Vancouver is destined to win the Stanley Cup, they will stem the tide of momentum and take advantage of being back on home ice. But they'd better not wait for some last-minute heroics to get it done, because Luongo's confidence is unquestionably shakier now than it was early in the series. Speed should be the key. Boston has now matched Vancouver's physicality, but the Canucks must use their team speed to exploit the Bruins' defense. If they do, they'll get Thomas moving the way Tampa had him moving on occasion in the Eastern Conference Finals. Then the goals will come in bunches.

 Share

1 Comment


Recommended Comments

I know this is a little off the topic, but is there such a thing as fixed rules in the NHL. From game to game the rules on whats illegal seem to change and whatever rules there are don't seem to be applied evenly.After watching the first four games of the final, I've come to the belief that the head office picks the winner they want and then tell the refs to go out and call the game accordingly. Kind of like point shaving in baskelball betting.I'm totally confused about whats a legal hit and what isn't and the explanation given by the head office is only more confusing. I remember AV saying that he thought the head office would do the right thing after the Eager hit on Sedin and the concussion hit on Rome, but they didn't. So why was Rome suspended. And the chippyness that Boston gets away with is amazing.Of course, when there's two guys at head office, one with a Bruin and the other an avowed Canuck hater this is the result we can expect. The head office must think that the average Canuck fan is a dunmmy.I don't blame Canucks at all for the debacle in Boston. They know that somehow the refs and the head office will blunt their chance for victory. The consistent mugging of the Sedins without punitive action in one example. The whole Boston team has an entitlement attitude from the coach to the bench warmer.I don't think that the Canucks played poorly because of the anything Boston did, it seems more like 'whats the point in trying'. As far as Don Cherry goes, another pro Boston type, he idolized the head shots with in his greatest rock em sock em hockey videos. Everyone of the greatest hits was a shot to the head of the player. The players in the league now, watched those videos as kids. Small wonder that there's so many head shots and concussions nowadays. Thank you Mr Cherry for your disservice to hockey.

Link to comment
Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...