Toggle sidebar

Confirmed with Link: [VAN/FLA] Luongo, Anthony for Matthias, Markstrom - Pt. 2

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,721
5,957
me2 said:
Nope. Was Lack to fault to Luongo's 8 goal meltdown, the many 7oungo's, the meltdowns against Chicago, the meltdowns against Oilers. ie Luongo vs Edmonton
Click to expand...

The meltdowns against Chicago happened in the playoffs and it was a few years ago. Luongo has improved his consistency.

Look at their stats. Prior to the trade, Lack played less games, had better GAA, and had better SV%. Yet, since October (Luongo is notorious for slow starts), Luongo has only let in 4 goals 3 times (empty net goals not included). Lack let in 4 goals 4 times (empty net goals not included). The stats clearly suggest that Luongo was much better at not letting games get out of hand and keeping the score manageable.
 
me2

me2

Go ahead foot
Jun 28, 2002
37,903
5,595
Make my day.
F A N said:
The meltdowns against Chicago happened in the playoffs and it was a few years ago. Luongo has improved his consistency.

Look at their stats. Prior to the trade, Lack played less games, had better GAA, and had better SV%. Yet, since October (Luongo is notorious for slow starts), Luongo has only let in 4 goals 3 times (empty net goals not included). Lack let in 4 goals 4 times (empty net goals not included). The stats clearly suggest that Luongo was much better at not letting games get out of hand and keeping the score manageable.
Click to expand...

Small sample size is small. Lack has had a couple of tough games, every starter has them. Since the season is dead anyway I'm prepared to give him until the end of the season to see what he can do as the teams starter before declaring him an issue that needs fixing (ie adding a vet goalie to platoon with him). If he stinks we get a better pick, if he stands on his own two feet we know we have a good goalie.
 

Zarpan

Registered User
Apr 27, 2010
2,090
185
Vancouver
F A N said:
The meltdowns against Chicago happened in the playoffs and it was a few years ago. Luongo has improved his consistency.

Look at their stats. Prior to the trade, Lack played less games, had better GAA, and had better SV%. Yet, since October (Luongo is notorious for slow starts), Luongo has only let in 4 goals 3 times (empty net goals not included). Lack let in 4 goals 4 times (empty net goals not included). The stats clearly suggest that Luongo was much better at not letting games get out of hand and keeping the score manageable.
Click to expand...

With the scoring problems the Canucks have been having, I'm not sure that being consistently okay is that useful. Letting in either 2 or 3 goals every game would probably get us less points than letting in either 1 or 4 goals every game. Not that either distribution would get us into the playoffs.
 
Jimson Hogarth*

Jimson Hogarth*

Registered User
Nov 21, 2013
12,858
3
me2 said:
Small sample size is small. Lack has had a couple of tough games, every starter has them. Since the season is dead anyway I'm prepared to give him until the end of the season to see what he can do as the teams starter before declaring him an issue that needs fixing (ie adding a vet goalie to platoon with him). If he stinks we get a better pick, if he stands on his own two feet we know we have a good goalie.
Click to expand...
The problem is that the backup goalie that was acquired for the team doesn't have the trust of the coaching staff. This hampers the team and could potentially **** with Lack's development as an NHL goalie. This could be one of the worst Gillis moves yet, telling the team, media and fans the expectation was to "make the playoffs" while forcing the team into a situation where it has 2 rookie goaltenders to chose from.
 
opendoor

opendoor

Registered User
Dec 12, 2006
11,719
1,403
F A N said:
The meltdowns against Chicago happened in the playoffs and it was a few years ago. Luongo has improved his consistency.

Look at their stats. Prior to the trade, Lack played less games, had better GAA, and had better SV%. Yet, since October (Luongo is notorious for slow starts), Luongo has only let in 4 goals 3 times (empty net goals not included). Lack let in 4 goals 4 times (empty net goals not included). The stats clearly suggest that Luongo was much better at not letting games get out of hand and keeping the score manageable.
Click to expand...

Lack also let in 0 or 1 GA 11 times in 22 starts compared to Luongo doing it only 6 times in 42 starts which clearly suggests that Lack was much better at giving an impotent offense a chance to win.
 

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,721
5,957
opendoor said:
Lack also let in 0 or 1 GA 11 times in 22 starts compared to Luongo doing it only 6 times in 42 starts which clearly suggests that Lack was much better at giving an impotent offense a chance to win.
Click to expand...

But he didn't win more. My point is that Lack isn't ready to be a #1 because he lacks the game to game consistency. If the number of brilliant games is how you measure the ability of a #1 goalie, then Brian Boucher would have been an established #1 starter in the NHL.

