Pre-Game Talk: Game #23: Vancouver Canucks vs. Florida Panthers - Tuesday, Nov. 17th 7:00PM - SNET-P

[Rotting Corpse*]

He would only be allowing one goal every 100 shots... If we were scoring 1 goal and still losing games we would be giving up approx 200 shots a game....

Don't scare him away with math.

 

[Ryp37]

If a guy is making X dollars, I am going to expect him to play like a player who makes X dollars. I really don't care what special tricks the accountants and loophole-savants have done to make it so his salary is accounted for differently in some other respect; it's irrelevant in this context.

Cap hit is the only relevant part, because that's what effects the team

No one (but you) cares how much he's making

 

[arsmaster*]

LOL. How'd I know that statement would draw comments.

I feel sad for people who see goals as stats only.

----

Anywho. I'm gonna bow out of this goaltending debate, especially in the GDT.

If we can't expose the worst defensive team in the league tomorrow night with arguably the greenest roster in the league I will be very sad.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

We've been afforded the chance to win all but 1 game this season because of he goaltending.

You could sub out the word goaltending with excellent team defense.

The skaters are being criticized for not scoring enough goals but as a group they have been exceptional defensively IMO. I don't see anybody cutting the forwards any slack even though they have bought into Tortorella's system very well, are backchecking and blocking shots better than ever and are aggressive on the PK, limiting the oppositions scoring chances.

 

[arsmaster*]

He really hasn't faced many chances/quality chances from opposition teams because we have been so dominant against the other teams in the forecheck. In two games where we were outplayed that I can remember, first game vs SJ and our recent game against LA, he lets in 4 goals and was pulled in the LA game. So he does still have meltdowns.

He lost his ability to steal games but still kept his ability to meltdown.

Ok last comment on goaltending. Only because I saw this one quoted.

Think back to the LA game. IIRC every goal was an odd man rush with missed assignments in transition. All 5 including the first shot on Eddie.

 

[Orca Smash]

I hope to god we beat the panthers, and hope we do, but keep in mind were getting another team that has started to play better.

They did beat the ducks and avs recently, minny squeaked out a 3-2 win over them, this might not be as easy as some expect.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

Think back to the LA game. IIRC every goal was an odd man rush with missed assignments in transition. All 5 including the first shot on Eddie.

Now think back to every game following that and the half dozen that proceeded it.

The Canucks have played like 2 or 3 bad periods in close to 10 games. The team defense has been outstanding.

Luongo is being put in a position to look very good. So far he's looked pretty good.

 

[StIllmatic]

The Canucks offense is nowhere to be found. The Sedins have been in a huge slump since they signed their contract extensions. Burrows has been snake bitten all season. Kesler has been very streaky. Booth has generated absolutely nothing. Kassian isn't producing at a top 6 clip. Offense from the back-end has been sporadic at best. Yet the majority of the discussion is centered around Luongo. To me, that's absolutely ridiculous.

The majority of the discussion is not about Luongo. The vast majority of people are complaining about the scoring and you know that. There have just been a few complaints about Luongo, these posts stand out more as they are the minority. The people discussing Luongo are just a few people with many posts about the topic. Go back to the GDT yesterday and you will see what I mean.

I am a huge Luongo fan, don't get me wrong, but personally I just expect more from Luongo, and I'm sure he does too. The most concerning aspect of the Canucks' play is obviously the offence. We have run into a bad streak. Even the best of teams slump at times so I am not worried. We are creating tons of scoring chances which is what matters to me and are defence has been good for the most part outside of a few hiccups here and there (the LA game).

 

[Ozone]

The majority of the discussion is not about Luongo. The vast majority of people are complaining about the scoring and you know that. There have just been a few complaints about Luongo, these posts stand out more as they are the minority. The people discussing Luongo are just a few people with many posts about the topic. Go back to the GDT yesterday and you will see what I mean.

I am a huge Luongo fan, don't get me wrong, but personally I just expect more from Luongo, and I'm sure he does too. The most concerning this is obviously the offence. We have run into a bad streak. Even the best of teams slump at times so I am not worried. We are creating tons of scoring chances which is what matters to me and are defence has been good for the most part outside of a few hiccups here and there (the LA game).

Well said. Also thanks to Elfred and Lundface (among others) for posts that were well thought out and well reasoned. Unfortunately, Y2k and arsmaster have not followed suit.

The great point of these discussions is expecting the occasional reply to be somewhat
rational (at least the illusion that they attempted to understand the post they're replying to) and show more intellectual depth than a puddle.

Edit: On a more positive note 3-1 Nucksters.

 

[arsmaster*]

Well said. Also thanks to Elfred and Lundface (among others) for posts that were well thought out and well reasoned. Unfortunately, Y2k and arsmaster have not followed suit.

The great point of these discussions is expecting the occasional reply to be somewhat
rational (at least the illusion that they attempted to understand the post they're replying to) and show more intellectual depth than a puddle.

Edit: On a more positive note 3-1 Nucksters.

Because you agree doesn't mean you're any more reasoned. Save that crap for someone else.


The mere fact we're even discussing the goaltending for me is the issue.

I really have no complaints.

What one should he have had last night?

San Jose?

He's played one bad game. The proof, for me at least, is the record when we score two. You can dress it up anyway you like. It is the simple reality at this time, will it correct over time? Most likely, but I don't know how you can discount it. A win is a win, and right now if we get 2 goals we are winning.

I think we're creating enough too. We're just not cashing in on the chances. It should right itself.

My guess is 3-1 Canucks as well. EN clinches it.

 

[604]

Tomrrow's game has made a question pop into my head...at the end of the day, would you rather have:

-two Veizna's, a Jennings, a Con Smythe, and a Cup or,
- won a Jennings and made $50M more in your career (~$75M vs. ~$25M)

Would it make a difference if the 2nd guy made the HHOF (I think his chances are much better).

Personally, I'd probably rather be the 2nd guy, especially if I make it into the HHOF (for the legacy factor which the other guy gets for winning Veiznas and the Cup).

 

[David71]

anyone noticed that burrows/kesler don't have their "a's" anymore? its been given to danny and kevin bieska now.

 

[BoHorvatFan]

Tomrrow's game has made a question pop into my head...at the end of the day, would you rather have:

-two Veizna's, a Jennings, a Con Smythe, and a Cup or,
- won a Jennings and made $50M more in your career (~$75M vs. ~$25M)

Would it make a difference if the 2nd guy made the HHOF (I think his chances are much better).

Personally, I'd probably rather be the 2nd guy, especially if I make it into the HHOF (for the legacy factor which the other guy gets for winning Veiznas and the Cup).

I'd gladly take 50 million dollars over a cup.

 

[No Face No Case]

What exactly are they seeing in Dalpe that I'm missing? We waived Weber to keep a roster spot for this guy?

 

[luongo321]

Tomrrow's game has made a question pop into my head...at the end of the day, would you rather have:

-two Veizna's, a Jennings, a Con Smythe, and a Cup or,
- won a Jennings and made $50M more in your career (~$75M vs. ~$25M)

Would it make a difference if the 2nd guy made the HHOF (I think his chances are much better).

Personally, I'd probably rather be the 2nd guy, especially if I make it into the HHOF (for the legacy factor which the other guy gets for winning Veiznas and the Cup).

For a guy like Lu, he wants the cup. It's the only thing that will silence the critics. Hell, even if they win a cup, they'll probably say he wasn't good enough and that the team bailed him out.

 

[SighReally]

Lol Jesus Christ the amount of personal and petty attacks in this thread is astounding.

It's ****ing hilarious and sad how people try to pinpoint one area of the Canucks that are dragging them down to explain a small blip in the overall scheme of the season while taking pot shots at each other.

In conclusion: Luongo needs to play better though he's not the absolute source of our troubles. We also need to score more (i.e. probably try to average over 2 goals a game) which is on our offense though we've been generating chances.

 

[MISC*]

I hope to god we beat the panthers, and hope we do, but keep in mind were getting another team that has started to play better.

They did beat the ducks and avs recently, minny squeaked out a 3-2 win over them, this might not be as easy as some expect.

Beating crappy teams is the problem with our team. We beat the weak and get beaten by the elite. I'm hoping we start losing to the Panthers and Oilers.

Only then will real changes occur.

The resemblance btwn out team and Calgary are starting to become very very concerning. Made it deep once and are trying at any coat to do it again even though the reality is staring us right in the face. Unless we get Gaborik, Cammy, Campbell and Vanek we aren't going anywhere in the post season.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

Beating crappy teams is the problem with our team. We beat the weak and get beaten by the elite. I'm hoping we start losing to the Panthers and Oilers.

Only then will real changes occur.

The resemblance btwn out team and Calgary are starting to become very very concerning. Made it deep once and are trying at any coat to do it again even though the reality is staring us right in the face. Unless we get Gaborik, Cammy, Campbell and Vanek we aren't going anywhere in the post season.

I don't have the years required to explain everything that's wrong with this post and this thread has already veered so far off-topic it's not funny.

------------------------------

If we lose this game, I will destroy something expensive and delicate.

 

[MISC*]

I don't have the years required to explain everything that's wrong with this post and this thread has already veered so far off-topic it's not funny.

I was emphasizing how far this team is from being a favorite.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Expecting to win games 1-0 is stupid. I don't need a better word for it either, expecting to win games 1-0 is stupid.

Are you actually contending that teams don't win 1-0? Or that teams don't take 1-1 ties into OT to get points?

It's context. Everything boils down to how a certain game is going and the run of play. Absolute statements based on score cannot be made.

I have no issue with the goaltending. It isn't why the team is losing.

Seriously, this isn't soccer. You have to score to win, and the majority of the time you have to score more than once, not even the majority, 90% of the time you need at least two.

