Luongo's Totals

[Warhippy]

yeah !! wow we in playoff ..but then what happen we choke so many times right ..who was the goalie that choke ,have you seen a goalie that perform worst than luo..you guy call himself an elite goalie..no wonder people around the league laghing at the canuck ..they overrated themselve ,starting with your number 1 goalie..luo is more like a backup goalie than a stater now ..

[Riviera82]

I've never said consistency isn't an issue with Luo. For me, it's a concern as a part of the bigger issue with lack of consistency with the entire team. For you, as you've posted in every single thread Luo's name has ever been mentioned in, consistency is the definition of an "elite goalie" and the reason you swear Luo can not be one.

How can you possibly argue that context doesn't matter? If you believe the number do tell a story, why don't you think a big part of that story is the numbers the team put up? Looking at only the first page of a book isn't seeing the full story!

For example, this year Luo had a .915 SV% and a 2.58 GAA and his stats were padded a bit by going in after Cory was pulled in game 3. By your arbitrary standards, Luo wasn't good this year, but in reality he actually was. Ignoring that doesn't make it not true!

My point is that you're missing a big part of the picture if you aren't looking at the team he's playing behind. You want to look at other goalies, fine. Look at them. But look at their teams too. What kind of scoring support and D are they getting? Ignoring the rest of the team is simply too shortsighted.

Let me put it another way: How many goalies who meet your definition of "elite" have played consistently well in front of a crap team during the playoffs? Surely if the team has nothing to do with a goalie's stats and "elite" goalies get it done no matter what, there have to be some. Who are they?

Other than the fact that you looked at Luo's stats and noticed that that's the threshold you can say he doesn't surpass, why those numbers? Is there any other reasoning at all behind those specific numbers? Otherwise, they're not a real standard, only a weapon to be used against Luo.

But remember that you set those as the threshold for what is "good" in the playoffs...

Wait, I thought consistency was the big issue, but now you're arguing that an "etlie" goalie is any who puts up numbers you find impressive at least once...but only if you think it was recent enough to count (since Luo's first playoff year numbers were better than most listed above)? How very inconsistent of you!

And remember when above you said, "Elite goalies put up elite stats in the playoffs even if their team loses, that's what I'd love to have seen from Luongo more than just the one time. It shows they were giving their team every chance to win consistently." Are these really the only examples you can offer of goalies who meet that definition? If so, I don't think you're proving your point as well as you think.

Let's look at your examples, noting that only 2 of them warranted multiple entries of stats you were impressed by. Apparently, once isn't good enough for Luo but it is for other goalies as long as that once was still in your short term memory...

Crawford - 4 playoff years (37 games). Finished 2 of those playoff years below your threshold (though one year he only had 1 game.) He's a good goalie, no doubt, but given that last year he had a .893 SV% .and 2.58 GAA he's hardly proven he's an example of consistency. And this year, Chicago was the 6th highest scoring team in the playoffs.

Quick - 4 playoff years (50 games). Though he has turned into the quintessential playoff goalie in the last 2 years, his first 2 years weren't great. In fact, in both of those years his GAA was over 3 and his SV% was below your threshold. And this year, LA had the 11th highest G/G in the playoffs. And they were the 3rd highest scoring team last year.

Niemi - 4 playoff years (56 games). Only surpassed your threshold in this year. Finished below .900 SV% in 10/11. Has a career playoff .909 SV% and 2.65 GAA. And this year SJ was the 9th highest scoring team in the playoffs and had more power play opportunities than all but 4 other teams.

Rask - Only 2 playoff years (35 games) and finished below your threshold in one of them. He also plays for freaking Boston, NHL darlin', back and neck breakers extraordinaires. Has a giant on his D squad. And this year, Boston had the 4th highest G/G in the playoffs.

Vokoun - 3 playoff years (22 games) Played half of his playoff games this year in front of the highest scoring team (by a lot!) And, this year was his first playoff since 06/07 when he had a .902 SV% and 2.96 GAA. His first playoff year was actually pretty good, but it was back in 03/04. And this year, Pitts had the highest G/G in the playoffs.

