Will Luongo make the Hockey Hall of Fame?

[Master Radishes]

I'm a huge Lu fan, but I agree he is currently a borderline case. Not a first balloter, but perhaps after a few years he'll get in (especially since it seems the HOF always has to vote in the max number no matter what). If he wins a Cup before he retires, he has a stronger case.

Wouldn't surprise me either way.

 

[sharks9]

He'd have to get in during a weak year

 

[KingWantsCup]

I'm gonna say no.

 

[TrillMike]

I would be very surprised if he got in.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

on his accomplishments, he's right on the cusp.

but i think a lot of people saying no right now have an unrealistic view of where the bar is. generally, the best 4-5 guys of every generation get in. right now, that looks extremely high because we spent the 90s watching roy, hasek, brodeur, and belfour. those four were so good, especially the first three obviously, that a guy like curtis joseph, who is probably a hall of famer in every other era, looks borderline. ditto vanbiesbrouck, or barrasso.

but try to name one goalie from the 2005 lockout to right now who will make the hall of fame, other than henrik lundqvist of course. the jury is out on jon quick because he may have a ways to go yet, and we may have to wait even longer to see how carey price's career turns out, but no one else comes to mind right? how can the second best goalie of his generation not get in the HHOF? it's not just ken drydens and vlad tretiaks and guys were superhuman peaks like bernie parent; tony esposito got in fro the 70s generation, and he's basically his generation's luongo. cheevers and giacomin got in and they are worse.

and if you think about it, quick and price aren't really in luongo's generation. brodeur was born in 1972. quick was born in 1986, and price in '87. in the roughly 15 years between those guys, we have only two HHOF-calibre guys: one is lundqvist ('82), the other is luongo ('79).

 

[Addison Rae]

There's no chance he's going to make it into the Hall of Fame if he retires today.

If he wins a Stanley Cup or suddenly starts having his best seasons now (at 35 or later), maybe there's a small chance. But even if the Canucks had won the Stanley Cup in 2011, I still say no chance Luongo gets in.

if van won game 6 lu would likely also have a conn smythe to his name. he'd be the first goalie in NHL history to be in the triple gold club. lu would have been a lock if he won a cup.

 

[thekernel]

He's got some hardware, insane career stats, and his peak included being nominated for the Hart, as well as multiple Vezina nominations. I think, should he win a Cup or maybe even a Vezina, he'd be a lock. Right now it's pretty debatable, it's really hard for goaltenders to make it into the HHOF, but he's definitely pretty high on the greatest-of-all-time list.

 

[Pacem]

I doubt it. No major individual awards and no Stanley Cup. Due to how goalies have been treated in the past, I have no clue how he would even get in.

It is so hard to get into the hockey hall of fame as a goalie. It is weird.

on his accomplishments, he's right on the cusp.

but i think a lot of people saying no right now have an unrealistic view of where the bar is. generally, the best 4-5 guys of every generation get in. right now, that looks extremely high because we spent the 90s watching roy, hasek, brodeur, and belfour. those four were so good, especially the first three obviously, that a guy like curtis joseph, who is probably a hall of famer in every other era, looks borderline. ditto vanbiesbrouck, or barrasso.

but try to name one goalie from the 2005 lockout to right now who will make the hall of fame, other than henrik lundqvist of course. the jury is out on jon quick because he may have a ways to go yet, and we may have to wait even longer to see how carey price's career turns out, but no one else comes to mind right? how can the second best goalie of his generation not get in the HHOF? it's not just ken drydens and vlad tretiaks and guys were superhuman peaks like bernie parent; tony esposito got in fro the 70s generation, and he's basically his generation's luongo. cheevers and giacomin got in and they are worse.

and if you think about it, quick and price aren't really in luongo's generation. brodeur was born in 1972. quick was born in 1986, and price in '87. in the roughly 15 years between those guys, we have only two HHOF-calibre guys: one is lundqvist ('82), the other is luongo ('79).

That's not entirely true. Billy Smith elected in 1993. It wasn't until 2003 (Grant Fuhr) that another goalie got elected in to the Hall, that is a long time between goalies getting elected. Considering the less then 10 year gap in age of Price/Quick vs Lundqvist/Luongo and you consider that not as the same generation it is not out of the question that they skip a generation as they have in the past.

 

[exporta]

Richard Brodeur also brought the Canucks to the Finals; doesn't mean he was a Hall of Famer.

