| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 05/05/2012 : 22:41:26
Man i really wish i were able to take credit for this article as it's pretty much BANG ON what i've been saying about Roberto Luongo for the past couple years!
For anyone who's read my defense of this guy over the last year or two, this is exactly what i've been saying, only it's got better stats and examples in it, things that i couldn't be bothered to research.
http://thehockeywriters.com/debunking-the-roberto-luongo-myths/
Not sure if it'll be the Leafs, but whatever team gets this guy is going to appreciate him more than most Canucks fans ever did!
|
| 12 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| simleung |
Posted - 05/08/2012 : 13:07:17
I am not a Luongo fan. I live in Vancouver, and I watch my fair share of games (on TV, not live), and I must admit then when Luongo is in net and there's a tense situation, a lot of pressure at the end of a close game, etc, I am nervous when Luongo is in net. I feel more confident with Schneider. Especially in shootouts (which makes no difference in playoff hockey, unless you consider the penalty shot that Schneider saved in their only win vs LA).
However, that said, I'll also say that Luongo IS one of the better goaltenders in the NHL today. Who would be considered better, and on what criteria? Are we looking at this year only? Are we looking at the last 3-4 years? Entire career? Playoff performance and Stanley Cup wins? I'll tell you, Marc Andre Fleury, Cam Ward and Annti Niemi are not better goaltenders than Luongo, but they have all won a Stanley Cup.
|
| Statman |
Posted - 05/08/2012 : 12:07:05
It's funny, you say he's not able to steal big games, yet in the finals against Boston (the same series that people consider a flame out), he won two games by a 1-0 score, with the other win being a pretty impressive effort in a 3-2 OT victory. If it weren't for Luongo, Boston probably sweeps that series.
And then, of course, there's the gold medal winning game in which he stopped 34 of 36 shots and was once again at his best in overtime.
I understand that all the Luongo haters aren't going to change their minds, no matter what the facts are, I just think it's a shame, that's all. |
| Statman |
Posted - 05/08/2012 : 12:06:12
It's funny, you say he's not able to steal big games, yet in the finals against Boston (the same series that people consider a flame out), he won two games by a 1-0 score, with the other win being a pretty impressive effort in a 3-2 OT victory. If it weren't for Luongo, Boston probably sweeps that series.
And then, of course, there's the gold medal winning game in which he stopped 34 of 36 shots and was once again at his best in overtime.
I understand that all the Luongo haters aren't going to change their minds, no matter what the facts are, I just think it's a shame, that's all. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 05/08/2012 : 00:50:03
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Very good points Alex. I, for one, have never faulted Luongo for the downfalls of the Canucks. He has been an elite level goaltender for a very long time. I get the frustration behind the comments of how he's crap and the Canucks won in spite of him.
That being said, it is hard to find meaningful games in Luongo's career (FLA, VAN, or Internationally) where one can say without argument that Luongo was the reason for the win.
He might not have lost it for his teams as some elude to, however, he has never been a goalie to jump out and steal games when the matter the most. I don't think anyone can argue that.
Touche! That's a point, very well taken. I'm not about to argue he's the best or that he's been the best, but i still think he's top 10 material. I argued with a co-worker the other day who claimed Bryzgalov and Niemi were better than him??? I'm not sure what's the worse comparison of the two???
Anyway....i keep asking myself why i'm still arguing in favour of a goalie i've never really taken a liking to overall. I think the biggest part for me was the whole "captain" thing, though i realize as an oraganization, what they were doing.
I really hope Schneider doesn't succumb to the pressure that is "playing hockey in Vancouver", because no matter what anyone else says or thinks, Roberto Luongo is far and away, the best goalie this franchise has EVER had!  |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/07/2012 : 15:22:07
Very good points Alex. I, for one, have never faulted Luongo for the downfalls of the Canucks. He has been an elite level goaltender for a very long time. I get the frustration behind the comments of how he's crap and the Canucks won in spite of him.
That being said, it is hard to find meaningful games in Luongo's career (FLA, VAN, or Internationally) where one can say without argument that Luongo was the reason for the win.
He might not have lost it for his teams as some elude to, however, he has never been a goalie to jump out and steal games when the matter the most. I don't think anyone can argue that.
Daniel Alfredsson is the MVP of the universe. All hail the Ottawa Senators!!!!! |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 05/07/2012 : 14:58:46
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4315
Someone could easily make an opposite article called "Luongo Myths proved true". Therfore this proves nothing. It is one-sided in the Luongo debate and therfore is a poor article. Love him or hate him you still have to ask "how come the stats of his failures have alluded this article?" or better yet "how come this article is needed in the first place?"
This is very true, someone could in fact write an article and document how he's blown up in some playoff games, given up some bad goals, etc. There's two sides to every argument, i get that. I guess what it boils down to, at least as far as the first part of the argument, is what you, as an individual, consider "elite" for a goaltender. If a Cup win is required, then Luongo is def not elite, that much is obvious. However there's a lot of goalies out there who i'd consider elite either now or in the past who never hoisted the cup, or in some cases, haven't yet.
