Vancouver Canucks Messageboard

I'm just bitter. When we won in 2010 people said we won in spite of Luongo. Now those same people, needing to keep justifying their Luongo hate, want to say Price was a difference maker when the reality is that this team played the best team defensive game ever. Luongo has never had the type of support, ever. Price himself said basically the same thing.

But, Price played very very well. He earned his SO, was good when he had to be. We didn't win in spite of Price, he was part of that win. I just think Smith or Luongo would have won gold as well. I am very satisfied with the play of Price and felt confident with him in net, he has earned the right to get another look in 4 years if he is still on the top of his game. No price hating or bashing here. Just think Luongo still gets a raw deal.

Clearly Price was a fine choice, but IMO Luongo had to be better in 2010 than Price had to be in 2014. I don't mean to discredit Price's performance, because clearly he was excellent, but he didn't really have to be a difference maker.

Even in the USA 1-0 game, the result never really seemed to be in question with how Canada was playing.

Hockey Widow wrote:I'm just bitter. When we won in 2010 people said we won in spite of Luongo. Now those same people, needing to keep justifying their Luongo hate, want to say Price was a difference maker when the reality is that this team played the best team defensive game ever. Luongo has never had the type of support, ever. Price himself said basically the same thing.

But, Price played very very well. He earned his SO, was good when he had to be. We didn't win in spite of Price, he was part of that win. I just think Smith or Luongo would have won gold as well. I am very satisfied with the play of Price and felt confident with him in net, he has earned the right to get another look in 4 years if he is still on the top of his game. No price hating or bashing here. Just think Luongo still gets a raw deal.

While I agree with everything you said, we have to consider that Babcock and co. had a plan going into the tournament, and I'm sure it had everything to do with Price being the hotter/better goalie this season. Right or wrong, Luongo wasn't going in as the starter, even after he was the better goalie after 2 games.

I agree, Luongo should have been given the opportunity to "lose" the top job, but if the coaching staff and the team felt better with Price, c'est la vie.

Can't argue with Gold.

Hockey Widow wrote:I'm just bitter. When we won in 2010 people said we won in spite of Luongo. Now those same people, needing to keep justifying their Luongo hate, want to say Price was a difference maker when the reality is that this team played the best team defensive game ever. Luongo has never had the type of support, ever. Price himself said basically the same thing.

It's not 2010 and Price is much better than Luongo.

Deal.

Rumsfeld wrote:

Hockey Widow wrote:I'm just bitter. When we won in 2010 people said we won in spite of Luongo. Now those same people, needing to keep justifying their Luongo hate, want to say Price was a difference maker when the reality is that this team played the best team defensive game ever. Luongo has never had the type of support, ever. Price himself said basically the same thing.

It's not 2010 and Price is much better than Luongo.

Deal.

until Kreiger tossed him a diphtheria blanket and reminded him that Manhattan had been SOLD

Hey rats, can you or Cornut use your mighty morphin moderating powers to fix the incorrect apostrophe in the forum description?

National Team's in our Team Canada forum

It's been pissing me off for a while now.

*kicks arronp18 in the gunt*

Do you guys think booze was the first painkiller? I do.