Official Luongo Hate / Love Thread

[Meds]

The notion that Luongo is anything more than an average playoff goalie is pants-on-head retarded at this point.

Is that, short-pants or regular-pants, retarded?

An ELITE goalie, IMO, is a goalie who, at least once or twice a playoff, steals games for his team in which his team is being outplayed, outshot and outchanced. How many times has Lou done that in the playoffs? Have we ever even won a playoff game with Lou in net in which we were badly outplayed?

Luongo very rarely steals games, has never stolen a series, and has an alarmingly frequent tendency to get absolutely lit up by weak shot after weak shot.

This I will have to disagree with and point to 2007 against Dallas. He completely outplayed Turco, who was considered to be one of the NHL's elite at that point. And we eliminated Dallas, who were the favorites to win that series going in. Our offense was non-existent thanks to a coach who had yet to be Gillis'd and we ended up playing some very long over-time games that round. Of course he then pulled the cork on his very own bottle of playoff choke wine and decided to watch the ref rather than the puck. It's true that Luongo has gotten almost no love from the officiating in this league, but that is besides the point and by no means does it excuse him.

I actually think that the injury he suffered two seasons ago is when his game really turned south. He quit coming across the net the way he used to, he was more prone to spread out on his belly, and he lost about 2 inches on either side of his pads when down in the butterfly. He totally lost the ability to steal a game for us, and any confidence he had left evaporated in the 2nd round against Chicago. From there on out he was No-Show Lou when we needed him to be No-Goal Lou, and the media hounds and fans began to circle like vultures. The added pressure from his family, the new goalie coach, the fact that he was about to be pushed (and then was last year) by Schneider, and also pressure from management, as well as his own competitive drive and pride, have simply taken too great a toll on Luongo. Vancouver is just not a good fit for him anymore, he is a goalie that will thrive in a smaller market where there is less expectation from the fans and media.

This is not a slight against him either IMO. There are only 2 goalies that I can think of in the last 10-15 years that have handled the media scrutiny and pressure to win without batting an eye. Brodeur and Roy, both had teams in front of them that were elite, the Devil's were shutdown experts, and the Sakic/Forsberg lead Av's were stacked from head-to-toe. Hasek is a distant 3rd who never won a cup until he was playing behind the Red Wing's dynasty, but always turned in strong performances when the chips were down and got Buffalo all the way to the finals only to lose on a blown call.

[Meds]

While you may want to tell yourself your goalie's performance doesn't affect the rest of the team and how the game is played, I'll most respectfully and smirkingly disagree.

You bought your ticket, so you can smirk if you want.

However, the FACTS are on my side, not yours.

What facts are those exactly?

If a goalie shits the bed, the team in front of him generally follows suit, while the team coming at him gains confidence with every rush.

Seriously though, if you have facts I'd appreciate seeing them.

[Rumsfeld]

This I will have to disagree with and point to 2007 against Dallas. He completely outplayed Turco, who was considered to be one of the NHL's elite at that point. And we eliminated Dallas, who were the favorites to win that series going in. Our offense was non-existent thanks to a coach who had yet to be Gillis'd and we ended up playing some very long over-time games that round.

I think your memory might be a little foggy with regard to that series. Luongo in no way "completely outplayed Turco".

Turco had three shutouts in that series. Three. The only game that wasn't decided by one goal was game seven, in which we had two empty-netters.

If you want to give Luongo the edge in that series, fine, but if so it was by the slimmest of margins. Going into game seven the media consensus was that Luongo was at best even with Turco, with many pundits giving the edge to Turco. Both goaltenders were outstanding in that series, and it didn't hurt their performances that both teams had anemic offenses who struggled mightily to put the puck in the net with any consistency.

[ESQ]

Where you and I depart is on one of the alternatives: Cory Schneider. I see Schneider as equally capable in terms of physical skills and, in addition, far superior mentally, as in he is not carrying the weight of an odd national media obsession and three playoff debacles around with him wherever he goes.

In my view, Schneider is the superior option because he doesn't not have to deal with the media and fan obsession nor does he seem to take losses, goals, boos, negative criticism nearly as personally. At the very least, Schneider is in the position Luongo was in 2007. I'm not sure how to phrase it, but Cory has nothing to lose or no historical pressure on him. However one wants to term it, Schneider is set up for success in the same way Luongo was in 2007. We all saw how Luongo performed back then.

Hm, I hadn't thought of that positive Schneider has, which is completely out of his and Luongo's control - the "grace period". I agree that the majority of fans in this city seem to want Schneider to take over, based on Team 1040 and this thread. But he is in a very different position from Luongo in 2007.

