Post-Game Talk: Game #24: Canucks 6, Jackets 2 - 6 goals? That's enough goals for 6 games!

[y2kcanucks]

The problem here is that people can't separate Luongo's game from the rest of the team (ie the offense not scoring). One has nothing to do with the other.

I don't think Luongo played a particularly strong game, he wasn't busy and when he was tested he didn't look very confident as he was flopping around quite a bit. I don't blame him on the first goal, that was primarily Kassian's **** up, and Bieksa was far too passive on the play. The second goal was a very juicy rebound given up by Lu and some weak coverage by Garrison (i think) in front. It's a good thing Columbus is a sad team because if they actually mounted any kind of offensive pressure the outcome might have been very different.

Just saw the highlights. Where the hell is the rebound on the second goal supposed to go? I don't see how anyone can blame Luongo on either goal, though it doesn't surprise me that people do. Anyone in our net but Luongo and they don't get this kind of blame. It sickens me.

 

[Tanevian*]

Just saw the highlights. Where the hell is the rebound on the second goal supposed to go? I don't see how anyone can blame Luongo on either goal, though it doesn't surprise me that people do. Anyone in our net but Luongo and they don't get this kind of blame. It sickens me.

It's just more passive aggressive Luongo bashing. I just block it out now because it's becoming beyond ridiculous.[/QUOTE]"]

Start blocking.

 

[Canucker]

Just saw the highlights. Where the hell is the rebound on the second goal supposed to go? I don't see how anyone can blame Luongo on either goal, though it doesn't surprise me that people do. Anyone in our net but Luongo and they don't get this kind of blame. It sickens me.

You don't normally try to kick rebounds into the slot or into areas where you can't make a second save...you normally try to 1) eliminate rebounds altogether or 2) direct them into the corners or out of play 3) or try to keep them in front of you so you can either cover the puck or be ready to make another save. You want to give him a pass (as usual), no problem give him a pass...I don't think it was a good rebound on his part.

 

[y2kcanucks]

You don't normally try to kick rebounds into the slot or into areas where you can't make a second save...you normally try to 1) eliminate rebounds altogether or 2) direct them into the corners or out of play 3) or try to keep them in front of you so you can either cover the puck or be ready to make another save. You want to give him a pass (as usual), no problem give him a pass...I don't think it was a good rebound on his part.

With where the original shot was placed, please explain how the hell he's expected to do that? The goal is on Garrison who's job was to clear that rebound away. He lost his man, he didn't do that. But we can continue to **** on Luongo because it's really become the "in" thing that all the cool kids do nowadays.

 

[Wetcoaster]

Here is the take on the game from Columbus Dispatch hockey writer Aaron Portzline per his Puck-Rakers Blog - "Game 23: Twins Spell Trouble":
http://bluejacketsxtra.dispatch.com...kers/2013/11/game-23-twins-spell-trouble.html

And his take on the Sestito charging penalty and the Hansen penalty shot?

Aaron Portzline ‏@Aportzline
The Sestito call was absurd. So was ruling to give Hansen a penalty shot on Tyutin penalty. Game wasn't close at that point, thankfully.

 

[yoss]

Nice to see Edler get a goal last night too.

 

[Lundface*]

With where the original shot was placed, please explain how the hell he's expected to do that? The goal is on Garrison who's job was to clear that rebound away. He lost his man, he didn't do that. But we can continue to **** on Luongo because it's really become the "in" thing that all the cool kids do nowadays.

With his stick, to the corner. But you're right no chance for Roberto. I've never seen a goalie deflect a puck to the corner with his stick, that shot was unstoppable.

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

Ok, if that's the case, can you explain to me what he was doing on the two occasions where he was prone on the ice before the skater had made his move? The shooter shot wide on both occasions, but I would like to know why he was prone there?

I see this kind of play by goaltenders all the time. I often find people criticize Luongo for plays I see other top goalie's make dozens of times over.

The first goal against was a comedy of errors by a few players, but Lu didn't help by remaining stationary on the player bearing down on him.