I dunno, Luongo is maybe closer than most, but I don't think he cuts it. I think a goalie gets judged on:
a) regular seasons success (wins vs. losses)
b) hardware / League-leader
c) championship success (Gold medals, Stanley Cup, etc.)
d) intangible of being the guy the media/coaches/GMs talk about as the guy you trust in net in OT of game 7, etc.

In my mind, Luongo scores:
a) pretty good
b) no (did lead the NHL in wins one year)
c) pretty good, but not great (Gold medal=yes; two trips to Stanley Cup finals but no Cup, including epic choke - albeit not his fault - in 2011 = not really)
d) not at all

Since he doesn't knock the ball out of the park on any one of these categories (to mix sports metaphors), I don't think he's getting in.

Having said that, it's becoming increasingly difficult to tell who is a great goalie and who isn't anymore. They're all kind of even at the 'starter' level now. For example: two years ago, Devan Dubnyk was a bum who was headed to the minors; this year he had the 2nd-best GAA and was NHL star of the month three months ago.

When did Luongo make the finals the 2nd time? Pretty sure he was just there for Vancouver?

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

That's not entirely true. Billy Smith elected in 1993. It wasn't until 2003 (Grant Fuhr) that another goalie got elected in to the Hall, that is a long time between goalies getting elected. Considering the less then 10 year gap in age of Price/Quick vs Lundqvist/Luongo and you consider that not as the same generation it is not out of the question that they skip a generation as they have in the past.

this is interesting. and good point about the '80s. the 50s were a really fallow period, where no north american was produced in north america for an entire decade.

birth years of hall of famers since the nazis invaded poland, with the biggest names after hasek added at the end:

giacomin 1939
cheevers 1940
esposito 1943
parent 1945
dryden 1947
smith 1950
tretiak 1952
fuhr 1962
roy, hasek, belfour 1965
brodeur 1972
luongo 1979
lundqvist 1982
quick 1986
price 1987


that is a huge age gap between smith/tretiak and fuhr. interestingly, exactly the same gap between brodeur and lundqvist. so you may be on to something.


but on the other hand, smith and fuhr played each other in the stanley cup finals twice. when smith won his vezina, fuhr was the runner-up.


if we look at it by time spent in the NHL rather than birth year, here's the tally of goalies building significant pillars to their HHOF cases, in five year increments:

'65-'70: hall, worsley, giacomin,

'70-'75: dryden, esposito, cheevers, parent, arguably giacomin

'75-'80: dryden, tretiak, arguably esposito (but probably not cheevers and smith)

'80-'85: smith, fuhr, tretiak

'85-'90: fuhr, roy

'90-'95: roy, belfour

'95-'00: roy, belfour, hasek, brodeur

'00-'05: roy, hasek, brodeur, arguably belfour

'05-'10: lundqvist, brodeur


so maybe the question is whether giacomin/cheevers is an aberration where a generation of guys peaking in the early 70s was overrepresented, or whether the gretzky era was the opposite aberration where nobody got in. which raises the question: is putting luongo in there for his '04-'11 stretch is a happy medium between how the HHOF treated those two generations?

the O6 "golden era" is really interesting to me. if you look at the 1960 season, all six starting goalies in the league were hall of famers: hall in chicago, plante in montreal, bower in toronto, sawchuk in detroit, and lumley in boston. if you go back to 1950, it's 5/6: brimsek in chicago, rayner in new york, broda in toronto, durnan in montreal, and lumley in detroit. it's stuff like that that makes me wonder how luongo, who is likely to finish 4th all-time in wins, with an outside chance of catching belfour for #3, out.

 

[BreakingGood]

Yes, of course. He's an all-time great goalie. Since Hasek's prime, the only goalie better than Luongo is - maybe - Henrik Lundqvist.

 

[Captain Bowie]

No. The bar is far higher for goalies than it is for players, and while he does have decent numbers, he doesn't have any serious hardware, and his consistent meltdowns under pressure, including in a game 7 during a cup final, will define his reputation.

And to blame game 7 vs. Boston on Luongo is laughable. The Canucks couldn't score on Thomas to save their lives. They scored 4 goals in the last 5 games of the series.

 

[KCC]

And to blame game 7 vs. Boston on Luongo is laughable. The Canucks couldn't score on Thomas to save their lives. They scored 4 goals in the last 5 games of the series.

Luongo was shaky as hell in that gold medal game (and many of the other games as well). Every shot against him seemed to be a massive rebound. He's just lucky that he had such a good team in front of him to clear away most of the second chance opportunities or he'd have let in a ton of goals that night. He's a good goaltender, but he's not HOF worthy.