Holtby - 2 playoff years (21 games). Was awesome in both years, no argument there! And last year, Washington had the 11th highest G/G, which was almost half a goal per game higher than ours.

Smith - 2 playoff years (19 games). His first playoff year he only played 3 games, but he absolutely played very well in both playoff years. His regular season play, however, has been very inconsistent. And last year, Phoenix had the 6th highest G/G in the playoffs.

Rinne - 3 playoff years (28 games). Finished below your threshold in 2 of them. If consistency is what you're all about, he's not shown it. (And his career playoff SV% is actually the same as Luo's.) And last year, Nashville had the 8th highest G/G in the playoffs, which was over a half a goal per game higher than ours.

Thomas - 4 playoff years (50 games). Finished below your threshold in the first one, but was awesome in the other 3. Played in front of Boston. (See comments above for Rask.) And Boston had the 4th highest G/G in the playoffs in both 2008/09 and 2010/11.

None of these are bad goalies by any stretch or reasonable definition. But, none have shown the consistency you have said too many times to count is the earmark of an "elite" goalie. If it's possible, why can't you find examples?

Also, in 8 of your 11 examples, the goalie you listed had a team in the top half (at least) of scoring during the year they recorded those stats. And in all of those examples the goalies had a team with a higher G/G than Vancouver had that year. If you're going to offer examples of how other goalies "get it done" even when the team isn't, maybe you should flip past the first page of the story and make sure they actually illustrate your point.

[TheDugg1er]

First off Luongo couldn't make the key save on Toews shorthanded opportunity which is why it went to overtime. Second, the Sharp save was lucky because he more got in the way of it as he moved then made an attempt of saving unlike the desperation save attempt McLean made in '94 off Reichel. I don't even think Luongo knew a shot was coming from Sharp. Had Sharp taken half a second more before shooting it may have been a different outcome. And finally the fact it even went to 7 games has a lot to do with Luongo as well. Lit up and pulled for games 4 and 5, benched for game 6 only to be put in and lose in OT with a trademark belly flop after punching the initial shot back into the slot. True the team played complacent in games 5 and 6, much like the Minnesota 3-1 series lead, but so did Luongo and of all the positions he can't afford to play that way.

That's why Burrows goal was considered slaying the dragon and remembered. It's also why Sidney Crosby had the golden goal and Luongo not the golden save in the dying seconds of third period when he couldn't stop the goal that sent it into overtime.

As for Slovakia it was Luongo that let in two quick goals that shut up the chanting Canadian fans and had us hanging on by a thread for a win.

Also you don't know for sure that I'm a hater so thanks for judging as well as for the real fan comment. I don't remember seeing a lot of you real fans in an empty building during the Messier era. I was there as I was there at the Pacific Coliseum before. I support this team through all its ups and downs. Speaking of haters you all seem to throw the hate on Cloutier despite wearing a Canucks uniform. He held a lot of records here before Luongo so I suppose none of you are real fans either by your definition. I supported him and even liked his Hextall style get the hell out of my crease attitude. Yet he struggled in the post season as well and I didn't make excuses for him then either.

I don't hate Luongo. I hate his inconsistency. I think he has done great things in Vancouver. Yet we still have no Cup with him and there's a good chance we never will if he can't string together a consistent playoff run. Assuming he plays for us this coming season then of course I will support him but he's got a long way to go to restore my faith in the post season.

I understand your frustration as I too have made these posts for the exact same reason. It's why I finally joined, so really you only have yourselves to blame.

[Snake Doctor]

He will come back strionger than ever. I'm so happy to have him back.

[TheDugg1er]

Oh for gods sake, Luongo hasn't been good enough in the playoffs, this is a fact. You put your long winded story book spin on it to make him look half decent. I show the stats which make him look like crap, but they are factual. Statistics exist for a reason, if you want to believe Luongo is good enough in the playoffs then that's your problem. All I see from Luongo are good regular seasons, bloated playoff numbers, short playoff runs (except for one which went sideways), and no cups. Yeah this elite superstar is simply dynamite, and yet somehow without rhyme or reason his playoff numbers always end up looking like sh!t. Let's all concoct some clever excuses as to why this is so we can all be deluded into thinking Luongo's been great and the real problem is that the Canucks (who make the playoffs with ease) are the Florida Panthers of the pacific northwest. Good day to you.