Part of it for me is your afinity to use sv% as the defacto reason for why the goaltending is good or isn't. Lu was .913 last night, had the Stars taken 5 more shots that were saved he'd be at .929.....I really don't think it matters. 2 goals went passed him and only one (that counted) went passed the other goalie. SV% doesn't tell me anything about the game was played.

SV% is the best objective representation of goaltending. Over 1 game it will tell you something that can be debated. Over multiple games and a larger sample, I'm not aware of a better stat to represent a goalie. GAA is dependant on shot volume. Yeah, so until you can find a better stat...?

Disliking the stat does nothing to discount the argument really.

MS is right, you can knock both and one or the other, but I really don't understand why you'd knock the goaltending at this point in time, when it's abundantly clear to me, it's the least of the teams problems. They have lost 4 straight and have only scored 1 goal in each of those games. There's a slogan about this, isn't there? Doing something the same way over and over and expecting different results is the definition of something right?

I also believe there was a stat someone brought up the other day about Lu/the Canucks record when scoring 2 or more this year? Not 100% sure of it, but are we not undefeated in regulation when scoring 2 or more?

We're not losing games because of goaltending....seems like a silly thing to complain about given the circumstances.

I think as a team, we're playing great hockey, besides the lack of finish. Here's hoping Timmy doesn't 2011 us again.

Currently, I think the goaltending is the 3rd most important problem on the team. First is the obvious scoring at ES. Next, the PP issues that persist, and finally the goaltending (although this has come to the fore lately for me, and others).

opendoor has used another set of arbitrary cut offs to illustrate the Canucks record in the opposite fashion. 3+ GF: 10-0-1.... 2 of fewer GF: 1-8-2. .500 record last year in the second category.

We are losing games due to a combination of factors. The primary is scoring at ES in the immediate (where they were averaging 3G/G before the latest slide), then its the PP overall, and in recent games the difference in goaltending has become more pronounced. You can ignore #2 and #3 and focus on #1 (scoring at ES), all good, but that's what you are doing, ignoring it. Simply put, he must be better.

 

[Wolfhard]

All I've learned in here is that if we don't score more than 2 goals, our goaltending isn't going to steal any points for us.
And if we allow 2 or more goals, our offense won't likely steal any points for us.

Seems like both areas are mediocre right now, and while improvement in one area may mask the problems in another, it doesn't stop the fact that there are problems. Both have to improve if we're going to compete in a very tough conference. I don't understand why it has to be one or the other...

 

[avelanch]

so you're saying we need to score more goals than we let in in order to win the game?

 

[arsmaster*]

SV% is the best objective representation of goaltending. Over 1 game it will tell you something that can be debated. Over multiple games and a larger sample, I'm not aware of a better stat to represent a goalie. GAA is dependant on shot volume. Yeah, so until you can find a better stat...?

Disliking the stat does nothing to discount the argument really.

We discussed this briefly a few days ago. Lu had a .933 against San Jose and lost. The SV% doesn't tell the goals were flukes

It might be the best objective representation if you have to use a number. We're letting in 2 or less goals on most nights.

For me that should be enough to win in this league.


You guys can continue to roll out your sv% numbers to knock Luongo. I just won't be joining you.

Using sv% as your be all_end all is like buying a car off the car lot and only looking at the bottom line of the car fact sheet. You might get a Steve Mason, Brayden Holtby, or Ben Scrivens, when if you look at things with a broader scope you might get a Lundqvist.

Corey Crawford is 13-3 with numbers worse than Roberto's because his team is scoring.




His worst statistical game this year (I actually thought the Canucks were playing a good game).

First goal, 3 on 2. Clear shot in the slot from 15 feet with a screen. (He maybe could have had this one).

2nd goal 2 on 1 tap in from 5 feet.

3rd goal tap because Edler lost his man in front.

4th goal (another tap in with a missed assignment at the lip of the crease).


Eddie Lack's goal against was a 2-1 as well.

5 mistakes in transition and in-zone coverage and they all ended up in the net. The stats point to the goaltending, my eyes point to coverage.

Seems there is a bit of false sense that we're playing perfect hockey right now. We're playing damn good, and Luongo isn't quite at the top of his game but he's playing well. Good enough to win on just about every night. The least of the concerns for me.

Obviously teams do win games 1-0 but expecting it, or pointing some fingers at a goalie who is losing games 2-1 seems a bit misplaced at this time.

You can call 11-0-2 arbitrary, but that's what is happening. Move it to two goals, that's still not enough. NHL teams, especially ones that are creating chances like we are right now need to score to win games.
-------

@DJopus - I like to believe that if I was on the Canucks I'd rather be that goalie with the cup, but otherwise, I'd take the money.

I'm not really that sure what it would be like to have that much money, but $25m is still a lot of money.

 

[Wolfhard]

so you're saying we need to score more goals than we let in in order to win the game?

That's basically the intelligence level of this whole conversation...

 

[Nuckles]

GDT is up: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1541653