By the time Luongo got here, he'd been The Man in net for an NHL team. I believe he led the league in saves or SV% for a few years and putting up damn impressive numbers on a terrible team. He had a 30+ win season under his belt, and 5 seasons as an NHL starter. Schneider, on the other hand, has been a bona fide starter at the AHL level for only 1 1/2 years and has 34 games NHL experience. When he had the opportunity to start in place of an injured Luongo, the Canucks had to go out and get Labarbera.

Obviously the Schneider we see today is far better than the 08 version. And I would agree that there is a chance he could get hot and take us to the promised land, like other rookie goalies in recent memory.

But I'm not much of a gambler, and I'd say the smart money is on Luongo, because his consistency is a known quantity. It would truly take an epic meltdown for Luongo to ever lose the starting job to Schneider, and while I can't rule that out, I think GMMG and his 64 million bucks agree with me.

EDIT: I should preface that I believe Luongo had his best season last year, both reg season (based on overall numbers) and playoffs (based on only number that matters - WINS). I realize many don't agree with this opinion, and that's fine.

[GoalieDad]

I know those who are pro-Luongo like to cite his "numbers" from last season. While the anti-Luongites, like myself, reply that Wins and GAA are team stats. (The exception, I would acknowledge, is when when the GAA varies significantly from one goalie to another ... like maybe half-a-goal or more per game. In those instances I think it is fair to surmise that the variance is likely a reflection of relative skill; but in such instances I'd also expect the Save% numbers to substantiate the inference.)
Anywho, the point I really wanted to make is that while Luongo's numbers -- all of them -- were very good last season, they only matched those of his 'back-up', who earned less than one-tenth of Luongo's salary and whose cap-hit was but 15% of Luongo's.
It is true that Luongo's GAA was slightly better than Schneider's, but not to what I would call a statistically significant degree; just as Schneider's Save% was only fractionally better than Luongo's. (BTW, if you compare last season's Winning % -- regulation Wins v. Losses -- for the two goalies in question, Schneider comes out on top of that metric too.)
And THAT is my point. The fact that there was essentially NO meaningful variation in their numbers is hard evidence that, despite the glitzy "numbers", the 10-million dollar man actually performed no better than his $900k back-up.
Now, that doesn't make Luongo a "bad" goalie, but it sure as hell must put the lie to any notion that he is somehow an exceptional or "elite" NHL goalie. Unless of course you're willing to admit that Schneider must also be, by the same definition, one of the league's "elite". And IF that is true, then why would anyone with a particle of sense not prefer the much younger, much less-expensive of the two?

[wienerdog]

That's all true. I would still take Lundqvist over Lou in a do or die game with this team.

Same here, and I think this sums it up for me.

I'm not really questioning a "realistic" Luongo vs Schneider scenario. I don't think it would be fair to put all of our expectations on a greenhorn like CS, nor do I think that would be particularly sane. (although I do think there's something to be said about the "grace period" theory voiced earlier)

In my mind, I'm pondering an "unrealistic" fantasy sceanrio of having a guy like Lundqvist - same-ish stats and salary - over Louie.

I gotta say, my answer would be yes.

Truth is, I think I'm just tired of Lu's flopping, his smugness, his weird poetry reading shit, and that greasy lid. Most of all, I'm tired of the headcase-factor, the OCD.

I'd rather have a guy like Lundqvist that doesn't bring any of that attendant circus show to the table, and can play a game that's close enough to Lu's for me at a price that's also in the same ballpark.

Lundqvist over Luongo any day for me.

[wienerdog]

1) It 100% does matter what RL earns, and it's not "irrelevant". Salary is always tied to expectation and Lu isn't immune to that. People want the players to perform according to salary. Whether it's the fans or the GM.

"He doesn't 'make' $10M. His cap hit is only $5.3M a year".

Well, that's false - he 'makes' what he's paid - and he only has a cap hit that low because of the incredibly risky contract that MG gave him.

I think you're begging the question here. Expectation is often tied to salary (as opposed to cap hit), but that doesn't doesn't make it reasonable.

I would not say, given Lou's track record (three Vezina noms, career numbers, etc, etc), that his contract is "risky". He is unquestionably, at WORST, a quality starting goaltender in the NHL. How many goalies in this league are not only starters, but UNQUESTIONABLE quality starters? Less than 30. Not every team has one.

If he were on the block there would be plenty of takers. What's the "risk"?

Begging what question exactly, darren?

In all seriousness, please explain to me in what context does salary not get reasonably tied to expectation?

