Thread: Speculation: More Luongo Talk
View Single Post
12-27-2012, 08:44 PM
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,053
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Zetterberg View Post
The assumption is not based solely on a poor save percentage, it's based on the wild variation of his save percentage from game to game in a short period of time.

So what made the difference from Game 5 to Game 6 then, if the defense was so awful and injured? Again, it's the case of one player wildly varying versus several. Did Ballard and friends discover some magical one-game hockey equipment to become MVP-worthy players for Game 5, then lose the power for Game 6? You're not blaming the goalie when things go bad, but you're giving him all of the praise when things go well. You either have to say that Luongo was inconsistent, that everyone around him was simultaneously inconsistent, or that everyone on Boston was simultaneously inconsistent. Whether you directly blame Luongo for the numbers or not, a GAA line of 2-0-8-5.8-0-21-3 is wildly inconsistent on SOMEBODY's behalf, and I'm inclined to believe that it's much more likely that one person was so than several all at the exact same times.

Maybe the horribly decimated defense you speak of was much less decimated at the time, plus versus far weaker teams, in much more low-pressure situations? Also, he was bad at least twice in the Chicago, then you could say once in Nashville. It wasn't just once.

As a matter of fact, it may very well have been those goalies' faults. Those goalies did have 3 game stretches of inconsistency. That's exactly what I was saying. Ok, so admittedly, I'm guilty of cherry-picking a little in that occasion by season-to-season. But did Quick go from a phenomenal shutout and great 2 goal game to an 8 goal game? Did Thomas go from being pulled 40 minutes into a game to getting a 31 save shutout?

See the above for my opinion on inconsistency of players vs goalie.
and these are Canuck fans who watch every minute of every game every season, and they're all telling you that goaltending wasnt the problem, it is an entire team not showing up and getting blown out. John Quick or Tim Thomas wouldnt have changed the outcome of those blowouts. The Canucks still would have lost. And no the team didnt no show DUE to soft goals against, the soft goals against were due to the now showing.

skywarp75 is offline