[apollo]

Just read the last couple pages and looks like classic Riviera comments getting countered by legit ffacts from Poetica.

Riviera... what stats would you REALISTICALLY want Lui to put up for you to promise you'll let go of your hate for him and join the lovewagon? .920 and 2.20 good? But u have to promise lol...

Btw nice touch duggler with the demitra save

... people are always saying luongo wasn't crucial in our gold medal. But obviously toews doughty and Keith had already packed their bags for that last shift... absolutely emberassing shift by those 3 all stars. Lui saved our ass.

Also game seven scf... Lui absolutely robbed Krejci on an open net when it was 0-0 ... canucks failed to score though and we lost 4-0

[poetica]

Oh for gods sake, Luongo hasn't been good enough in the playoffs, this is a fact. You put your long winded story book spin on it to make him look half decent. I show the stats which make him look like crap, but they are factual. Statistics exist for a reason, if you want to believe Luongo is good enough in the playoffs then that's your problem. All I see from Luongo are good regular seasons, bloated playoff numbers, short playoff runs (except for one which went sideways), and no cups. Yeah this elite superstar is simply dynamite, and yet somehow without rhyme or reason his playoff numbers always end up looking like sh!t. Let's all concoct some clever excuses as to why this is so we can all be deluded into thinking Luongo's been great and the real problem is that the Canucks (who make the playoffs with ease) are the Florida Panthers of the pacific northwest. Good day to you.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

Not to knock Luongo but wins in today's era have a huge advantage over goalies prior to the 04/05 season. How many goalies on that list didn't have the benefit of shootout wins. Luongo has over 30 shootout wins, prior to the 04 season goalies were not awarded for that and would be giving a tie instead. Imagine what some of the other goalies would have if they had shootouts in the majority of their playing career. To put this into perspective if Brodeur went even just went 50% in his career ties he'd be at 721 total reg season wins, Roy would have 616, Belfore 539. In fact if people want to look at wins they should be looking at winning % rather than just wins. Luongo isn't even in the top 25 in that category even with his skewed 30+ shootout wins added to his totals.

As a goalie your greatness is defined by how you play in big games. To say Luongo is a top 5 even a top 10 goalie in the all-time list is absurd. He has put together some good season and that is all and good but that does not make you elite by any means. But other than some strong regular season campaign he doesn't have much.

As of (right now) what makes Luongo's career any better than Kiprusoff, Nabokov, Tim Thomas, Joseph, Osgood, Lundqvist

Look at some of the past greats such as Dryden, Hall, Plante, Espisito, Sawchuk Tretiak(even though he didn't even play in the NHL). They played in a different era and Dryden played under 500 games but yet is still considered to be one of the game's best. Goalies are defined by how they played in important games and have the hardware that came along with it.

The difference that between Luongo and the all-time elite goalies is that elite goalies can elevate their game to the next levels when it matters. Levels that no other goalie can match. When goalies do this they win hardware, Patrick Roy has 3 conn smythe, and has been named the best goalie of that year 3 times. Brodeur has 4 vezina's

Not once has Luongo ever even been named the league's best goalie for any year of his career. This is a tuff pill to swallow is you're in the Luongo is an all-time greatest camp.

Don't get me wrong, Luongo is a very good goalie. One of the better(not the best) goalies in the league today. But unless he puts up some all star seasons that bring him some serious hardware (stanley cup, conn symthe, vezina) you can't even consider him to be in the top 10 of all time. There is still some time left in his career to achieve that and I hope he does. Nothing would make me more happy than the canucks to win a cup but after whats happened this last season I have a feeling some of his pasion to give everything to this org. will have faded or maybe it will be the opposite and light a fire under neath of him.

[TS06]

what is your definition of generational talent?