Are players somehow exempt from criticism because these big paydays are an aberration of pseudo-Cap-circumvention deals? I mean, the only time that we see players get paid grotesque amounts like $10M a season, is when they have such a high value demand that GM's bend over the barrel to give them crazy long contracts to fit them into a Cap structure, right?

Is Ehrhoff, for example, worth $10M bucks? We're all familiar with his play. I don't think so, but if he flops in BUF, you better believe that the fans there will screaming about the 10 extra-large he's getting paid.

So, would that be Regier's fault or Ehrhoff's fault? Who would have to answer for that (hypothesized) poor performance?

They both would, IMO; but you've got to be a fucking retard of a player to accept a $10M paycheque and think that fans aren't going to expect you to move a mountain or two for them. Money has always been tied to performance, and if you get paid the big dough, you'd bloody well better put on the show.

As for the "risk" factor, it's after 2AM and I'm tired, but I don't think you need an explanation of why there's some inherent risk to sign any player in this league to a 12 year deal. 12 years ago we were freaking out about Y2K and the Euro didn't even exist yet. It's a loooooooooooooooong fucking time.

And yeah, even if he retires early, it'll likely be three years early. Nine years is still too long in my books.

I will say that if you're going to give a contract like that out, you'd better be damn well certain that you have a better asset than "a quality starting goaltender in the NHL". Contracts like that should be reserved for the players that you know - as in, with 99.9repeating% certainty - can pull you over the top. I'm sorry, but Lu hasn't shown that he's worthy of that deal.

He's worthy of a deal that pays a similar price and term of his peers, of which there are some. He's not head and shoulders above any top goalie in the League. Far from it, actually.

(on a side note, there's a debate here over whether the real blame/anger/frustration should be directed at Gillis, not Luongo - for some other time...)

Lastly, who would the takers be, exactly? There might be plenty of GM's that would want Luongo, but there aren't a boatload of GM's that could take that contract on without risking their own job, darren. While I agree that he's not totally unmoveable (yet), it's not exactly a seller's market. Another spectacular set of meltdown games this post-season and I do fear he will become the other truly untradeable goalie in the NHL - who, not coincidentally, also has a crippling long contract.

Is he to blame for that loss? I think not, but he certainly didn't outperform the guy at the other end - 200' away as you say - that had had a much, much, much harder test than Louie did at that moment.

So whether the comparison is fair or not, he was nowhere near what Lundqvist's performance was. Not even in the same postal code.

And that, my friend, sums up why Roberto gets a hard time on nights like that.

My point is that the comparison is not fair. If Lundqvist were that good every night, then the Rangers would have a rafter full of recent Cup banners, and I'd want him instead of Lou. But Lundqvist ISN'T that good every night.

In fact, he has a whopping total of 4 (four) playoff wins in the last 3 (three) years. Luongo has won more ROUNDS in the last three years than Lundqvist has won GAMES. (Oh, and Lou's cap hit is quite a bit lower too )

I agree with meds' previous post that your supporting logic is flawed here.

But you also missed my point.

This is pro-sports, and it's actually expected to use a player's counterpart as a comparison. If your forwards outplay theirs, you win that battle. Same for defense. Goaltenders even more so, because they can single-handedly steal the game for you.

Besides, I wasn't commenting on the empirical statistical performances Lu turns in over a big picture, I was talking about the subjective optics of how Lu is frequently (enough) "outplayed" by his opponent at the other end of the ice.

As I said, Lu wasn't to blame for the Rangers loss, but that night, he lost the head-to-head matchup with Lundqvist. And in typical Luongo fashion, he lost it with that discouraging and hope-deflating flair he so consistently does in those instances.

And he also did so despite the fact that he plays on a decidedly better team than the other guy does.

Shit happens, but it's sometimes about how the shit happens...

[BCReefer]

I am tired of the Luongo soap opera, time for a change of place for him so the Canuck fans can talk about something else. There is no way he can stay here anymore because of the pressure he and the Canucks organization put on him. First the stupid contract, 2nd making him captain, third his constant calling out his team mates when he shit the bed and finally his constant melt downs at big points in the season.

Put all that together and regardless of the spin MG wants to put on it, Luongo is not good for this team anymore. This is another episode of a GM who won't do what is needed. This reminds me of Beach Ball Dan when the Canucks only needed a decent goalies and they could of went further but Burke was "loyal"to his players and the team never won.

The problem we have is once Luongo is gone CS will have a stinker and the Luongo faithfull will stand up and see, CS sucks too it happens to all goalies and then the fight will be on again. Sometimes I want this team to suck again for 3 - 4 years get rid of the winning attitude from the fans so we can relax a little watching the game without the high expectations.