Same goes for the "playoff choker" label. Assuming you read the article, read this paragraph again.....
Luongo’s playoff numbers are almost identical to his regular season numbers. He has a career .916 playoff save percentage and 2.53 goals against average. If anything, Roberto Luongo is consistent so the idea he’s only good in the regular season just does not have any facts to support it. This myth lives on because of a couple of high-profile flameouts against Boston and Chicago. Everyone saw those games and decided that, despite the small sample size, Luongo was no good when it mattered most.
Now, considering his multiple Vezina nominees, and a Hart nominee as well i might add, it's pretty hard to argue that he's not a great regular season goalie. If his numbers are the same in the playoffs, how is he such a choker? It's easy to point a finger at a goalie, but we have to remember that this is a team game. A great example is with the Kings right now. Is Quick "elite"? I'd argue if he's not, the only reason i could see against is he hasn't done it long enough. But he sure as hell is playing like an elite goalie right now! Having said that, if the playoffs were to end today, Dustin Brown would prob win the Conn Smyth, not Quick (this is debatable of course).
It's funny though, with Luongo, I always come back to that one important thing. Game 7 vs Boston. Had the Canucks won, it'd be the same as the Olympick medal. Those who think he's average or overrated, would be on the "The Canucks won in spite of him, they should have played Schneider" kick. It was 1 game, played by a team, not just Luongo! Some just can't see by that and conveniently for them, they can use "he's never won the cup" as part of their argument, even though he was 1 win away!
How often do i hear Kipprusoff's name mentioned in "elite" goalie conversations? How about Rinne? Lundqvist? Well, as far as i recall, Kipper's never won a cup? Don't think he's got a gold medal either. How 'bout Rinne? And Lundqvist? Didn't he lose something like 7 or 8 straight playoff OT games till he finally won that one recently? That sure isn't winning the big game when you need to is it? He's consistently called the "best goalie in the NHL", is about to win the Vezina (or maybe runner up in a close vote) yet hasn't won a cup and is in tough right now to get his team through to the semis. Are these guys elite? Again, i guess it depends on your definition of elite?
FTR, i'm a huge Rinne and Lundqvist fan (and Kipper for that matter), and i think both Rinne and Lundqvist are better than Luongo, hands down. I also think Kipper in his prime was better, that's not my point so don't read into the comparisons the wrong way .
My point is simply that Luongo is far better than many give him credit for and IMO, the "many" are prob people who hate the Canucks and therefore conveniently criticize him. I don't recall seeing many people hate on him back in his Florida days. Some of it likely comes from the exposure he's rec'd playing in a hockey market like Vancouver and i'm sure some of it is from his general demeanor as well. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/06/2012 : 19:24:43
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4315
Someone could easily make an opposite article called "Luongo Myths proved true". Therfore this proves nothing. It is one-sided in the Luongo debate and therfore is a poor article. Love him or hate him you still have to ask "how come the stats of his failures have alluded this article?" or better yet "how come this article is needed in the first place?"
I agree. I am far from a Luongo basher but it is reasonable to argue the axact opposite have have validity to the argument. Regardless of how good his numbers are compared to this guy or that guy, The most important point (IMO) is the truly best goalies have their best games when they have to. Roy's numbers and performance were better in the playoffs as we're Brodeur's.
Again, I am not a Luongo basher and I don't think that he can be faulted forth the fortunes of the Canucks. However, the elite level goalie gets better when he has to and his team can count on hm regardless of the situation. I don't think you can say that about Luongo.
Luongo didn't lose anything but her certainly didn't win anything either.
Daniel Alfredsson is the MVP of the universe. All hail the Ottawa Senators!!!!! |
| Guest4315 |
Posted - 05/06/2012 : 14:14:52
Someone could easily make an opposite article called "Luongo Myths proved true". Therfore this proves nothing. It is one-sided in the Luongo debate and therfore is a poor article. Love him or hate him you still have to ask "how come the stats of his failures have alluded this article?" or better yet "how come this article is needed in the first place?" |
| Guest9733 |
Posted - 05/06/2012 : 08:18:10
I stopped reading after he started comparing stats to the 90's. So we can collectively say that Antti Niemi has better career stats than Patrick Roy so he's an elite goaltender.
I like how they show the video where they cut out the part where he dropped the puck with his glove 5 seconds before that to keep the puck in the zone and keep the play alive for US.
When did Roberto Luongo change his name to Andrew Eide? |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 05/06/2012 : 08:17:33
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4128
Do they actually try to compare Luongo to Roy?
Yes, Brodeur too. But not for a second does the writer claim Luongo is as good as them if that is what you were implying.
Statman, you're not alone! I've been saying this exact stuff for years! |
| Statman |
Posted - 05/06/2012 : 01:36:38
Finally! FINALLY!!!
Thank you to Andrew Eide for writing that article. Sometimes I feel like the lone sane voice in a massive wilderness of crazy. It's good to know that I'm not alone. |
| Guest4128 |
Posted - 05/06/2012 : 01:27:51
Do they actually try to compare Luongo to Roy? |
|
|