Luongo does not fall under that category.

[Primus099]

Oh for gods sake, Luongo hasn't been good enough in the playoffs, this is a fact.

[Mustapha]

And Giguere isn't close to Luongo. He had a few seasons of great hockey, those are the type of seasons Luongo has been having since atleast 2002

[Riviera82]

Just read the last couple pages and looks like classic Riviera comments getting countered by legit ffacts from Poetica.

Riviera... what stats would you REALISTICALLY want Lui to put up for you to promise you'll let go of your hate for him and join the lovewagon? .920 and 2.20 good? But u have to promise lol...

Btw nice touch duggler with the demitra save

... people are always saying luongo wasn't crucial in our gold medal. But obviously toews doughty and Keith had already packed their bags for that last shift... absolutely emberassing shift by those 3 all stars. Lui saved our ass.

Also game seven scf... Lui absolutely robbed Krejci on an open net when it was 0-0 ... canucks failed to score though and we lost 4-0

[Smashian Kassian]

I don't remember Luongo having seasons like these ^

If he ever does in Vancouver, he would be worshipped like a god.

[Primus099]

2.20 GAA and .920 Sv% would be a terrific improvement. I'd be quite pleased if he finished a playoff with numbers like that, they are pretty respectable. My true hope would be to see a return of 2007 Luongo, but that's a fairly tall order I know.

[Mustapha]

Luongo would have had both of those had this team been able to score some goals.

[Primus099]

Mind you Jiggy had to spend time toiling in the AHL to get his chance, he didn't have a red carpet entrance to the NHL like Louie

[Smashian Kassian]

'Would have' and 'if only' are useless statements in sports. He doesn't have those trophies, and the Conn Smythe is the greatest individual trophy in professional hockey, because it recognizes excellence at the most critical time. Giguere only allowed 1 goal in an entire playoff series that year, something Luongo hasn't been able to do even at his best.

Regular season games won, perhaps. Mind you Jiggy had to spend time toiling in the AHL to get his chance, he didn't have a red carpet entrance to the NHL like Louie. As for the 'international accomplishments' I assume you are referring to the Gold Medal. I am willing to bet that if a hockey player could choose either a Gold Medal in his career or a Stanley Cup and a Conn Smythe, they would choose the latter.

Hell, if the city of Vancouver could trade their Gold Medal for a Stanley Cup, it would be a no-brainer. There's a reason the people trashed the city after Game 7.

[Mustapha]

Luongo was drafted in 1997 and didn't play in the NHL until 1999-2000, and it was on a garbage Islanders team.

How is that a red carpet entrance lol

[Mustapha]

If Giguere was a generational talent he wouldn't have been in the minors for so long, he would have been in the NHL.

Giguere had a great peak, but he couldn't maintain it, thats the difference between he and Luongo.

Luongo has had a great peak, and has maintained elite play. Giguere hasn't been as good as Luongo for as long as Luongo has.

[Riviera82]

I've never said consistency isn't an issue with Luo. For me, it's a concern as a part of the bigger issue with lack of consistency with the entire team. For you, as you've posted in every single thread Luo's name has ever been mentioned in, consistency is the definition of an "elite goalie" and the reason you swear Luo can not be one.

How can you possibly argue that context doesn't matter? If you believe the number do tell a story, why don't you think a big part of that story is the numbers the team put up? Looking at only the first page of a book isn't seeing the full story!

For example, this year Luo had a .915 SV% and a 2.58 GAA and his stats were padded a bit by going in after Cory was pulled in game 3. By your arbitrary standards, Luo wasn't good this year, but in reality he actually was. Ignoring that doesn't make it not true!

My point is that you're missing a big part of the picture if you aren't looking at the team he's playing behind. You want to look at other goalies, fine. Look at them. But look at their teams too. What kind of scoring support and D are they getting? Ignoring the rest of the team is simply too shortsighted.

Let me put it another way: How many goalies who meet your definition of "elite" have played consistently well in front of a crap team during the playoffs? Surely if the team has nothing to do with a goalie's stats and "elite" goalies get it done no matter what, there have to be some. Who are they?

