GDT: R2G6 - Canucks @ Chicago - 6pm - CBC, VS

[Cornuck]

Guys like Sundin, Demitra and Ohlund killed us. Bieksa won't beat anyone in a race and neither will Mitchell.

I don't think Ohlund had that bad of a series. I don't remember seeing any big mistakes or lapses. Mitchell on the other hand - whenever there was a big goal against us, he was either missing an assignment or in the box. He had the worse series of any Canuck in my opinion.

Sundin - too little, too late. It's almost like he was coasting the whole way, then made the plays when absolutely 'had' to.

Luongo - obviously expected more, but unless he was injured/sick - he had a complete meltdown.

Funny how our D ended up losing this series, when they were our strength from day 1. Actually, not funny.

[Puck]

Who would have ever thought that we'd blow that many leads? A defense-minded team with an elite goalie and we gave up the lead over and over again. Stunning. An echo of the mental fragility of January? If so, fixing that is very difficult.

[Amazon Canuck]

I'm still so disappointed today... it makes it a harder to pill to swallow seeing that hockey is still on but our team isn't a part of it anymore. Will I still watch? Yes, of course. I love the sport, but my heart won't be in it.

As for last night... Luongo is my favourite player on the team, still is, but he is the one that folded last night in a way we have never seen him fold before. What happened? Usually Lu is the last one standing out there, and when the rest of the team chokes, Luongo is the last defense we could rely on... Utterly shocking that he was the first line of defense to fall...

With 5 goals we can't blame the offense, that's for sure, although we could say that their decision not to score goals for 2 games straight perhaps led significantly to losing this series. I believe that we could have beaten Chicago if we had've won game 4. After that, Vancouver lost its edge and that was that.

I think what sums up this series is, too little too late.


It will be interesting to see what moves Gillis makes over the summer, that's for sure.

[the Cunning Linguist]

Woah-woah... Did this board get a simultaneous e-lobotomy and become CalPuck all of a sudden?

Have a little perspective people... How many of us thought this team would win the Division and go this far into the playoffs back in September? Do we really believe that this team would have gotten past Anaheim or Detroit even if it did get past Chicago? Sure this hurts but it's NOT the end of the world.

Move the e-knife away from your wrists, give yourselves a week to de-compress and enjoy the sunshine.

[LotusBlossom]

Woah-woah... Did this board get a simultaneous e-lobotomy and become CalPuck all of a sudden?

Have a little perspective people... How many of us thought this team would win the Division and go this far into the playoffs back in September? Do we really believe that this team would have gotten past Anaheim or Detroit even if it did get past Chicago? Sure this hurts but it's NOT the end of the world.

Move the e-knife away from your wrists, give yourselves a week to de-compress and enjoy the sunshine.

LOL

I am just really disappointed. I figured the boys lost this series in game 4. I guess there are questions to be answered but I'm not calling for heads to roll... It was a long roller coaster ride, just didn't think it would end on such a down note.

Someone wrote this on my face book. A disappointed fan...

but doesn't think that trading Luongo will be the factor.

"Too little, too late" is a phrase that comes to mind when I muse over the Vancouver/Chicago 6-game series that came to an unfortunate end last night. After sweeping the Blues in round 1 and splitting the series with Chicago after 4 games, the momentum shift that occurred following the loss in game 4 was gut wrenching and disappointing for fans across British Columbia, and undoubtedly for the team last night.

Many are quick to point fingers at Vancouver's captain and goalie, Roberto Luongo, for losing the series, and no doubt, allowing 7 goals in a do-or-die game last night was not only out of character for Luongo's usually unshakable self, but it was unacceptable. However, in my humble opinion, the 2-1 OT loss in game 4 is what initiated the downward spiral that led to the Canucks' removal from the playoffs, and Luongo's stellar performance in that game should not be forgotten so suddenly.

A shift to a defensive style play in game 4, sitting on a 1-0 lead rather than putting more shots on the Hawks' goalie Khabibulin, proved to be a poor coaching decision on Vigneault's part. Against a high-shooting, fast and hard-hitting young team like Chicago, sitting on a one-goal lead is simply a stupid move and led to a significant loss for the Canucks. Game 5 was similar, with the Canucks only taking 22 shots on 'Bulin and losing 4-2, giving the Blackhawks a 3-2 lead in the series. To me, Vigneault pulling Luongo with almost 90 seconds to go in the 3rd was a terrible coaching decision, considering how atrocious the Canucks' passing had been all game combined with the speed of the Hawks forwards.

Despite questionable (or straight-up horrible) officiating last night, Vancouver's offense decided to re-emerge after a 2 game disappearance, as did a few players who had been for the most part invisible during the playoffs or even, in regards to O'brien, invisible during the regular season. O'Brien, Sundin and Daniel Sedin, scored a total of 4 goals, adding to Raymond's, for Vancouver last night, however, Luongo's performance rendered these goals rather useless in the end. Unfortunately for Vancouver's fans, their steadfast, reliable Captain didn't show up with the rest of the team. Too little, too late for the Canucks? Definitely.