Also, your stat ignores situations where Luongo gives up the 1st and 2nd goal before the Canucks score a goal. If the team is already down multiple goals, it really doesn't matter that they score 1. They would have to score 4 or 5 to overturn the result. My question becomes: How many goals is Luongo allowing in those games where the team scores 1, and if it's more than 2, the there's cause to look at why.

The statline posted above is just startling, when scoring more than 1 goal the Canucks are 12 - 0 - 3.

I realize that adding scoring is really tough and that makes it easy to point fingers at the goalie, but its tilting at windmills to be going after Luongo right now.

 

[Bleach Clean]

delete

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

I see this kind of play by goaltenders all the time. I often find people criticize Luongo for plays I see other top goalie's make dozens of times over.



The statline posted above is just startling, when scoring more than 1 goal the Canucks are 12 - 0 - 3.

I realize that adding scoring is really tough and that makes it easy to point fingers at the goalie, but its tilting at windmills to be going after Luongo right now.

Like anyone else on the team, I evaluate Luongo based on how he plays. I don't care about how other people play. I don't let Chris Higgins factor into my opinion of David Booth, or judge Jeremy Welsh based on how Ryan Stanton plays. But somehow, our evaluation of Luongo has validity only based upon how other members of the team play. It is very strange to me. All I care about when I'm talking about Luongo is how he's playing. But unless we lose 6-5 it's like you're not even allowed to talk about him, the way some posters act.

As for your other comment, yes, Luongo is judged on a higher standard than most goalies; that is true, and should be expected when you are one of the highest paid goalies in the game. Even if it's not really being exposed at the moment, I can still be concerned that our highly-paid, 34 y/o goalie seems to not be capable of playing at the kind of level that earned him that contract in the first place. This is something that will bite us in the future should it continue, even if it's not a major factor in our games lately.

 

[Canucker]

With where the original shot was placed, please explain how the hell he's expected to do that? The goal is on Garrison who's job was to clear that rebound away. He lost his man, he didn't do that. But we can continue to **** on Luongo because it's really become the "in" thing that all the cool kids do nowadays.

There are plenty of ways to direct rebounds, google it. And as I said before, I'm not solely blaming Luongo on the goal...Garrison lost positioning on Anisimov and was weak in front, he shares in the blame...but that wasn't a good rebound to give up IMO. YMMV.

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

Like anyone else on the team, I evaluate Luongo based on how he plays. I don't care about how other people play. I don't let Chris Higgins factor into my opinion of David Booth, or judge Jeremy Welsh based on how Ryan Stanton plays. But somehow, our evaluation of Luongo has validity only based upon how other members of the team play. It is very strange to me. All I care about when I'm talking about Luongo is how he's playing. But unless we lose 6-5 it's like you're not even allowed to talk about him, the way some posters act.

Unfortunately for your opinion its a team sport and often how your teammates are playing reflects on your performance as well.

As for your other comment, yes, Luongo is judged on a higher standard than most goalies; that is true, and should be expected when you are one of the highest paid goalies in the game. Even if it's not really being exposed at the moment, I can still be concerned that our highly-paid, 34 y/o goalie seems to not be capable of playing at the kind of level that earned him that contract in the first place. This is something that will bite us in the future should it continue, even if it's not a major factor in our games lately.

I can agree with most of this paragraph, however I would argue that of much greater concern than Luongo's start to this season is our lack of scoring, our pathetic bottom 6 forward group, our lack of real callup options in the AHL, and our drafting record overall.

 

[Zombotron]

So how about those empty seats in the stands...

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

In the black and white world of NHL fandom, every goal is other "soft" or "unstoppable." This isn't just a Luongo-excuse. It was here when we had Cloutier, and Auld and Skudra, and is probably true for the fans of every team.

In the real world, there is a spectrum, and every shot has some % chance of being stopped. If Luongo is an average goalie he will stop the 45%ers roughly 45% of the time; if he's elite, maybe he will stop them 60% of the time. It is very hard to judge these sorts of probabilities on a case-by-case basis (which is why we fall back on primitive black/white thinking,) so we have to sort of look at the bigger picture, IMO.