Say what you will about Luongo but he's a very good goalie in the regular season who has proven time and time again he can handle a starter's workload. You know what you're going to get with Luongo. With Lack, he's had these games where he simply couldn't settle the team down.
 

Zarpan

Registered User
Apr 27, 2010
2,090
185
Vancouver
F A N said:
But he didn't win more. My point is that Lack isn't ready to be a #1 because he lacks the game to game consistency. If the number of brilliant games is how you measure the ability of a #1 goalie, then Brian Boucher would have been an established #1 starter in the NHL.

Say what you will about Luongo but he's a very good goalie in the regular season who has proven time and time again he can handle a starter's workload. You know what you're going to get with Luongo. With Lack, he's had these games where he simply couldn't settle the team down.
Click to expand...

Boucher's problem is that he's mediocre much more than he is brilliant. He has a career .901 save percentage and has put up pretty average numbers in the minors too. Even if he was perfectly consistent at a .901 save percentage, he would still be a backup.

If Lack can maintain a .915 save percentage, he'd be at least an adequate #1 even if he has some consistency issues that he needs to work through, assuming he doesn't give up 6 goals every second game in the long run.
 
Pip

Pip

Registered User
Feb 2, 2012
69,191
8,522
Granduland
F A N said:
But he didn't win more. My point is that Lack isn't ready to be a #1 because he lacks the game to game consistency. If the number of brilliant games is how you measure the ability of a #1 goalie, then Brian Boucher would have been an established #1 starter in the NHL.

Say what you will about Luongo but he's a very good goalie in the regular season who has proven time and time again he can handle a starter's workload. You know what you're going to get with Luongo. With Lack, he's had these games where he simply couldn't settle the team down.
Click to expand...

Those haven't been too many of those games, and it's not as if we haven't seen it with Luongo in the past (especially in the post season).
 
opendoor

opendoor

Registered User
Dec 12, 2006
11,719
1,403
F A N said:
But he didn't win more. My point is that Lack isn't ready to be a #1 because he lacks the game to game consistency. If the number of brilliant games is how you measure the ability of a #1 goalie, then Brian Boucher would have been an established #1 starter in the NHL.
Click to expand...

He did when his team actually scored. In the games where each goalie got at least 1 goal in support, Lack had a better winning % than Luongo.

Say what you will about Luongo but he's a very good goalie in the regular season who has proven time and time again he can handle a starter's workload. You know what you're going to get with Luongo. With Lack, he's had these games where he simply couldn't settle the team down.
Click to expand...

You're not going to get an argument from me that Lack probably isn't ready to be a #1 just yet, but you're overrating Luongo's consistency this year. Yeah he cut down on the blowouts against compared to recent years, but he also was pretty much guaranteed to give up 2+ GA every night. I guess it's consistent, but it's consistently mediocre.

And really, none of this matters since Luongo wasn't going to be here long term. The question should be whether the Canucks should get a veteran to split time with Lack and I imagine the last stretch of games will help tell us that.
 
mossey3535

mossey3535

Registered User
Feb 7, 2011
13,424
9,958
PG Canuck said:
congratulations, you picked a game that every goalie has. You showed us!
Click to expand...

I don't think this speaks to Lack's suitability as a prospect, but 7 goals in one period is epic level bad. In fact, I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of goalies who have the talent to reach the pros has NEVER let in 7 goals in one period.

He did not look good on a single goal against. I'm not sure why Tortorella left him in there for 'bouncing back' because I definitely didn't see it.

While FAN is definitely premature in his assessments, I think this shows us how much the pressure of being the starter and the difference in routine and workload can change a goalie's game.

But let's not pretend every goalie has a 7 goal period. Probably every goalie has had a 7-8 goal game. But not one period.
 
me2

me2

Go ahead foot
Jun 28, 2002
37,903
5,595
Make my day.
mossey3535 said:
I don't think this speaks to Lack's suitability as a prospect, but 7 goals in one period is epic level bad. In fact, I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of goalies who have the talent to reach the pros has NEVER let in 7 goals in one period.

He did not look good on a single goal against. I'm not sure why Tortorella left him in there for 'bouncing back' because I definitely didn't see it.

While FAN is definitely premature in his assessments, I think this shows us how much the pressure of being the starter and the difference in routine and workload can change a goalie's game.

But let's not pretend every goalie has a 7 goal period. Probably every goalie has had a 7-8 goal game. But not one period.
Click to expand...

