Elias Pettersson Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 4 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said: Luongo's contributions to the Canucks are not significantly more deserving of higher honors than McLean's. McLean was a Vezina finalist twice as a Canuck. Same with Luongo. McLean got the Canucks to game 7 of the SCF, same with Luongo, and McLean did a better job of it while setting league records for minutes and saves in the playoffs. Luongo had the more HOF career as a whole but this is about jersey retirement with one particular team. They deserve the same treatment, whatever it is. And I don't personally think #1 needs to be taken out of circulation just on the basis of Lu's time as a Canuck. Luongo’s dominant years were with Vancouver. He is in the hall of fame. McLean isn’t. So it’s a pretty black and white comparison really. How can you say both had equal careers with Vancouver when one is in the hall of fame and the other isn’t? I highly doubt Luongo pushed himself into the hall of fame based on his time in Florida. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Biestra Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: Luongo’s dominant years were with Vancouver. He is in the hall of fame. McLean isn’t. So it’s a pretty black and white comparison really. How can you say both had equal careers with Vancouver when one is in the hall of fame and the other isn’t? I highly doubt Luongo pushed himself into the hall of fame based on his time in Florida. Because whether they are in the Hall of Fame is almost irrelevant. It's about their total contribution to one team. I have Bure and Luongo WAY WAY WAY behind Stan Smyl in terms of whether their jersey should be retired, and Stan will never get anywhere close to the Hall of Fame. And yes, if you take away Lu's Florida years he is absolutely not getting into the Hall of Fame at all, I guarantee it. He is in largely for longevity and workload and career totals and over half of that is from Florida. Edited June 28, 2022 by Kevin Biestra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 Watching some highlights, I swear you could put together atleast an hour long compilation of remarkable A+ saves by Luongo. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said: Because whether they are in the Hall of Fame is almost irrelevant. It's about their total contribution to one team. I have Bure and Luongo WAY WAY WAY behind Stan Smyl in terms of whether their jersey should be retired, and Stan will never get anywhere close to the Hall of Fame. And yes, if you take away Lu's Florida years he is absolutely not getting into the Hall of Fame at all, I guarantee it. He is in largely for longevity and workload and career totals and over half of that is from Florida. I watched both McLean and Luongo in Vancouver. Luongo was the more dominant goalie. Had the greatest year for a goalie in Vancouver Canucks history. Actually if you take out Brodeur that year it was one of the most dominant years in NHL history with 47 wins. Only Brodeur has more wins in a single year. That alone puts him ahead of McLean and that year is what pushed Luongo into a first ballot hall of famer. McLean never hit 40 wins in a season, Luongo did it twice WITH Vancouver. Luongo had 30+ win seasons 6 years in a row WITH Vancouver, McLean had one. How can you say McLean had an equal career in Vancouver to Luongo? The stats don't support your argument. Roberto Luongo is the greatest goalie in Vancouver Canucks history, is a first ballot hockey hall of famer and deserves and WILL have his number retired by the Vancouver Canucks. Edited June 28, 2022 by Elias Pettersson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Biestra Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: I watched both McLean and Luongo in Vancouver. Luongo was the more dominant goalie. Had the greatest year for a goalie in Vancouver Canucks history. Actually if you take out Brodeur that year it was one of the most dominant years in NHL history with 47 wins. Only Brodeur has more wins in a single year. That alone puts him ahead of McLean and that year is what pushed Luongo into a first ballot hall of famer. McLean never hit 40 wins in a season, Luongo did it twice WITH Vancouver. Luongo had 30+ win seasons 6 years in a row WITH Vancouver, McLean had one. How can you say McLean had an equal career in Vancouver to Luongo? The stats don't support your argument. Roberto Luongo is the greatest goalie in Vancouver Canucks history, is a first ballot hockey hall of famer and deserves and WILL have his number retired by the Vancouver Canucks. McLean never played with OTLs and shootouts. His 38 win season (which led the NHL) with no shootouts and OTLs is way better than 40 wins today. It's not just about stats...though McLean and Lu aren't that far apart there. Both were a top 3 goalie in the NHL twice as a Canuck. Both went to the final once. McLean had maybe the two most legendary games by a Canuck goalie ever in round 1 and round 4 of 1994. Lu pooped the bed repeatedly in rounds 1 and 4 of 2011. Sure I would agree that Lu's big year was the best regular season by a Canuck goalie. But it's not like he was Gretzky and the next guy down was Taylor Pyatt. McLean had competitive years with that, Gary Smith had one as well. And Lu's 47 wins is impressive...but it's not really even close to Bernie Parent's 47 wins in the 1970s with no shootouts, etc. Bernie Parent would have probably had something like 53 wins if it were under the current