I also remember a poll some years back where players voted and it was that Luongo was the most overrated goaltender. Not sure he's overrated, but he's not a top goaltender in my eyes. Never was IMO.

 

[Dahlin 2 Eichel]

I could see him getting in but if he doesn't it wouldn't hurt my feelings either

 

[Captain Bowie]

lol no , he chokes too much in the playoffs + no vezina

Ed Belfour was considered a playoff choker until he finally made it to a final and won at the age of 33. The thing that will hold Luongo back is that he never played for a playoff until until the age of 27, and it seems he will finish his career with a non-playoff team from the age of 34 and on.

 

[Fish on The Sand]

And to blame game 7 vs. Boston on Luongo is laughable. The Canucks couldn't score on Thomas to save their lives. They scored 4 goals in the last 5 games of the series.

You can say that about game 7. It wasn't his finest game, but he didn't exactly go out there like he was going to win it for them though. You absolutely can blame him for game 6 though, when he had a chance to win the cup and instead got pulled halfway through the first as the game was already over.

I think Luongo will make it. He's basically the Dionne on goaltenders. I would much rather somebody like Luongo in than say Osgood, who was never great but was in some very fortunate situations.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Luongo was shaky as hell in that gold medal game (and many of the other games as well). Every shot against him seemed to be a massive rebound. He's just lucky that he had such a good team in front of him to clear away most of the second chance opportunities or he'd have let in a ton of goals that night. He's a good goaltender, but he's not HOF worthy.

I also remember a poll some years back where players voted and it was that Luongo was the most overrated goaltender. Not sure he's overrated, but he's not a top goaltender in my eyes. Never was IMO.

The great myth continues. Luongo made several key saves in the gold medal game, including a huge one in OT about a minute before Crosby's golden goal. He outplayed Brodeur to earn the starting gig.

Are Price and Brodeur lucky to have such a good team in front of them? Why is Luongo the only one who was lucky?

Between 03/04 and 11/12 (before the new generation takes over of Quick/Price/Rask) who was better than Luongo? Brodeur and Lundqvist? Pretty long list, eh?

 

[The Head Crusher]

I am leaning towards no. While he has some decent numbers and the Gold Medals, I do not think it i enough to get him in.

 

[CloutierForVezina]

Richard Brodeur also brought the Canucks to the Finals; doesn't mean he was a Hall of Famer.

I dunno, Luongo is maybe closer than most, but I don't think he cuts it. I think a goalie gets judged on:
a) regular seasons success (wins vs. losses)
b) hardware / League-leader
c) championship success (Gold medals, Stanley Cup, etc.)
d) intangible of being the guy the media/coaches/GMs talk about as the guy you trust in net in OT of game 7, etc.

In my mind, Luongo scores:
a) pretty good
b) no (did lead the NHL in wins one year)
c) pretty good, but not great (Gold medal=yes; two trips to Stanley Cup finals but no Cup, including epic choke - albeit not his fault - in 2011 = not really)
d) not at all

Since he doesn't knock the ball out of the park on any one of these categories (to mix sports metaphors), I don't think he's getting in.

Having said that, it's becoming increasingly difficult to tell who is a great goalie and who isn't anymore. They're all kind of even at the 'starter' level now. For example: two years ago, Devan Dubnyk was a bum who was headed to the minors; this year he had the 2nd-best GAA and was NHL star of the month three months ago.

For point A, regular season success, the guy is already 10th all time for wins and will easily end up #4 all time at the very worst, with a strong possibility of #3. He's also 13th all time on the shutout list, and he should end his career somewhere around #4-#10. His regular season dominance isn't really debatable, and it's quite a bit better than "pretty good".

For point B, this is his major weakness. No Vezinas. No Harts. No Pearson. With that said, he finished 2nd in Hart voting in 06-07 and it took a teenage Crosby scoring 120p to beat him that year. He also the following finishes in Vezina voting: 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 4th, 7th, 8th, 11th. Additionally, he was the starting goaltender for 2 president's trophy winning teams and has a Jennings trophy to his name. But again, the lack of individual hardware is his biggest issue.

For point C, he was only to the finals once. He takes a fair share of the blame for losing that series, but the entire Canucks team was struggling hard. The defense was crippled, the offense was anemic and the Bruins were playing really good hockey. He also has WJC silver, WHC gold and olympic gold x 2. The big missing piece is the cup, but he's had a fair amount of international success.