Disappointing doesn't describe the emotion felt by Canucks fans across this province. Not since the West Coast Express era of 2003/2004 (or maybe even 1994) have the fans seen so much promise in their team -- to rub salt in the wound, we finally had a stellar goalie to take us deep in the playoffs; however, absolutely no one, not even Luongo's biggest critics, would have ever imagined that he would "choke" in an elimination game.

With Vancouver's roller-coaster season at an end, the next concern is whether or not Luongo (who teared up during a post-game interview last night about letting his team and fans down) will decide to re-sign with Vancouver and give BC's fans another shot at a cup run. Or will he fail to shake his own disappointment in himself and need to start fresh with another franchise? Only the off-season will tell.

One bad game, no matter how important, should not undo all that Luongo has done for this team, for this franchise and for the fans (no matter how fickle they can be). Oh Captain, our Captain, go down with this ship, but please don't scramble aboard another after the storm

[JCardinal]

I see a lot of people countering blame Louie posts by bringing up game 4 and saying that 7 goals was a "bad game", in fact he had a bad SERIES entirely. He stole no games for us and let in a *lot* of bad goals. He was just bad the whole series. No the blame doesn't fall entirely on him, but a *lot* of the team's money is tied up in him and it could be better spent in other areas.

The way it is now we have an "eggs in one basket" philosophy and common sense tells you you don't put all your eggs in one basket.

Let's say we didn't have Louie in goal this series, do you think for a second that whoever the starter was wouldn't have been given the hook for the backup after a few bad performances? When Louie plays bad he's so freakin expensive and touted that a coach almost can't pull him no matter how bad he's playing.

Two adequate goalies though would be an entirely different story and adequate goaltending these days is enough to get to the finals. Look who has made it to the finals in the last few years.

I don't blame Louie, well I do but that's beside the point, it's just a bad allocation of resources. If you want to win the cup.

[dr.dork]

I don't blame Louie, well I do but that's beside the point, it's just a bad allocation of resources. If you want to win the cup.

It is simply not a bad allocation of resources if you want to win the cup. The goalie is on the ice 60 minutes (+OT - empty net) and is your most important player.

If you get the November Luongo or the Luongo we had against StL he is worth every penny. If you get the Luongo we had against Dallas and Anaheim two years ago, he is worth every penny. If you get the Luongo we had against Chicago then you can argue bad allocation of resources. In four playoff series he had 3 stunning series and one that was (and he would admit this) not good. He was in the head of the StL players. Against Chicago, they got in his head. Against Chicago, if the rest of the team played better they could have bailed him out.

He gets most of the credit when the team wins so it isn't unfair that he gets most of the blame when they lose. He is the captain and the best player on the team, and so it goes with the territory.

[the Cunning Linguist]

Luongo hasn't allowed 7 goals in one game since I was last ID'ed... A goalie of his caliber doesn't just allow six goals in forty minutes - as I recall, he had plenty of 'help' on the ice. To hang this loss on Luongo overlooks how the team was beaten - any way you look at it, the Hawks were better and had an answer for everything Vancouver threw at them.

IMO, the turning point of this series happened in Game 1. Vancouver is up 3-0 going into the third period; Chicago storms back to tie it only to make probably their biggest mistake of the series and gave up a 4 on 1 in the waning minutes of the third. Prior to this, Vancouver was 30-0 in regulation when leading after 30 minutes. Vancouver wins 5-3 but in that third period (which the Hawks 'won', 3-2), the 'Hawks learned that:

• Vancouver can't keep up with their speed.
• Luongo can be beaten. And beat him they did, like he was a dinner bell at the Ponderosa.
• While much has been made of Vancouver's experienced d, it isn't impregnable; separate the d from their forwards and that slot area is wide open.
• Vancouver cannot contain Byfuglien. Get his 247lb. ass in front of Luongo and eventually he'll buckle.

[Island Nucklehead]

Our defense shit everywhere. That's the series.

Luongo should have made some of those saves (Kane's wraparound killed us), but a majority of them he had little chance on. Mitchell had a rediculously bad series. Ohlund was slow and uncertain. Bieksa looked like Jovo with some of his cramps. Salo couldn't stay in the lineup. Edler was overwhelmed. O'brien, well what's a number 6 going to do about anything?!

If you can't stop giving teams GLORIOUS chances, you can't blame the goalie. Lou robbed Havlat to start that game, we gave him some leads, but the defense found a way to give the puck away in our own zone, lose their coverage, fall down, wet themselves, give the puck away again and then hesitate going to a check.

This team is quite close to being a very good hockey club. I have very high hopes for next season, but the defensive footspeed, espeically with Ohlund (who will be gone) and Mitchell was on display BIG TIME. If these guys are going to play big minutes, they have to be able to keep up.

What I find somewhat curious is nobody is chasing after Burrows and Kesler.

Kesler had one of the worst couple games I've seen him play. For a Selke nominee he was tragic defensively and as a scoring-line player he got 3 points and was -2.