league rules. McLean would have probably had 43 or something. Anyway yeah Luongo will probably get his number retired here but I was giving my opinion on whether he should. Getting your jersey retired in a city is about having made such a contribution to that one team that nobody should ever wear that jersey again. Hall of Fame for a full career including other teams is mostly beside the point. That's why I think Ken Daneyko in New Jersey is a more fitting jersey retirement than Lu or Bure in Vancouver. Same with Stan Smyl and Trevor Linden, Shane Doan, Patrik Elias, Neal Broten, Milan Hejduk, Rick Middleton, Brian Sutter, Dave Taylor...none of whom are in the Hall of Fame. Edited June 28, 2022 by Kevin Biestra 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 34 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said: Luongo's contributions to the Canucks are not significantly more deserving of higher honors than McLean's. McLean was a Vezina finalist twice as a Canuck. Same with Luongo. McLean got the Canucks to game 7 of the SCF, same with Luongo, and McLean did a better job of it while setting league records for minutes and saves in the playoffs. Luongo had the more HOF career as a whole but this is about jersey retirement with one particular team. They deserve the same treatment, whatever it is. And I don't personally think #1 needs to be taken out of circulation just on the basis of Lu's time as a Canuck. disagree Luongo have accomplished a lot more than Maclean have in the regular seasons and it's not even close.. if we are comparing playoffs only then we should unretire Naslund's number since he never took the team to the SCF. Luongo was robbed twice on the vezina once with the panthers once with the canucks both losing out to brodeur.. .luongo was the far superior goalie both season behind an abysmal team while devils were a defensive juggernaut. the guy literally owns every single regular season single season records overall regular season record playoff records.. i honestly dont see anyone touching on the canucks anytime soon.. maybe the win record if demko stays as the starter for 7-8 more years. that alone should warrant his jersey being retired in vancouver based on the requirement we have set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said: McLean never played with OTLs and shootouts. His 38 win season (which led the NHL) with no shootouts and OTLs is way better than 40 wins today. It's not just about stats...though McLean and Lu aren't that far apart there. Both were a top 3 goalie in the NHL twice as a Canuck. Both went to the final once. Sure I would agree that Lu's big year was the best regular season by a Canuck goalie. But it's not like he was Gretzky and the next guy down was Taylor Pyatt. McLean had competitive years with that, Gary Smith had one as well. And Lu's 47 wins is impressive...but it's not really even close to Bernie Parent's 47 wins in the 1970s with no shootouts, etc. Bernie Parent would have probably had something like 53 wins if it were under the current league rules. McLean would have probably had 43 or something. Anyway yeah Luongo will probably get his number retired here but I was giving my opinion on whether he should. Getting your jersey retired in a city is about having made such a contribution to that one team that nobody should ever wear that jersey again. Hall of Fame for a full career including other teams is mostly beside the point. That's why I think Ken Daneyko in New Jersey is a more fitting jersey retirement than Lu or Bure in Vancouver. Same with Stan Smyl and Trevor Linden, Shane Doan, Patrik Elias, Neal Broten, Milan Hejduk, Rick Middleton, Brian Sutter, Dave Taylor...none of whom are in the Hall of Fame. Good points, thanks. McLean was actually one of my favourite players when he was a Canuck. I even follow him on Facebook. Trust me, I loved watching him play and those Bure years were my favourite Canuck years. Best memories for me as a Canucks fan. But in my opinion Luongo was on another level. And like you said it wasn't just the stats. It was the way he played the game, clutch saves, fans chanting Luuuu. He was like a goalie version of Bure when he was here in Vancouver. In regards to shootouts and OT wins, I do agree with that. But also remember that rules change all the time and it is hard to compare players in different eras because of that. People say that McDavid is more dominant than Gretzky because Gretzky played in an era where goalies had small pads and were under 6' tall. Gordie Howe only played against 5 other teams, etc. In my opinion, McLean deserves the ROH and I believe Luongo deserves to have his number retired like the other hall of famers we have in Bure and the Sedins. Yes it is a big honour to not have any other player ever wear the #1 ever again. So an argument can be made to not have #1 retired. I don't personally believe that Naslund's number should have been retired but that is another story. Edited June 28, 2022 by Elias Pettersson 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Biestra Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 (edited) 10 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said: disagree Luongo have accomplished a lot more than Maclean have in the regular seasons and it's not even close.. if we are comparing playoffs only then we should unretire Naslund's number since he never took the team to the SCF. Luongo was robbed twice on the vezina once with the panthers once with the canucks both losing out to