HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Round 2, Vote 8 (HOH Top Goaltenders)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-30-2012, 10:56 AM
  #26
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 20,419
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Was Giacomin actually actively losing the series for his teams like Luongo constantly does?
I know that this happened once, against Chicago, 2010.

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 10:58 AM
  #27
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 20,419
vCash: 500
Come to think of it...

Somebody needs to explain me how Tim Thomas and Dave Kerr could possibly be far apart one from another.

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 11:02 AM
  #28
DaveG
Mod Supervisor
RIP Kev
 
DaveG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Durham NC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,914
vCash: 2498
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I'm having trouble seeing Liut over Luongo. Was Liut's 1981 any better than Luongo's 2007? Both were runner up for the Hart Trophy and Luongo narrowly lost the 1st team and Vezina to the best regular season of Martin Brodeur's career. And didn't Luongo have more additional seasons close to that level than Liut did?

To have Liut over Luongo, it seems to me like you are implicitly saying that goaltending in the 1980s was better than goaltending in the 2000s and I really don't think that was the case.
I hontestly think Liut's was 81 was better, yes. He won the Pearson, very nearly won the Hart over Gretzky, absolutely destroyed the competition for the AS. FWIW Liut's runner up to Hextall was also extremely close, so he very easily could have been a two time Vezina winner.

That's not a bash on Luongo's 07 season, as he beat Brodeur in Hart voting but fell short in Vezina. But he was clearly outclassed by Crosby in Hart voting, pretty significant margin. And Gretzky ran away with the scoring race in 81, Crosby had 13 players within the range of points Gretzky won the 81 scoring race by in 07. Thornton was within 6. And yet Liut still nearly won the Hart in 81.

The goaltending overall point I won't argue against, to me there's no question it's better now then it was in the 80s. And Luongo's the more consistent of the two.

So which do we prefer, which goalie is better at their best (Liut) or which goalie is more consistently good (Luongo).

Edit: one thing I definitely plan on looking at further when evaluating Luongo pre-Vancouver is his home-road splits as far as Sv% goes. Let's just say there have been accusations there for a while that they have "fuzzy" shot count tallies there.

edit 2.0:


his numbers in Florida were actually BETTER on the road then at home in regards to sv% for all but his first and last season there


Last edited by DaveG: 12-30-2012 at 11:19 AM.
DaveG is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 11:52 AM
  #29
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,659
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveG View Post
I hontestly think Liut's was 81 was better, yes. He won the Pearson, very nearly won the Hart over Gretzky, absolutely destroyed the competition for the AS. FWIW Liut's runner up to Hextall was also extremely close, so he very easily could have been a two time Vezina winner.

That's not a bash on Luongo's 07 season, as he beat Brodeur in Hart voting but fell short in Vezina. But he was clearly outclassed by Crosby in Hart voting, pretty significant margin. And Gretzky ran away with the scoring race in 81, Crosby had 13 players within the range of points Gretzky won the 81 scoring race by in 07. Thornton was within 6. And yet Liut still nearly won the Hart in 81.

The goaltending overall point I won't argue against, to me there's no question it's better now then it was in the 80s. And Luongo's the more consistent of the two.

So which do we prefer, which goalie is better at their best (Liut) or which goalie is more consistently good (Luongo).

Edit: one thing I definitely plan on looking at further when evaluating Luongo pre-Vancouver is his home-road splits as far as Sv% goes. Let's just say there have been accusations there for a while that they have "fuzzy" shot count tallies there.
edit 2.0:


his numbers in Florida were actually BETTER on the road then at home in regards to sv% for all but his first and last season there
Yeah, if the numbers don't support the argument, just say they are wrong.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 12:11 PM
  #30
intylerwetrust
Space Oddity
 
intylerwetrust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,255
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Was Giacomin actually actively losing the series for his teams like Luongo constantly does?
All Ill say is if the Sedins and Vancouver offense acutally showed up in the 2011 finals (8 goals in 7 games), Luongo would surely already be on the list.

Luongo blew the 2010 series vs CHI and thats it. Keep in mind he has an Olympic gold too.

intylerwetrust is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 12:13 PM
  #31
BM67
Registered User
 
BM67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In "The System"
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,573
vCash: 500
Here is a home/road split for Luongo.

YearH Min%H SV%R SV%H SOG/60R SOG/60SOG DifSOG Dif%
99-0053.00%.903.90533.5534.280.732.18%
00-0154.77%.928.91129.3931.692.307.83%
01-0256.18%.910.92132.2933.311.023.16%
02-0348.83%.907.92831.4035.043.6411.59%
03-0454.87%.926.93534.6235.300.681.96%
05-0650.72%.920.90933.2836.122.848.53%
06-0754.65%.916.92727.8030.412.619.39%
07-0853.43%.919.91626.1331.785.6521.62%
08-0953.09%.929.91027.8530.482.639.44%
09-1057.36%.926.89429.9128.87-1.04-3.48%
10-1153.54%.937.91730.4128.02-2.39-7.86%
11-1255.05%.923.91529.5430.390.852.88%
Total53.77%.921.91730.3532.181.836.03%

Luongo faced 2.39 more shots/60 at home in 2010-11, where the league average was 1.73 more on the road. Hard to believe Vancouver was that bad defensively at home.

