Thread: Speculation: More Luongo Talk
View Single Post
Old
12-23-2012, 01:38 PM
  #506
NYVanfan
Registered User
 
NYVanfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,185
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by FerrisRox View Post
In the Stanley Cup Final, the single most important set of games in his entire career, Luongo posted
a save percentage of .850 or lower in four of the seven games in the Final. Disturbingly, in two of the games his save percentage was below .800. If Vancouver had even a half-way decent goalie, they win that series and the Cup. Instead, they didn't just get less then adequate goaltending, they received awful net minding, and it cost them. If you think in any way, shape or form he compares on any level to what Tim Thomas did that spring, you are confused, mis-informed or perhaps just a pathological liar. It's like comparing a triangle to a bag or marbles and marvelling at their similarity. Vancouver got to the Final that year in spite of Luongo, not because of him. Amazingly, he had SEVEN games where he posted a save percentage below .850 in that one playoff run. Anyway you slice it, that's just plain awful and players that **** the bed come playoff time not surprisingly don't fetch huge hauls in a trade. He's so widely inconsistent that no team can seriously pin their hopes on him. In the playoffs, the guy is Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and that's a risk very few GM's - including Mike Gillis - want to take. In last years playoffs, he played just two games, one of them, again with a sub .850 save percentage and the year before the trip to the Final, Luongo played 12 playoff games for the Canucks and delivered a save percentage of .857 or lower in FIVE of the games. Teams don't win championships with that kind of "clutch" goaltending. Vancouver fans seem to think that nobody understands why the Canucks want to trade Luongo. We all get it. What we don't quite understand is why Toronto would want to acquire him.




Well, here's the problem, you're saying he'll continue playing at his "current rate" and the problem is, I was saying it's unlikely he'll deliver "elite goaltending" for the next five or six years. If you think his "current rate" (which statistically was virtually indentical to journeyman Jose Theodore who was on a much lousier team) is elite, your credibility has just gone out the window. If the best case scenario is Luongo maintains the decidedly average performance he put in last season (when he lost his starters job in the playoffs) why would any team acquire the burden on his contract? Are you starting to see the point? You can say the odds are 70-30 that he will play well into his 40's (an absurd claim, by the way because he's not even playing that well *now*) but the real question is: will he play better than Jacob Markstrom or whoever else Florida could acquire an pay $5 million a season without being handcuffed to a long burdensome contract? I think the odds of that are more like 4-96, and that's really the point.
nice that you can read the stats, but instead of calling ppl liars, id suggest you go and watch the series and then re-think your opinion.
those of us who watched know that luongo cost the team in game 6 (i was there), the other 3 losses were team meltdowns. I suppose by your theory, with a better goalie they would've won game 7 by a score of 0 to -1?

NYVanfan is offline