Burrows was nowhere to be found, except chirping 'Bulin during the stoppages...way to psych the guy out dumbass. 1 assist in 6 games, only 10 shots the whole series?

There's a lot of blame to go around, I would say Luongo definately deserves some, but NOBODY can say they had a good series.

[dr.dork]

If you can't stop giving teams GLORIOUS chances, you can't blame the goalie. Lou robbed Havlat to start that game, we gave him some leads, but the defense found a way to give the puck away in our own zone, lose their coverage, fall down, wet themselves, give the puck away again and then hesitate going to a check.

Well, people have been blaming Cloutier for 2003 for, umm, 6 years. Glorious chances were given up as we we looking for the knockout punch and we were counterpunched to death. Cloutier deserves part of the blame for that, Roberto deserves some of the blame, and of course a lot of the blame goes to the players too. (Island, you mentioned the team later in your post so I am not disagreeing with you here...).

What I find strange is the common mantra in this town is "we would have won it all in 2003 if we had a good goalie". And now we have a good goalie and so we want to trade him. Good old fickle fans, ya got to love 'em.

[the Cunning Linguist]

I don't blame Louie, well I do but that's beside the point, it's just a bad allocation of resources. If you want to win the cup.

Not really. Of the teams left in the playoffs, the Canucks are spending (in goal) about the same:

Yes, he's a huge-ticket item. But the Canucks' goaltending budget is not exceptional among the eight Stanley Cup quarter-finalists. If you throw out the high (Chicago Blackhawks, $12.375 million US for their two goalies) and lows (Detroit, $2.45 million; and Carolina, $3.1 million), the other five teams that made the second round spent between $5.35 million and $7.85 on their goaltending tandems. The Canucks are at the top of this middle ground.

Luongo is not the problem. If we had Schneider in goal, would he have fared better? What other goalie(s) do you think would have been better for Vancouver?

[Larry Goodenough]

I don't blame Louie, well I do but that's beside the point, it's just a bad allocation of resources. If you want to win the cup.

Not really. Of the teams left in the playoffs, the Canucks are spending (in goal) about the same:

Yes, he's a huge-ticket item. But the Canucks' goaltending budget is not exceptional among the eight Stanley Cup quarter-finalists. If you throw out the high (Chicago Blackhawks, $12.375 million US for their two goalies) and lows (Detroit, $2.45 million; and Carolina, $3.1 million), the other five teams that made the second round spent between $5.35 million and $7.85 on their goaltending tandems. The Canucks are at the top of this middle ground.

Luongo is not the problem. If we had Schneider in goal, would he have fared better? What other goalie(s) do you think would have been better for Vancouver?

Luongo is not the problem, the salary cap is. If you had Schneider/LaBarbera, you would have had another 5-6 million to spend on d-men and forwards. Then would we have fared better? We'll never know, but a legitimate debate none the less.

[Puck]

Two observations (admittedly spinning off the thread a bit):

1) If you don't think that Chicago is paying peanuts for all those young, talented players, note that they are paying almost 12.5 million for goaltending alone. Yikes. They are in for it worse than Pittsburgh re: cap problems when the youngsters need to be re-signed.

2) How can Carolina possibly be paying only 3.1 million for their goaltending when Ward won a Conn Smythe in '06? Does this guy have the world's worst agent? How did they get him for anything less than at least 4 million per?

ok, this is 3) For every great young playoff goalie that 's cheap, there's another that has failed to pan out. I think taking a chance on your goalie just happening to get hot is a bad strategy. Keep Lu until Lu doesn't want to be here.

[Island Nucklehead]

Luongo is not the problem, the salary cap is. If you had Schneider/LaBarbera, you would have had another 5-6 million to spend on d-men and forwards. Then would we have fared better? We'll never know, but a legitimate debate none the less.

If we had Schneider and LaBarbera, we'd be golfing in early April. Anyone remember how they did when Luongo was hurt?

Schneider went 2-4 with a 3.38 and .877
Labarbera was 3-2-2 all season with 2.66 and a .915

5-6-2 will not get anyone into the playoffs.

Are people forgetting that Luongo was 33-13-7?

6M could not be spent better.

[Larry Goodenough]

Luongo is not the problem, the salary cap is. If you had Schneider/LaBarbera, you would have had another 5-6 million to spend on d-men and forwards. Then would we have fared better? We'll never know, but a legitimate debate none the less.

If we had Schneider and LaBarbera, we'd be golfing in early April. Anyone remember how they did when Luongo was hurt?

Schneider went 2-4 with a 3.38 and .877
Labarbera was 3-2-2 all season with 2.66 and a .915

5-6-2 will not get anyone into the playoffs.

Are people forgetting that Luongo was 33-13-7?

6M could not be spent better.

Yes, but what would their record/numbers look like if another $6 million worth of defencemen/forwards were playing in front of them? That's the argument.

While Schneider/Labarbara played, they played behind a team $7-10 million under the cap. Luongo played behind a team at the cap.