For point D, he's actually got a 9-7 record in overtime in the playoffs with a 0.952 sv%. Compared to other elite goalies like Lundqvist (2-8, 0.873), Price (2-4, 0.852), Rinne (2-3, 0.885) and Thomas (7-6, 0.901), he's actually pretty damn solid. I'm not saying he's a playoff God or anything, he clearly has his warts, but that's a really good record for a goalie in OT, when a single mistake costs your team the game. He was also great in OT in the Olympics and in particular, in game 7 against the Hawks in 11 and his very first playoff game, against the stars, that went to 4 OTs where he faced 76 total shots.

To be fair and not cherry pick stats, Niemi has a 7-2 record with a 0.949 and MAF has a 7-3 record with a 0.954 sv% in overtime in the playoffs.

(As an aside, JS Giguere is an absurd 12-1 with a 0.991 sv% in the playoffs. Wow.)

 

[The Panther]

Just to note that I was of course wrong in saying that Luongo had been to the Finals twice. It's only once. So he's getting further from the Hall in my mind...

With a goalie who's on the cusp of the Hall (like Luongo), it really comes down to how many powerful friends you have, and what your reputation for big games is. I don't see Luongo as strong in either of these.

 

[CascadiaPuck]

Has anyone with 3 Vezina nods not made it in? Serious question. He lost to Brodeur, Brodeur, and Thomas on the back of crazy seasons by each of those guys. Seriously: lu broke the record for wins in a season only to have Brodeur break it too in the same year. Two Pearson nominations and a Hart nomination. Two shutouts in a Stanley cup final series and the team in front of him scores 8 goals.

He has a decent shot at top 5 in wins and shutouts. An outside shot at 500 wins (while spending over half his career with non playoff teams).

Anyone making cracks about his play in 2010 should take a look at his save on Demetra (RIP) to advance to the gold medal game.

I get that the bar is high for goalies and I'm not saying he is at Brodeur's level (obviously not). But those dismissing him with "lol no" have no idea what they're taking about.

 

[AfroThunder396]

If you DON'T put Luongo in, then you're basically saying no one from the 2000's era is worthy. Other than Brodeur (whoplayed in the 2000's but isn't really Luongo's cohort in age and is about as safe a lock as you can get), the only goalie of that generation who you can put on par with Luongo is Lundqvist.

Guys like Kiprusoff, Miller, Theodore, Turco, Nabokov, etc are clearly a step below Luongo. And despite lack of hardware, you could argue Luongo's peak and prime are comparable to Lundqvist.

He's pretty clearly one of the top goalies of his generation and will get in as a compiler. If Lundqvist is the only goalie post-Brodeur to be worthy of the Hall, I don't think that's right at all. Luongo should get in.

 

[lawrence]

I think he should be there.

If the Hall of Fame is reserved for people who has Stanley cups only then the Hall of Fame will be quite empty.

For example, lets look at Mats Sundin. what has he won individually? he's won nothing, team champions? nothing. Stanley cup finals? None. He has a total 6 playoff series wins in his career and that's it. 1300 points pretty good, hes 27 in NHL all time points.

How bout Adam Oates? no Stanley cups, no individual championships, he's in the hall of fame.

Roberto Luongo. He's currently 14th all time in wins. He is exactly 27 wins away from being in the top 10, he has 6 years left in his contract.

Ed Belfour has 484 wins, and is number 3 in all time wins....

If Luongo wins 30 or more games per year, until he retires, he will easily exceed Ed belfour and I think he should be in the hall of fame.

Again if individual rewards and Stanley cup rings count, then no one will ever make the hall.

Luongo should make it if he finishes in the top 10 in wins, which I think he will easily do it. Florida will get better, he will rack up some wins too towards the tail end of his career.

 

[Seatoo]

Seeing as how he's posted the best numbers by any Canadian goalie since he's been drafted, won two gold medals and has single handedly won entire playoff series for the Canucks. Yes Luo semi imploded during the finals but when you score 6 goals in 7 games it whatever it was you are going to lose no matter how good your goalie is.

Luo will be a member of the HHOF, most likely on a first ballot, and anyone who disagrees is blinded by Canuck hatred.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

There's a lot more in the HHOF than Brodeur, Hasek, Messier, Gretzky and Yzerman.

Luongo is right around the cutoff (which is way harder as a goalie than as a skater). But I think he probably makes it in if he can have a few more successful years with Florida.

Honestly, as a goalie, you can't be that far off that level and get in. The only goalies from the last 35 years to make the HHOF are Billy Smith, Grant Fuhr, Patrick Roy, Ed Belfour, and Dominik Hasek. That's it. Martin Brodeur will join them, but who else? If Tom Barrasso and Curtis Joseph couldn't get in, why would Luongo?