brodeur.. .luongo was the far superior goalie both season behind an abysmal team while devils were a defensive juggernaut. the guy literally owns every single regular season single season records overall regular season record playoff records.. i honestly dont see anyone touching on the canucks anytime soon.. maybe the win record if demko stays as the starter for 7-8 more years. that alone should warrant his jersey being retired in vancouver based on the requirement we have set. Luongo only played 400 something games as a Canuck. His team records are all surpassable if a decent goalie lays his roots down for a while and the Canucks aren't perennial bottom feeders for those years. You say based on the requirement we have set but there's no precedent for goalies. No numbers are retired and King Richard isn't even in the ROH. The only standard we have is that McLean is ROH and Brodeur apparently isn't even enough for the ROH. The bar seems kind of high for honoring goalies. Edited June 28, 2022 by Kevin Biestra 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Biestra Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: Good points, thanks. McLean was actually one of my favourite players when he was a Canuck. I even follow him on Facebook. Trust me, I loved watching him play and those Bure years were my favourite Canuck years. Best memories for me as a Canucks fan. But in my opinion Luongo was on another level. And like you said it wasn't just the stats. It was the way he played the game, clutch saves, fans chanting Luuuu. He was like a goalie version of Bure when he was here in Vancouver. In regards to shootouts and OT wins, I do agree with that. But also remember that rules change all the time and it is hard to compare players in different eras because of that. People say that McDavid is more dominant that Gretzky because Gretzky played in an era where goalies had small pads and were under 6' tall. Gordie Howe only played against 5 other teams, etc. In my opinion, McLean deserves the ROH and I believe Luongo deserves to have his number retired like the other hall of famers we have in Bure and the Sedins. Yes it is a big honour to not have any other players ever wear the #1 ever again. So an argument can be made to not have #1 retired. I don't personally believe that Naslund's number should have been retired but that is another story. I was iffy about retiring Naslund as well. I would have Linden, Smyl and the Sedins. Naslund would be the next one for me if there was to be one. But I would probably just have the four jerseys and then ROH: Kurtenbach, Boudrias, Snepsts, Brodeur, Bure, Luongo, McLean, Naslund, Odjick, Tiger Williams, Ohlund, Burrows and then there are a few more I would consider like maybe Don Lever or Doug Lidster but who knows. Edited June 28, 2022 by Kevin Biestra 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnarcore Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 21 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said: No complaint about Alfredsson getting in but I think he's on the same level as or even a little inferior to some guys who have been waiting a decade or even two. Fleury, Mogilny, Pierre Turgeon, Bernie Nicholls, etc. I'm not sure why he bypasses them. It's also a little odd to have Luongo in first ballot while having Mike Vernon and Tom Barrasso on the outside for at least 15 years. Barasso wasn't well liked. Down right hated by some. That matters. Hell he was called Barasshole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnarcore Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 If the Sedins didn't get in on their first ballot I was flying to Toronto to burn that mother down! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted June 28, 2022 Author Share Posted June 28, 2022 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted June 28, 2022 Author Share Posted June 28, 2022 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
250Integra Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 37 minutes ago, Muttley said: The last one.... At the end there you can hear Richardson and OEL saying "Get us on the Canucks ASAP!!!" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 1 hour ago, Kevin Biestra said: Luongo only played 400 something games as a Canuck. His team records are all surpassable if a decent goalie lays his roots down for a while and the Canucks aren't perennial bottom feeders for those years. You say based on the requirement we have set but there's no precedent for goalies. No numbers are retired and King Richard isn't even in the ROH. The only standard we have is that McLean is ROH and Brodeur apparently isn't even enough for the ROH. The bar seems kind of high for honoring goalies. Lol his team records are easily surpassable? How many years before we had a goalie surpassed the easily surpassable win record of Mclean? With how many games goalie plays nowadays it’ll prolly take demko at least 6-7 years assuming he stays healthy and play at a high level to reach. You seem to forgotten when luongo came the canucks were in a transition period to the sedins and they weren’t even expected to make the playoff that year. The winning percentage alone.. no one is touching.. McLean and Brodeur both have more losses than wins.. luongo only have 115 more wins than losses even if u take out the SO and replace with ties he still have close to 100 more wins than losses. His shutout records on the team? What competent goalie in our history of the franchise is even close? You seem