Other than the fact that you looked at Luo's stats and noticed that that's the threshold you can say he doesn't surpass, why those numbers? Is there any other reasoning at all behind those specific numbers? Otherwise, they're not a real standard, only a weapon to be used against Luo.

But remember that you set those as the threshold for what is "good" in the playoffs...

Wait, I thought consistency was the big issue, but now you're arguing that an "etlie" goalie is any who puts up numbers you find impressive at least once...but only if you think it was recent enough to count (since Luo's first playoff year numbers were better than most listed above)? How very inconsistent of you!

And remember when above you said, "Elite goalies put up elite stats in the playoffs even if their team loses, that's what I'd love to have seen from Luongo more than just the one time. It shows they were giving their team every chance to win consistently." Are these really the only examples you can offer of goalies who meet that definition? If so, I don't think you're proving your point as well as you think.

Let's look at your examples, noting that only 2 of them warranted multiple entries of stats you were impressed by. Apparently, once isn't good enough for Luo but it is for other goalies as long as that once was still in your short term memory...

Crawford - 4 playoff years (37 games). Finished 2 of those playoff years below your threshold (though one year he only had 1 game.) He's a good goalie, no doubt, but given that last year he had a .893 SV% .and 2.58 GAA he's hardly proven he's an example of consistency. And this year, Chicago was the 6th highest scoring team in the playoffs.

Quick - 4 playoff years (50 games). Though he has turned into the quintessential playoff goalie in the last 2 years, his first 2 years weren't great. In fact, in both of those years his GAA was over 3 and his SV% was below your threshold. And this year, LA had the 11th highest G/G in the playoffs. And they were the 3rd highest scoring team last year.

Niemi - 4 playoff years (56 games). Only surpassed your threshold in this year. Finished below .900 SV% in 10/11. Has a career playoff .909 SV% and 2.65 GAA. And this year SJ was the 9th highest scoring team in the playoffs and had more power play opportunities than all but 4 other teams.

Rask - Only 2 playoff years (35 games) and finished below your threshold in one of them. He also plays for freaking Boston, NHL darlin', back and neck breakers extraordinaires. Has a giant on his D squad. And this year, Boston had the 4th highest G/G in the playoffs.

Vokoun - 3 playoff years (22 games) Played half of his playoff games this year in front of the highest scoring team (by a lot!) And, this year was his first playoff since 06/07 when he had a .902 SV% and 2.96 GAA. His first playoff year was actually pretty good, but it was back in 03/04. And this year, Pitts had the highest G/G in the playoffs.

Holtby - 2 playoff years (21 games). Was awesome in both years, no argument there! And last year, Washington had the 11th highest G/G, which was almost half a goal per game higher than ours.

Smith - 2 playoff years (19 games). His first playoff year he only played 3 games, but he absolutely played very well in both playoff years. His regular season play, however, has been very inconsistent. And last year, Phoenix had the 6th highest G/G in the playoffs.

Rinne - 3 playoff years (28 games). Finished below your threshold in 2 of them. If consistency is what you're all about, he's not shown it. (And his career playoff SV% is actually the same as Luo's.) And last year, Nashville had the 8th highest G/G in the playoffs, which was over a half a goal per game higher than ours.

Thomas - 4 playoff years (50 games). Finished below your threshold in the first one, but was awesome in the other 3. Played in front of Boston. (See comments above for Rask.) And Boston had the 4th highest G/G in the playoffs in both 2008/09 and 2010/11.

None of these are bad goalies by any stretch or reasonable definition. But, none have shown the consistency you have said too many times to count is the earmark of an "elite" goalie. If it's possible, why can't you find examples?

Also, in 8 of your 11 examples, the goalie you listed had a team in the top half (at least) of scoring during the year they recorded those stats. And in all of those examples the goalies had a team with a higher G/G than Vancouver had that year. If you're going to offer examples of how other goalies "get it done" even when the team isn't, maybe you should flip past the first page of the story and make sure they actually illustrate your point.