Plum Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 So it's okay to use Lu's shortened season against him but not Quick... Lu's Stanley cup year is just a tad worse than Quicks. Is Quick the better goalie? Of course he is, he's the 2nd best in the league. They both had their numbers drop after the Cup run. It's one year apart yes, but the trend is the same. Quick also had the better team in my opinion.. LA is built for play-off hockey. My argument was, it's easy to blame the goalie. My stats that I gave were the 11-12 season, for both goalies. We could argue that our team was still devastated from the Cup loss coming into the 11-12 season. But that isn't a good argument. Quick is the better goalie and an elite one, so yes you are right. Arguably? No way... Our defense was probably the best in the league. Okay what about 12-13? Lemon didn't think that our defense wasn't the best and "said look at their (Kings) top-6". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poetica Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 He also shows up when it matters too. You know? Game 7 SCF? How is 3 goals allowed in a game with a limping D squad and 0 scoring support "not showing up when it matters"? He might have sucked in Boston, but Luo absolutely "showed up" at home, allowing only 5 goals in our 4 home games, including 2 shutouts. We also only scored 5 goals at home, including being shut out in Game 7. So, why is it that Luo didn't "show up when it matters" because he allowed 5 goals in 4 home games but no one is saying the team didn't "show up when it matters" because they scored only 5 goals in 4 games, were kept scoreless twice, and scored only a single goal in 3 more games? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plum Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 What you define as reality might not even make the common sense level. It is obvious you are a staunch Canuck fan and that is great stuff, however you need to understand the team concept much better to form a less biased opinion on any player. Injuries, suspensions and poor play all contributed to the loss against Boston. It was just not Luongo' s play itself. Maybe you should be also singling out Edler, Bieksa and a few of the boys who left him hanging out to dry on several of the goals you believe we're totally his responsibility. They didn't have Nathan Horton, and they were probably bruised up aswell. Stop bringing up the past, i'm not going to argue with you. I think he's talking about the upcoming olympics. We don't have great goaltending, of course Luongo would start. He has excellent defense infront of him, if we still lose... I don't know what to tell you about his eliteness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drouin Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 My stats that I gave were the 11-12 season, for both goalies. We could argue that our team was still devastated from the Cup loss coming into the 11-12 season. But that isn't a good argument. Quick is the better goalie and an elite one, so yes you are right. Lemon didn't think that our defense wasn't the best and "said look at their (Kings) top-6". by the defense I was talking playoffs, not regular season. Salo got injured, Rome suspended, AV/Ballard situation, Edler was playing injured. Not to mention Tanev wasn't as experienced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drouin Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 They didn't have Nathan Horton, and they were probably bruised up aswell. Stop bringing up the past, i'm not going to argue with you. We don't have great goaltending, of course Luongo would start. He has excellent defense infront of him, if we still lose... I don't know what to tell you about his eliteness. Excellent defense at the olympics? Obviously Brodeur showed otherwise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plum Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 How is 3 goals allowed in a game with a limping D squad and 0 scoring support "not showing up when it matters"? He might have sucked in Boston, but Luo absolutely "showed up" at home, allowing only 5 goals in our 4 home games, including 2 shutouts. We also only scored 5 goals at home, including being shut out in Game 7. So, why is it that Luo didn't "show up when it matters" because he allowed 5 goals in 4 home games but no one is saying the team didn't "show up when it matters" because they scored only 5 goals in 4 games, were kept scoreless twice, and scored only a single goal in 3 more games? But when he went to Boston, you know what happened. All he had to do was show some of his magic at Boston but he didn't do to it, in fact he played terrible. I don't want to talk about 10-11, if he kept the goals down to 1-2 in Boston we could have had a cup.. But that doesn't matter anymore, move on to next year, if I don't see elite stats out of him this upcoming season then I will continue to believe he isn't elite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plum Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 Excellent defense at the olympics? Obviously Brodeur showed otherwise Brodeur has already shown how great of a goaltender he is. He is the best goalie to ever play between the pipes, don't even try to argue about this. He was 36? At Olympics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drouin Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 But when he went to Boston, you know what happened. All he had to do was show some of his magic at Boston but he didn't do to it, in fact he played terrible. I don't want to talk about 10-11, if he kept the goals down to 1-2 in Boston we could have had a cup.. But that doesn't matter anymore, move on to next year, if I don't see elite stats out of him this upcoming season then I will continue to believe he isn't elite. You don't wanna talk about 10-11 cause you know you're wrong. If he kept the goals down to 1-2? Isn't that what he did when he had 2 SO's? Are you forgetting we had the lowest GF average in history in the finals? No. We would've had a cup if our team could score and play consistent defense, something you fail to acknowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drouin Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 Brodeur has already shown how great of a goaltender he is. He is the best goalie to ever play between the pipes, don't even try to argue about this. He was 36? At Olympics? So? He can't play decent? Thomas was older when he won the SCF. If he was such a great goaltender, how come Luo started and not him? Oh, so once he shows he's great he doesn't have to play good again? Yet Luo does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benchsplinters Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 Yet you are talking about the Olympics, lol. He doesn't put him elite stats, look at Quick and Lundqvist, 11-12 season. Their stats were alot better than Luongos, because they are elite goaltenders. Luongo will tell you he isn't the same elite goalie he was. Do you believe in the past two years, the Canucks were the same team as the year the played Boston in the SC finals. I have yet to hear you speak of the injuries that plagued the team in that series, only your blame of Lou for all the goals he let in. I do not want to take anything away from Quick or Lundqvist they are elite goalies, you are right in that regard. But they also had well coached, cup hungry players playing in front of them that even makes them look better. Let their defenseman hang them out to dry and then you will see their crack in their elites. Stanley Cups are won by those teams that make the fewest errors in a series. Those errors are caused by all players just not goaltenders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5Fivehole0 Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 My stats that I gave were the 11-12 season, for both goalies. We could argue that our team was still devastated from the Cup loss coming into the 11-12 season. But that isn't a good argument. Quick is the better goalie and an elite one, so yes you are right. Lemon didn't think that our defense wasn't the best and "said look at their (Kings) top-6". 