 

[Wetcoaster]

So how about those empty seats in the stands...

They were sold.

 

[Wetcoaster]

How about a blast from the past?

Jeff Paterson ‏@patersonjeff
*Per #Canucks game notes: Ryan Stanton first rookie VAN d-man since Steve Staois in 1997 to record 3A in a game

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

How about a blast from the past?

Jeff Paterson ‏@patersonjeff
*Per #Canucks game notes: Ryan Stanton first rookie VAN d-man since Steve Staois in 1997 to record 3A in a game

Cool. What an odd game that was. Donald Brashear had 2 goals and Staios 3 A

We, as usual, lit up Curtis Joseph.

 

[Tanevian*]

So how about those empty seats in the stands...

The way things were going, you might lose a client taking them to a Canucks/Jackets game.

 

[mossey3535]

There are plenty of ways to direct rebounds, google it. And as I said before, I'm not solely blaming Luongo on the goal...Garrison lost positioning on Anisimov and was weak in front, he shares in the blame...but that wasn't a good rebound to give up IMO. YMMV.

Well, he makes a toe save there, it's hard to control rebounds on toe saves. Sometimes you have to give the shooter some credit for his shot placement.

Also while I agree with you in general philosophy, Lu is just not an active stick goaltender which is not surprising given his coaching influences. Personally I think all goalies should be active stick goalies but Lu is just not. Which is disappointing but it isn't going to change anytime soon. And he's not alone in the league by any means.

Having said that, you'd have to lunge to redirect with your stick there. So yeah, I disagree with your assessment on that particular goal.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Well, he makes a toe save there, it's hard to control rebounds on toe saves. Sometimes you have to give the shooter some credit for his shot placement.

Also while I agree with you in general philosophy, Lu is just not an active stick goaltender which is not surprising given his coaching influences. Personally I think all goalies should be active stick goalies but Lu is just not. Which is disappointing but it isn't going to change anytime soon. And he's not alone in the league by any means.

Having said that, you'd have to lunge to redirect with your stick there. So yeah, I disagree with your assessment on that particular goal.

And this coming from someone who actually PLAYS as a goalie. Thank you!

 

[y2kcanucks]

They were sold.

Sure...to scalpers who couldn't re-sell those seats.

 

[wonton15]

Stanton and Bieksa top pairing

 

[stuffradio]

Like anyone else on the team, I evaluate Luongo based on how he plays. I don't care about how other people play. I don't let Chris Higgins factor into my opinion of David Booth, or judge Jeremy Welsh based on how Ryan Stanton plays. But somehow, our evaluation of Luongo has validity only based upon how other members of the team play. It is very strange to me. All I care about when I'm talking about Luongo is how he's playing. But unless we lose 6-5 it's like you're not even allowed to talk about him, the way some posters act.

As for your other comment, yes, Luongo is judged on a higher standard than most goalies; that is true, and should be expected when you are one of the highest paid goalies in the game. Even if it's not really being exposed at the moment, I can still be concerned that our highly-paid, 34 y/o goalie seems to not be capable of playing at the kind of level that earned him that contract in the first place. This is something that will bite us in the future should it continue, even if it's not a major factor in our games lately.

Maybe that's because a goalie can't score goals, and if your team isn't scoring goals, you won't win?

 

[stuffradio]

The way things were going, you might lose a client taking them to a Canucks/Jackets game.

It was really noticeable last game. I didn't really pay attention to it against the Panthers, but it was glaringly obvious. I didn't know Rogers Arena could be so empty.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Maybe that's because a goalie can't score goals, and if your team isn't scoring goals, you won't win?

Marty Brodeur, Mike Smith, Evgeni Nabokov, Ron Hextall, Chris Osgood, and Jose Theodore all disagree with you. Pfft...Luongo is the problem with this team. He lets in goals where he has no chance to make the save on (where most NHL goalies wouldn't make the save) but it's his lack of goal scoring that's killing us.