BM67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 12:21 PM
  #32
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
I know that this happened once, against Chicago, 2010.
2009 vs. Chicago, .879 series, .767 final game

2010 vs. Chicago, .897 series, .857 final game

2011 vs. Boston, .891 series, .850 final game

2012 he was a backup, but still posted glorious .891 in a losing effort

Vancouver lost five series during his tenure, and he personally caused three of the losses. I rest my case.

MadArcand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 12:42 PM
  #33
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 20,419
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
2009 vs. Chicago, .879 series, .767 final game

2010 vs. Chicago, .897 series, .857 final game

2011 vs. Boston, .891 series, .850 final game

2012 he was a backup, but still posted glorious .891 in a losing effort

Vancouver lost five series during his tenure, and he personally caused three of the losses. I rest my case.
They lose against Boston regardless of Luongo because they fail to score a goal in the final game. Furthermore, Luongo had two shutouts AND the Nucks averaged one goal a game.

As for 2009, well, Luongo had sub-par performances in two games, but his team didn't score in the other losses.

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 01:00 PM
  #34
Johnny Engine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,266
vCash: 500
Save percentages from tiny samples like that basically say that he lost those games. Considering that his Sv% from the 3 games he won were 1.000, .933, and 1.000, you should see how much these things can fluctuate. It would be interesting to see how many 7 game series you can find where a goalie's average Sv% in games they lost looks anything short of awful.

As far as "actively losing series", that reads like the worst kind of narrative-building. What my own eyes told me was that that Luongo often reminds me of the annoying AI goalies in EA NHL games - if they get down by 2 or three goals, they pretty much all but put a gun in their mouths and just stop trying to stop pucks. Whether he holds together and loses 4-1 or buckles and lets in 8, his teams still loses and does so as a team. But that's what I saw. What we should be looking at, is how does his playoff performance, in both winning and losing causes, stack up against say, Giacomin? If nobody looks at this before I get home, I'll take a look.

Johnny Engine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 01:03 PM
  #35
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 20,419
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Engine View Post
Save percentages from tiny samples like that basically say that he lost those games. Considering that his Sv% from the 3 games he won were 1.000, .933, and 1.000, you should see how much these things can fluctuate. It would be interesting to see how many 7 game series you can find where a goalie's average Sv% in games they lost looks anything short of awful.
IF Luongo had a .987 SV%, his team would have lost regardless (game 7, Boston).

A goalie cannot lose a game by himself if his team doesn't score.

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 01:15 PM
  #36
Johnny Engine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,266
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
IF Luongo had a .987 SV%, his team would have lost regardless (game 7, Boston).

A goalie cannot lose a game by himself if his team doesn't score.
True, but people wouldn't have talked about the game the same way after the fact, and that is part of his legacy. Either way, he didn't get shelled early enough in most of those games to have done what MadArcand is accusing him of. As I remember it, the games kind of slid away slowly.

Johnny Engine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 01:23 PM
  #37
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
IF Luongo had a .987 SV%, his team would have lost regardless (game 7, Boston).

A goalie cannot lose a game by himself if his team doesn't score.
True, but when a goalie constantly craps the bed, especially against the same opponent (Chicago), what kind of confidence does that leave his team with?

Being great in the wins and atrocious in losses makes him an inconsistent rollercoaster, and it's one that always had its lows when it mattered the most.

Luongo is a goalie that should go in the 40s, and is clearly the worst here. To compare him with Giacomin, who is by now overdue, is unfair.

MadArcand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 01:24 PM
  #38
intylerwetrust
Space Oddity
 
intylerwetrust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,255
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
2009 vs. Chicago, .879 series, .767 final game

2010 vs. Chicago, .897 series, .857 final game

2011 vs. Boston, .891 series, .850 final game

2012 he was a backup, but still posted glorious .891 in a losing effort

Vancouver lost five series during his tenure, and he personally caused three of the losses. I rest my case.
two 1-0 shutouts in the 2011 finals, Canucks score 8 goals in 7 games, get shutout in game 7, and Luongo is to blame? really?

intylerwetrust is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 01:33 PM
  #39
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by intylerwetrust View Post
two 1-0 shutouts in the 2011 finals, Canucks score 8 goals in 7 games, get shutout in game 7, and Luongo is to blame? really?
Three great games and four total crap. Yes, really.

MadArcand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 01:45 PM
  #40
kmad
Riot Survivor
 
kmad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Three great games and four total crap. Yes, really.
The reason the Canucks lost is because Dan Hamhuis went down. He was the defensive anchor. He played 25-30 mins per night of flawless defensive hockey. Early in game 3 he was sidelined with a hip injury after throwing a hit on Milan Lucic. After that, his minutes were made up by... Edler... Ehrhoff... Bieksa... Alberts... etc. Below average-to-terrible defensively. The Bruins' forecheck ate them alive. Luongo was basically left out to dry without Hamhuis.

kmad is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 02:42 PM
  #41
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,651
vCash: 500
Wow, how on earth is Luongo getting so dismissed when Giacomin is a virtual shoo-in?