to just diminish every luongo stats and think any average goalie that plays 8 years in Vancouver can easily reach or achieve. Put cloutier and he would have easily achieved the same with those teams right? He was a good regular season goalie for the canucks too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Biestra Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 (edited) 9 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said: Lol his team records are easily surpassable? How many years before we had a goalie surpassed the easily surpassable win record of Mclean? With how many games goalie plays nowadays it’ll prolly take demko at least 6-7 years assuming he stays healthy and play at a high level to reach. You seem to forgotten when luongo came the canucks were in a transition period to the sedins and they weren’t even expected to make the playoff that year. The winning percentage alone.. no one is touching.. McLean and Brodeur both have more losses than wins.. luongo only have 115 more wins than losses even if u take out the SO and replace with ties he still have close to 100 more wins than losses. His shutout records on the team? What competent goalie in our history of the franchise is even close? You seem to just diminish every luongo stats and think any average goalie that plays 8 years in Vancouver can easily reach or achieve. Put cloutier and he would have easily achieved the same with those teams right? He was a good regular season goalie for the canucks too You added the word easily before surpassable. The guy only played 450 games or something for us. His games and wins can be beaten if we stick with a guy for close to ten years instead of cycling through the Lacks and Millers and Markstroms every few years which has been the case for all of Canucks history save for McLean and Brodeur and sticking way too long with Cloutier. Other teams have guys that play 10+ years in net for them... Lundqvist, Marc Andre, Price, Rinne, etc. The Canucks have a history of not much longevity with goalies, Luongo included, so the team career records are surpassable. It's not complicated. I'm just giving context to Luongo stats. If the context diminishes them, then that's how it is. Wins are easier to get nowadays than in McLean's or Brodeur's day. Take half of their ties and turn them into wins. It was also not an era for them where goalies played 70 games. That was something that was ushered in mostly by Martin Brodeur, Cujo, Luongo and a few others. Credit to them for being capable of such a workload but it just wasn't really done in the 80s and early 90s, save for a Grant Fuhr and Ed Belfour season or two, so they didn't have the opportunity to rack up as many games and wins. McLean and Brodeur both led the entire league in games played with low to mid 60s. That was almost just a regular starter in the peak Lu and Martin years. It just is what it is. That will make Lu's team records a little harder to beat as we're back to not having many 70 game goalies if any, but at the same time...400 something games isn't so long of a career that the totals will be untouchable. Lu's shutout mark will be the last one to go and hardest to beat if it falls. Edited June 28, 2022 by Kevin Biestra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nooks Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 Remember that Lu also demanded to leave and saddled us with a 3 mil cap recapture instead of going LTIR just to stick it to us. lost in the WJC final in OT lost in the SCF won in 2010 but let in a game tying goal with 24 seconds left. He simply didn’t perform when the championship was on the line Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Biestra Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Nooks said: Remember that Lu also demanded to leave and saddled us with a 3 mil cap recapture instead of going LTIR just to stick it to us. lost in the WJC final in OT lost in the SCF won in 2010 but let in a game tying goal with 24 seconds left. He simply didn’t perform when the championship was on the line He was less of a clutch ice water in his veins type of goalie than McLean or Brodeur. People forget that Brodeur was the first ever Memorial Cup MVP, won the WHA championship, made the WHA final another time and got to the Stanley Cup final. The guy was a playoff performer. Like I said, Lu had a bit of Dan Cloutier in him. But he was still so bloody good that you were glad to have him even with the meltdowns. But by contrast, Kirk McLean WAS the calming influence of his Canuck teams. Lu wasn't that at all. He got done what he needed to get done in the 2010 Olympics though, tying goal or not. Edited June 28, 2022 by Kevin Biestra 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 4 minutes ago, Nooks said: instead of going LTIR just to stick it to us. No, he retired because it worked better for his current team, than going on LTIR would be for his current team. Dude didn't and doesn't "owe" the Canucks a thing. He was Florida's player, not ours when he retired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 18 minutes ago, gurn said: No, he retired because it worked better for his current team, than going on LTIR would be for his current team. Dude didn't and doesn't "owe" the Canucks a thing. He was Florida's player, not ours when he retired. doesn't negate the effect tho, and does put him in a different category than other guys like the Sedins that were loyal their entire careers. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now