2010-2011 cup run, our D going in was the best, hands down... vs Boston... Below average due to injury. So what about Quicks year after he won the cup?? Well below average... Cup hangovers are very much so real. They include, losing players, and mental abuse, especially to the losing team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plum Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 You don't wanna talk about 10-11 cause you know you're wrong. If he kept the goals down to 1-2? Isn't that what he did when he had 2 SO's? Are you forgetting we had the lowest GF average in history in the finals? No. We would've had a cup if our team could score and play consistent defense, something you fail to acknowledge. I don't want to talk about because it has been talked about to death. Elite goalies don't give up 5-8 goals, please tell me why he played good in Vancouver but crapped in net in Boston? All he needed to do is keep the goals down a bit so we still have confidence when the guys were playing. You can't say that our defense was bad but then when we went to Vancouver they turned good, give me an explantion of the Boston and then back to Vancouver games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poetica Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 ... Lu's Stanley cup year is just a tad worse than Quicks. Is Quick the better goalie? Of course he is, he's the 2nd best in the league. They both had their numbers drop after the Cup run. It's one year apart yes, but the trend is the same. ... Thomas did as well. 10/11 .938 SV% 2.00 GAA 11/12 .920 SV% 2.36 GAA Niemi is probably the only recent anomaly as after he was traded from Chicago to SJ his SV% improved but his GAA went down. But then, he also won a Cup with worse overall stats than Luo had during our Cup run and worse stats in the SCF than Luo had... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benchsplinters Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 They didn't have Nathan Horton, and they were probably bruised up aswell. Stop bringing up the past, i'm not going to argue with you. We don't have great goaltending, of course Luongo would start. He has excellent defense infront of him, if we still lose... I don't know what to tell you about his eliteness. You are judging from things that happened in the past and are associating those happenings to the the blame you place on Luongo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plum Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 2010-2011 cup run, our D going in was the best, hands down... vs Boston... Below average due to injury. So what about Quicks year after he won the cup?? Well below average... Cup hangovers are very much so real. They include, losing players, and mental abuse, especially to the losing team. Quick had the Kings got to the West final, that is very good. But when we lost in the SCF and came back we just got killed. So? He can't play decent? Thomas was older when he won the SCF. If he was such a great goaltender, how come Luo started and not him? Oh, so once he shows he's great he doesn't have to play good again? Yet Luo does. He was 36 years old facing superstars, come on man. He already proved he is the best goaltender to ever play between the pipes. This is what you sound like IDC IF HE WAS 36 YEARS OLD HE STILL SHOULD HAVE WON THE GAME AGAINST SUPERSTARS IN THE NHL. You sound like an idiot. I can't put it any other way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plum Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 You are judging from things that happened in the past and are associating those happenings to the the blame you place on Luongo. No i'm not, not going to argue with 4 people about the same thing. Again, the question is he currently elite? Answer it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drouin Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 I don't want to talk about because it has been talked about to death. Elite goalies don't give up 5-8 goals, please tell me why he played good in Vancouver but crapped in net in Boston? All he needed to do is keep the goals down a bit so we still have confidence when the guys were playing. You can't say that our defense was bad but then when we went to Vancouver they turned good, give me an explantion of the Boston and then back to Vancouver games. Ok. We couldn't score, we were 1/20 on the PP, Boston scored 6 goals on PP, between 2 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5Fivehole0 Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 I don't want to talk about because it has been talked about to death. Elite goalies don't give up 5-8 goals, please tell me why he played good in Vancouver but crapped in net in Boston? All he needed to do is keep the goals down a bit so we still have confidence when the guys were playing. You can't say that our defense was bad but then when we went to Vancouver they turned good, give me an explantion of the Boston and then back to Vancouver games. Tim Thomas had multiple 4+ goal games in his cup run 5-2 loss to Tampa 5-6 win vs Tampa (his team could bail him out) 4-5 loss to Tampa Lu 7-2 to Chicago 8-1 Boston Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5Fivehole0 Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 No i'm not, not going to argue with 4 people about the same thing. Again, the question is he currently elite? Answer it. Yes, yes he is. The same how Quick put up less than average numbers and still is... The same that Pekke Rinne put up average numbers and still is considered elite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poetica Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 But when he went to Boston, you know what happened. All he had to do was show some of his magic at Boston but he didn't do to it, in fact he played terrible. I don't want to talk about 10-11, if he kept the goals down to 1-2 in Boston we could have had a cup.. But that doesn't matter anymore, move on to next year, if I don't see elite stats out of him this upcoming season then I will continue to believe he isn't elite. You didn't answer my question. How is 3 goals against in Game 7 "not showing up when it matters"? And, if Luo wasn't "elite" because he sucked in the 3 games in Boston despite only allowing 5 goals in our 4 home games, doesn't that mean our team wasn't elite because they scored only 8 goals in 7 games, including being kept to no more than 1 goal in 5 of those 7 games? If you argue an "elite" goalie should be able to win when a team isn't scoring well, shouldn't an elite team be able to win a few when their goalie allows more than 2 goals? Boston certainly could. They won 4 games in which Thomas gave up 3, 4 or 5 goals. We won only 2 games in which Luo gave up 3 and failed to do it one more time to get the Cup in Game 7. Are you really just mad that Luo wasn't "elite" enough to make up for the fact that our team wasn't as "elite" as Boston? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.