Lack let in 6, one was an empty net, (4 were PP goals, one was a second after it expired but I'll count it since the guy wasn't on the ice). I'd be more worried if he got ventilated at ES.

OTOH Luongo let in 6 in the 3rd vs Edmonton. 7 in 18min if you add the one at the end of the 2nd. Only one was on the PP.


2nd
18:47 Jordan Eberle (15) Tip-in - ASST: Justin Schultz (17), Nick Schultz (8
3rd Period
02:21 PPG - Nail Yakupov (15) Wrist shot - ASST: Justin Schultz (18), Sam Gagner (24)
13:17 Justin Schultz (8) Wrist shot - ASST: Taylor Hall (33), Mark Fistric (5)
14:16 Nail Yakupov (16) Wrist shot - ASST: Magnus Paajarvi (6)
14:37 Jordan Eberle (16) Wrist shot - ASST: Taylor Hall (34), Justin Schultz (19)
15:47 Nail Yakupov (17) Backhand shot - ASST: Mark Fistric (6), Magnus Paajarvi (7)
16:52 Jerred Smithson (3) Wrist shot - ASST: Ryan Jones (5), Ryan Smyth (11)
 
Bleach Clean

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
27,055
6,624
me2 said:
Lack let in 6, one was an empty net, (4 were PP goals, one was a second after it expired but I'll count it since the guy wasn't on the ice). I'd be more worried if he got ventilated at ES.

OTOH Luongo let in 6 in the 3rd vs Edmonton. 7 in 18min if you add the one at the end of the 2nd. Only one was on the PP.


2nd
18:47 Jordan Eberle (15) Tip-in - ASST: Justin Schultz (17), Nick Schultz (8
3rd Period
02:21 PPG - Nail Yakupov (15) Wrist shot - ASST: Justin Schultz (18), Sam Gagner (24)
13:17 Justin Schultz (8) Wrist shot - ASST: Taylor Hall (33), Mark Fistric (5)
14:16 Nail Yakupov (16) Wrist shot - ASST: Magnus Paajarvi (6)
14:37 Jordan Eberle (16) Wrist shot - ASST: Taylor Hall (34), Justin Schultz (19)
15:47 Nail Yakupov (17) Backhand shot - ASST: Mark Fistric (6), Magnus Paajarvi (7)
16:52 Jerred Smithson (3) Wrist shot - ASST: Ryan Jones (5), Ryan Smyth (11)
Click to expand...



Good catch me2.

Yeah, it's not good, but the entire team has just quit on Torts. Hard to contextualize Lack's performance, or the team's in this kind of situation. There's no base from which to work from.
 

Wetcoaster

Guest
Gord Miller ‏@GMillerTSN
Top 5 Save % Last 3 Seasons (min 75 starts)
Rask .928
Schneider .927
Elliott .925
Bishop .924
Lundqvist .924


Gord Miller ‏@GMillerTSN
Worst Save % last 3 seasons (min 75 starts)
Brodeur .904
Pavelec .905
Emery .905
Bryzgalov .906
Mason .906
 

Verviticus

Registered User
Jul 23, 2010
12,664
592
eddie's game and luongo's games are pretty easy to read - every time a goalie lets in 7 or 8 goals, it's a very bad job of goaltending. they had a very bad game.

i dunno why people bother discussing it, though. it shouldnt be too hard to understand.
 
me2

me2

Go ahead foot
Jun 28, 2002
37,903
5,595
Make my day.
Bleach Clean said:
Good catch me2.

Yeah, it's not good, but the entire team has just quit on Torts. Hard to contextualize Lack's performance, or the team's in this kind of situation. There's no base from which to work from.
Click to expand...

3 excellent PP goals, including a 5 on 3, you can't blame Lack at all for the collapse 3-0 turning into 3-3. 4-3 was poor but not uncommon goal even for good goalies, 5 was a random, 6 well he made the save but was slow, where was the team?

I'm not that upset with Lack, good PP, 1 mistake and some chaos. Random it's not like he was letting Dubnyk like stinkers. A whole lot of bad random numbers combining at the same, it happens. Roll enough dice you'll get a string 1's.
 
Win One Before I Die

Win One Before I Die

Cautious Optimism
Jul 31, 2007
5,119
4
L3VL1Lq.gif
 
racerjoe

racerjoe

Registered User
Jun 3, 2012
12,189
5,889
Vancouver
I don't know how to link into twitter, but botch was saying people from Florida are saying seal was in place since Sept, but they wanted to wait the year to give Lack a mentor, then the HC made things happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom