(Article)NHL goalie rankings: Is Luongo still elite?

[poetica]

Cynics above answers far better than I can. I already stated that it may not be fair, but such is the price of the elite title and paycheque.

I still don't know who gave him the "elite" title that apparently obligates him more than all other players on the team combined. But, if a big salary does create added responsibility, what about the Sedins? Shouldn't their combined $12.2M have gotten us more than 2 goals and 5 total points in the SCF series? Especially given that they were the 1st and 4th top point producers in the regular season and our team's 1st and 2nd point producers in those playoffs.

[poetica]

Nevermind the Stanley Cup Final for a minute. I think the bottom line is this. Luongo has started and finished 10 playoff series in his career and has finished 5 of them with sh!t numbers. Granted, in the other 5 he played very well but that's the thing, it's seems he can only be counted on to play well every other series on average. Elite in the regular season yes, in the playoffs no. End of story.

Good, you're decided then. You think Luo sucks in the playoffs and has for all but his first year. So, obviously he's was not a goalie who was ever going to steal us a Cup and it was silly to ever expect it. Going forward, obviously with a goalie like him we need to SCORE to win. See how easy it was for us to agree that scoring is what we need in the postseason?

And now you can adjust your expectations and save yourself some disappointment every time he doesn't get a shutout in the future. You're welcome.

[King Heffy]

Good, you're decided then. You think Luo sucks in the playoffs and has for all but his first year. So, obviously he's was not a goalie who was ever going to steal us a Cup and it was silly to ever expect it. Going forward, obviously with a goalie like him we need to SCORE to win. See how easy it was for us to agree that scoring is what we need in the postseason?

However. with a goalie that dreadful in the playoffs, it's unreasonable to expect enough scoring to win. We not only need more scoring, we need a goalie who can at least play like he belongs in the NHL more than half the time.

[hudson bay rules]

The fact that Lou is up and down is beyond debatable. The question is are we happy with that or would we rather a more consistent tender.

[DeNiro]

The fact that Lou is up and down is beyond debatable. The question is are we happy with that or would we rather a more consistent tender.

I would like us to have more consistent defense and scoring over anything.

Lu can get the job done if he has a team in front of him. If they continue to fold like a deck of cards, he's not Lu from 06/07 anymore that can carry them on his back.

[King Heffy]

The fact that Lou is up and down is beyond debatable. The question is are we happy with that or would we rather a more consistent tender.

We need a goalie who doesn't play like trash half the time in the playoffs or we aren't going anywhere.

[hudson bay rules]

I would like us to have more consistent defense and scoring over anything.

Lu can get the job done if he has a team in front of him. If they continue to fold like a deck of cards, he's not Lu from 06/07 anymore that can carry them on his back.

yeah. letting in 8 goals is gonna frack up your offence every time

[DeNiro]

yeah. letting in 8 goals is gonna frack up your offence every time

You know the D are responsible for those goals too right?

There's not enough common sense in this market.

Everyone thinks every goal is the goalies fault. They'll only focus on the goals, and not the countless breakdowns on D and unwillingness to block shots or stop players in the neutral zone that lead to those goals.

Our D has been brutal over the years and have had countless breakdowns along with the goaltenders.

[ilduce39]

...lifetime playoff GAA of 2.54 isn't insurmountable and is pretty much bang-on with his regular season GAA. He had two stinkers in the postseason - 2010 and 2012. You can whine and moan all you want that it's "unacceptable" but the bottom line is it's a team sport and while he's had some bad games / series on average it's no worse than the team in front of him.

[ilduce39]

...or we can pin all of our hopes and expectations on one guy and then throw ourselves to the ground and have a hissy fit every time he doesn't live up to the unrealistic expectations, as we have with our goalies for the past 40+ years. It's been working well for us so far.

[King Heffy]

You know the D are responsible for those goals too right?

There's not enough common sense in this market.

Everyone thinks every goal is the goalies fault. They'll only focus on the goals, and not the countless breakdowns on D and unwillingness to block shots or stop players in the neutral zone that lead to those goals.

Our D has been brutal over the years and have had countless breakdowns along with the goaltenders.

Luongo's numerous soft goals, however ARE his fault. It's hard to play D if you know that ANY shot has a legit chance of going in because your goalie is a sieve.

[poetica]

However. with a goalie that dreadful in the playoffs, it's unreasonable to expect enough scoring to win. We not only need more scoring, we need a goalie who can at least play like he belongs in the NHL more than half the time.

Really? A goalie with a .916 playoff SV% is dreadful? He had a .915 this year and if stats reflected only his play, it would be much higher. He also had a .914 in 10/11.

Despite the hyperbole so common to this Chicken Little forum, Luo's allowed 3 or fewer goals in 75% of his playoff games. (And he allowed 3 or fewer goals in 71% of his games in 10/11.) We've also won 52% of the playoff games he's started despite the fact that we've only scored 2 or fewer goals in 54% of our playoff games during Luo's time here. (If you're interested, you can read a short comparison with other teams in a previous post of mine.)

If you think that means he doesn't play like he belongs in the NHL "more than half the time" you need a reality check!

[poetica]

yeah. letting in 8 goals is gonna frack up your offence every time

Every 1 time, you mean? And are you forgetting that is also the game Rome took out Horton? That was a HUGE momentum shifter. (Of course let's ignore that we also gave up 13 PP shots, which led to 2 goals, and 7 shorthanded chances, which led to another 2 goals.) Yep, it was all just Luo. Like always. In fact, I heard he stunk so bad in that game it actually caused global warming. Retroactively. Damn that Luo!

But, remind me again, how did that keep the team from scoring a single goal in Game 7?

[hudson bay rules]

Every 1 time, you mean? And are you forgetting that is also the game Rome took out Horton? That was a HUGE momentum shifter. (Of course let's ignore that we also gave up 13 PP shots, which led to 2 goals, and 7 shorthanded chances, which led to another 2 goals.) Yep, it was all just Luo. Like always. In fact, I heard he stunk so bad in that game it actually caused global warming. Retroactively. Damn that Luo!

But, remind me again, how did that keep the team from scoring a single goal in Game 7?

so, if the injured team scored 7 then Lou woulda got a free pass?

[poetica]

so, if the injured team scored 7 then Lou woulda got a free pass?

So, if a goalie gives up 3 the team gets a free pass (game 7)? And if the goalie gives up 8 in one game, the team gets a free pass for scoring only that many goals in the entire series?

And why is the team being injured an excuse for our lack of offense, but not a strong indication that our defense was also suffering?

[We Are All Cynics]

I do know that Conn Smythe can go to the losing team player. Many media members pointed out that Luongo would have won the MVP if Vancouver won it because it's hard to ignore the two 1-0 shutouts that got us there, and because no one on our team could seem to score. And those are the guys that vote for the Conn Smythe...

So we're believing the media now? How convenient when it's in Luongo's favour. But Healey makes a claim Vigneault would've won a Cup if he had a goaltender and the CDC explodes with attempts to discredit or tear him down.

I agree that two 1-0 shutouts that Luongo got was definitely impressive but those games in Boston have to factor in it too and in comparison to Thomas it would be completely unfair to give it to Luongo for just four games of play when Thomas had seven great games. He too got two shutouts to help his club to the Cup.

Again, we'll have to agree to disagree. I just don't see how the Conn Smythe could've gone to anyone but Thomas win or lose based on all seven games not just the four that wins it.

[5Fivehole0]

Really? A goalie with a .916 playoff SV% is dreadful? He had a .915 this year and if stats reflected only his play, it would be much higher. He also had a .914 in 10/11.

Despite the hyperbole so common to this Chicken Little forum, Luo's allowed 3 or fewer goals in 75% of his playoff games. (And he allowed 3 or fewer goals in 71% of his games in 10/11.) We've also won 52% of the playoff games he's started despite the fact that we've only scored 2 or fewer goals in 54% of our playoff games during Luo's time here. (If you're interested, you can read a short comparison with other teams in a previous post of mine.)

If you think that means he doesn't play like he belongs in the NHL "more than half the time" you need a reality check!

Nice research, and well put.

[hudson bay rules]

So we're believing the media now? How convenient when it's in Luongo's favour. But Healey makes a claim Vigneault would've won a Cup if he had a goaltender and the CDC explodes with attempts to discredit or tear him down.

I agree that two 1-0 shutouts that Luongo got was definitely impressive but those games in Boston have to factor in it too and in comparison to Thomas it would be completely unfair to give it to Luongo for just four games of play when Thomas had seven great games. He too got two shutouts to help his club to the Cup.

Again, we'll have to agree to disagree. I just don't see how the Conn Smythe could've gone to anyone but Thomas win or lose based on all seven games not just the four that wins it.

Lou sucked some games no matter how you wanna spin it. Doesn't give others a free pass but it also doesn't mean he didn't have a negative influence on them either.

[We Are All Cynics]

If we were only ever going to win by completely changing our style of play at the last minute, abandoning the fact that we were built around being a high scoring team, and expecting our goalie to do what no other goalie has ever done and steal 4 games while getting less support than ever before, all while under some of the most intense pressure a hockey player has ever faced, then we were never going to win. It's really that simple.

I agree that Thomas was great in those playoffs. But I don't understand the claim he gave his team a chance to win every game unlike Luo when just to get to the Finals Boston had to win 4 games in which Thomas gave up 3, 4 or 5 goals. (And 3 of those were must wins in a 7 game series.) He was great, but he was also carried by his team in 4 games. Luo was only carried by his team twice (as we only won 2 games when he gave up 3 goals.) Even if we had won Game 7 we would have carried our goalie less than Boston did. Maybe (obviously) our team wasn't up to the challenge, but that doesn't make it Luo's fault that his team wasn't able to do their part. And frankly I don't understand how any intelligent hockey fan can not see that.

Furthermore, I know it's the common argument to claim it was a "goalie battle" but it's not true. Saying it was a "goalie battle" supposes that all other factors were equal and that the only difference was the play of each goalie. But that isn't even close to the truth of that series. In reality, Boston's players were doing their job. Their D focused on defending and even made a couple of saves (see Game 7 highlights for one example), while ours allowed Bruins players to stand in front of Luo for quick tip-ins, gave up multiple short handed chances, and allowed them to run into Luo and knock the puck out of his pads and into the net. And that was just Game 7.

Their top scorers were putting up shots and getting goals, while ours were barely noticeable most games. (Daniel got 4 points. Hank got only 1. And Hank only got a faceoff win over 50% in a single game. He was below 40% in the first 2 games.) To try to make up for it, our D was often so focused on trying to create offense that it was detrimental of our defense. (We had 2 Dmen with over 20 shots in that series. We also only had 2 forwards with over 20 shots. And one of them was Lappy. Burrows got only one more shot in that series than Salo, and Hank got 2 less.)

For it to be a goalie battle the team has to level the playing field. Luo didn't do his job in Boston. I agree. But, I also know that the team didn't do their part in every game either. And if you don't expect the team to win with a deficit, wh would you expect Luo to win with one?

I guess we'll have to disagree. Four games were won by shutouts and the Canucks had managed to shell Thomas in four games with 38-41 shots which suggests to me that both Boston's D wasn't doing their job effectively and that Thomas was standing on his head. Thomas just happened to get hot and stood on his head when the SCF started. He struggled in previous series just like Luongo did but those series were different. Each one is a clean slate and can develop their own identity.

I agree injuries, lack of scoring, special teams all contributed but Luongo unfortunately contributed as well. To say Luongo gave us a chance for under 50% of the series and expect the team to make up the rest how are they supposed to account for that. Was Vigneault supposed to say to the team "we don't know how Luongo will be this game, but if he's on ride the gravy train and if he's off better be prepared to score a ton of goals." You can't predict for it. And also would it likely have mattered whether the Canucks were scoring. We likely wouldn't have beat Boston 9-8 in Game 3 if that was the case because if that miraculous comeback was to occur Luongo would have likely let in more than eight. That goes back to the mind frack scenario. What's the point of a hurting unit attempting to come back in a game with a deficit that seems insurmountable if they believe Luongo will just let in more. If anything you can make the argument of blaming them for giving up in those games in an attempt to rest for the next game. But that again depends on how Luongo will perform the next start.

It's also not like the Canucks didn't try. Those games in Boston the Canucks put 38-41 shots on Thomas and 37 shots on him in Game 7. You can't say Boston's defense was spectacular with numbers like that, I mean NJ D kept Toronto to just 6 shots several years back. The difference was Thomas that series. Even I didn't think Thomas was good before the start of that series but I kept waiting for the games he would stumble and it never came. For Luongo it did.

[DeNiro]

Luongo's numerous soft goals, however ARE his fault. It's hard to play D if you know that ANY shot has a legit chance of going in because your goalie is a sieve.

The the D are just as soft and mentally weak if they get deflated that easily.

If they're worried about our goalie letting in softies, how about they actually block some shots then? I've never seen a D core be so allergic to blocking shots as ours. And when they actually do block shots, they usually miss and just get in the way of Lu.

Say what you want about Ballard, but at least he knew how to block shots.

And I could say the same thing in reverse. It's hard to play goal when you know you're D is gonna screen you, stand around not covering their checks, not block any shots for you, and let numerous odd man rushes come your way. That's alot of pressure for a goalie to know he's gonna pretty much have to be the star every game.