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 02:56 PM
  #42
quoipourquoi
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 2,974
vCash: 500
Is anyone else leaning Tim Thomas over Roberto Luongo? Just curious since I believe we've all seen their entire careers.

quoipourquoi is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 02:58 PM
  #43
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 20,419
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Is anyone else leaning Tim Thomas over Roberto Luongo? Just curious since I believe we've all seen their entire careers.
I do. I don't think any of them are Top-4 material, though. Thomas has a shot at the Top-8. Some similarities with Dave Kerr at this point.

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 03:02 PM
  #44
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
The drop-off from 1939-40 to 1940-41 is strange. Normally something like that would lead one to wonder if Kerr was really as good as his numbers in 1939-40. But it was the same roster and the same coach in both seasons. And both Patrick and Kerr were unhappy with Kerr's play in 1940-41, to the point that it ended his NHL career.
A few more points on this:

While the Rangers were generally pretty healthy in 1940-41, Art Coulter (team captain and #1 defenceman, named to the HOH Top 60 defencemen) missed 13 games in November and December with a shoulder injury. New York had been the last unbeaten team in the league before his injury, with a record of 2-0-2, 3.0 GF/G, and 2.0 GA/G. With Coulter out of the lineup, they went 4-8-1, with 2.6 GF/G and 3.0 GA/G. After Coulter returned they finished 15-11-5 with 3.2 GF/G and 2.5 GA/G. So Coulter's injury could explain part of the dropoff in the team stats.

Baz O'Meara of the Montreal Star, published in the Feb 8, 1941 Vancouver Sun:
Quote:
It's hard to believe that injury to one man could disrupt a 15-man outfit, knocking it down from a championship outfit to a struggling fifth-place team, but that's what happened when defenseman Art Coulter smashed his shoulder early in the season.

You could see Rangers wilt. As they were buffeted about the schedule that has hurled tough stretches at teams in rotation, giving them as many as nine games in 14 days, the Rangers just couldn't keep up the pace they promised before the season opened.

Alex Shibicky (ed. Winger who was fourth on NYR in points in 1939-40) suffered a knee injury. Bryan Hextall (ed. Hall of Fame wing who led the league in goals and led NYR in points in 1939-40) didn't quit with a charley horse, but he slowed. Now Phil Watson (ed. scrappy two way centre who was third on NYR in points in 1939-40) has a torn cartilage in his knee that threatens to have the high-scoring forward benched until play-off time.)
Quote:
Dave Kerr, who has consistently played brilliant hockey in goal, has been the victim of Rangers' misfortunes. Dave used to hold a great deal of hockey glory as Rangers pounded on and on, but the circumstance of the Detroit-Toronto battle has hurled Toronto's Turk Broda and Detroit's Johnny Mowers into pipe prominence.
While Frank Boucher is listed as the coach for 1939-40, Lester Patrick still had a role in the on-ice activities. Some contemporary sources list Boucher as the assistant coach, some call him the coach and Patrick the manager, etc. In any case Patrick retired from coaching before the 1940-41 season and Boucher took over all coaching duties. Maybe they missed Lester Patrick's influence?

And with the seasons being relatively short (only 48 regular season games), random variation could play a part as well.


Last edited by overpass: 12-30-2012 at 04:09 PM.
overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 03:02 PM
  #45
quoipourquoi
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 2,974
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
Somebody needs to explain me how Tim Thomas and Dave Kerr could possibly be far apart one from another.
I held Tim Thomas a little bit higher than the voters did in terms of Hart consideration in 2009 and 2011. That's where I draw a distinction.

quoipourquoi is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 03:22 PM
  #46
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,659
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagorim Jarg View Post
The reason the Canucks lost is because Dan Hamhuis went down. He was the defensive anchor. He played 25-30 mins per night of flawless defensive hockey. Early in game 3 he was sidelined with a hip injury after throwing a hit on Milan Lucic. After that, his minutes were made up by... Edler... Ehrhoff... Bieksa... Alberts... etc. Below average-to-terrible defensively. The Bruins' forecheck ate them alive. Luongo was basically left out to dry without Hamhuis.
Wasn't that Game 1?

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 03:23 PM
  #47
kmad
Riot Survivor
 
kmad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Wow, how on earth is Luongo getting so dismissed when Giacomin is a virtual shoo-in?
HF Canuck hate. Get used to it.

kmad is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 03:24 PM
  #48
kmad
Riot Survivor
 
kmad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
Wasn't that Game 1?
He was hurt in game 1, but taken out of the series in game 3.

kmad is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 03:30 PM
  #49
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,659
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagorim Jarg View Post
He was hurt in game 1, but taken out of the series in game 3.
I don't think so.

They lost Rome in game 3. (While B's lost Horton).

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 03:37 PM
  #50
kmad
Riot Survivor
 
kmad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
I don't think so.

They lost Rome in game 3. (While B's lost Horton).
After looking it up it looks like you're right. My point still stands, though. Hamhuis missing from the lineup exposed the Canucks' lack of defensive depth and Boston ran roughshod.

kmad is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:03 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.