[Island Nucklehead]

And I would rather have Crosby>H.Sedin, Stamkos>Daniel and Weber>Edler....

Lundqvist may be the better goalie. He may not be. His stats vs. Luongo's are nearly identical and Luongo has won more in the playoffs.

The only way we'll find out if Schneider is a bona-fide star goalie in this league is for 1) Luongo to be hurt, 2) Lunogo to be traded or 3) Schneider to be traded.

To have a look at 25 games last year and say he's as good as Luongo is beyond insane. What did he accomplish? Put up some very good numbers. Some of the teams he faced however...

Edmonton four times, Calgary, Columbus twice, Colorado twice, St Louis, Minny three times, Dallas twice. A lot of time against non-playoff teams.

[Potatoe1]

It is true that Luongo's GAA was slightly better than Schneider's, but not to what I would call a statistically significant degree; just as Schneider's Save% was only fractionally better than Luongo's. (BTW, if you compare last season's Winning % -- regulation Wins v. Losses -- for the two goalies in question, Schneider comes out on top of that metric too.)
And THAT is my point. The fact that there was essentially NO meaningful variation in their numbers is hard evidence that, despite the glitzy "numbers", the 10-million dollar man actually performed no better than his $900k back-up.

That might be a fair comment if they were both playing against the same calibre of teams.

Last Season Schneider played 25 games only 6 of those games were against playoff teams. Of those 6 games against playoff teams only 2 of his starts were against a top team (he played the Sharks twice)

Schneider is a very good back up but he was essentially playing once every 4 to 6 days against mostly bottom feeders. To claim he is "just as good" because you can pro rate his stats (while playing the easiest schedule possible) and compare them to Lu's, is speculative at best.

It is a massive jump to go from the schedule Schneider played last season to the schedule we would need him to play if we traded Luongo.

PS. I think we should call this the Luongo Rant thread some of these posts are gold

[Sticky]

So, apparently the effectiveness of Luongo on this Vancouver team is up for debate...

At the end of the debate, whether you think you won or lost (in the effort to convince others that Luongo is only an average goaltender or that some other guy is better, or that he's overpaid...or whatever)

He's not the reason the Canucks have sucked so badly over the last five years.

Get over your false (and unappreciative) sense of entitlement people.

[Potatoe1]

He's not the reason the Canucks have sucked so badly over the last five years.

Wait, we have sucked over the past 5 years?

I'm counting 4 division titles, a presidents trophy, 6 playoff round wins and a trip to the final.

[ESQ]

Anywho, the point I really wanted to make is that while Luongo's numbers -- all of them -- were very good last season, they only matched those of his 'back-up', who earned less than one-tenth of Luongo's salary and whose cap-hit was but 15% of Luongo's.

Another very interesting point, that Luongo's numbers, while good, are not appreciably better than the backup's, because of the quality of the team in front of him.

Take a look at Schneider's game logs from last year: http://espn.go.com/nhl/player/gamelog/_/id/3750/year/2011/cory-schneider

I see 6 starts against playoff teams. Schneider's record was 3 W, 3 L/OTL. That's 6/22 starts against playoff teams, which meant Luongo played about 31 starts out of 60 against playoff teams. (I did the math myself, not guaranteeing its perfect).

I agree that the stats you pointed out are a function of the quality of the team, but you also have to take into account the quality of the opponent. I would argue Schneider benefited more than Luongo from the team he was behind, because his starts were "sheltered" and against poor teams, while Luongo's starts were against the most difficult opponents.

This is another reason why I think it would be crazy to start Schneider over Luongo - the difference between great backup and solid starter is massive (just ask Mike Smith).

He's not the reason the Canucks have sucked so badly over the last five years.

I agree, except for the part that the Canucks have sucked over the past 5 years

EDIT: Didn't realize Pot had posted the exact same thing

[Sticky]

He's not the reason the Canucks have sucked so badly over the last five years.

Wait, we have sucked over the past 5 years?

I'm counting 4 division titles, a presidents trophy, 6 playoff round wins and a trip to the final.

Didn't mean to startle y'all... I guess using green text to express sarcasm is outdated now.

[GoalieDad]

If we set aside all the debates about whether or not Luongo is an elite goalie, worth the money he's paid, or worth his cap-hit ... isn't there at least some credibility to the idea that he is now a full-blown "distraction" for other players, maybe even for management? Surely we can at least agree that he is a source of friction between "team" and a healthy percentage of "fans". I mean, regardless of whether or not you think he SHOULD be a distraction, isn't he a distraction all the same?
So I suppose the question is: At what point is the distraction -- the friction -- something that has to be dealt with? Are we there yet?