HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Chicago Wolves Discussion - Part V

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-23-2012, 09:37 PM
  #576
timw33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,957
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisp View Post
Rodin turning a corner? I sure hope so.
We need him to. Need 2nd round picks to have a chance to play for the big club. I really hope he can come around as a 3rd line energy winger with some offense, but his size is a concern.

timw33 is offline  
Old
11-23-2012, 09:43 PM
  #577
Hodgy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by timw33 View Post
We need him to. Need 2nd round picks to have a chance to play for the big club. I really hope he can come around as a 3rd line energy winger with some offense, but his size is a concern.
I hold the Rodin pick to a higher standard. Gillis explicitly stated that the Canucks had Rodin as a first rounder, and as such, I evaluated him as if he were a first rounder.

So basically, in 2009, Gillis believed he had two first round forwards in Rodin and Schroeder.

Hodgy is offline  
Old
11-23-2012, 09:46 PM
  #578
Reverend Mayhem
Registered Nurse
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,095
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisp View Post
Rodin turning a corner? I sure hope so.
I doubt he plays in the NHL as a regular. Maybe one day he's an AHL star.

Reverend Mayhem is offline  
Old
11-23-2012, 09:47 PM
  #579
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 19,505
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
/

Not true - stats have gone up and down. Last year he was statistically worse than in any year but one in his tenure in Vancouver. There has been no statistical improvement here
I'm going to disagree here. Luongo had 1 month with any decent number of games that was less than .920. His October .869 ruined his season which was .925ish otherwise and October and we all know that was a team wide funk not just Luongo. That's quality tending and as good or better than anything that came earlier: equal equal to 06-07, and only bettered by the 10-11.

Quote:
Moreover, I think was clear (and this was commented about in the media) that there was an-going problem b/w Luongo and Melanson. Luongo started last season poorly and was giving up goals because he was deep in the crease. Wasn't until he ignored Melanson that he picked up.
That can't be argued against, he really struggled to adapt early. You only need to look at his month by month numbers for 10-11: .907 .914 .922 .947 .923 .942 .961. But Luongo adapted, found a way to incorporate elements of new technique that worked best for him. and destroyed the league from Jan on. In the playoffs I thought he actually struggled to keep his end of season form and style.


Last edited by me2: 11-23-2012 at 10:02 PM.
me2 is offline  
Old
11-23-2012, 09:51 PM
  #580
Pseudonymous
Registered User
 
Pseudonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanuck View Post
Btw 0/6 on the PP.
Maybe they should adapt that AMAZING drop pass that the canucks continually repeated god that drop pass haunts me

Pseudonymous is offline  
Old
11-23-2012, 09:58 PM
  #581
Maccas
Registered User
 
Maccas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: England
Country: England
Posts: 356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudonymous01 View Post
Maybe they should adapt that AMAZING drop pass that the canucks continually repeated god that drop pass haunts me
It wasn't too bad when we had Ehrhoff who would pick it up and skate it in but after he left they continued to use it and it just didn't work..... at all.
Watching them mess around in the Neutral Zone last season almost made me want to cry. Don't get me started on the short handed goals against the kings

Maccas is offline  
Old
11-23-2012, 10:02 PM
  #582
Hollywood Burrows
Registered User
 
Hollywood Burrows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: VANCOUVER
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudonymous01 View Post
Maybe they should adapt that AMAZING drop pass that the canucks continually repeated god that drop pass haunts me
3/4 of the teams in the NHL use that play regularly. When it works it's amazing. Remember Kesler's goal against Nashville? Blame Edler for not keeping his head on a swivel. Also blame Gillis for letting Hoffer walk

Hollywood Burrows is offline  
Old
11-23-2012, 10:03 PM
  #583
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 10,765
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudonymous01 View Post
Maybe they should adapt that AMAZING drop pass that the canucks continually repeated god that drop pass haunts me
Any PP net presence out there today? It'd be a shame if not... Wolves D had quite a few shots on net today.

They should get Kassian screening the goalie more - from what I remember I don't think it's been done enough, and he's the only big body they have in the top 6. Perhaps they should try Mallet on the other unit.

vanuck is offline  
Old
11-23-2012, 10:09 PM
  #584
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,758
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Tiranis;55990331]Luongo in Vancouver:

06-07: .921
07-08: .917
08-09: .920
09-10: .913
10-11: .928
11-12: .919

So he had his best statistical year (by far) under Melanson and then he had his 4th best year again under Melanson.

And he's not ignoring Melanson. What a joke. You can clearly see all the adjustments he has made with the help of Melanson. Hell, they both even discussed that he played that deeply in only until he could figure out how to adjust to what Melanson was teaching him.

If he is improving under Melanson how come his save percent(as you number indicate) dipped last year. And how come his GAA went from .211 to .241. How can you say he is statistically improving when the stats say otherwise. Cherry picking one year to prove yourself in the face of the obvious decline statistically in the last year is clearly silly and contrived. If he is getting better thaen that should be evident in the most recent stats. Right?

Moreover, as the article below indicates, there was obvious friction b/w Melanson and
Luongo last year. Surely you're not saying that this kind of friction over styles is good for Luongo.

http://www.vanhockey.com/2012/04/19/...o-long-luongo/

Moreover, this repeats the hassle he has with Price indicating something of pattern with good goalies that don't go with the Melanson system.

Saying that there is some expert (apparently the only person in Vancouver who knows about goal-tending) is just a way of not taking on the responsibility of providing your own support for your case. My bet is that you have no way of knowing whether Woodley would disagree with me or not and that you only say this because you have little else to support your case that Melanson has been good for Luongo and, increasingly, it appears Lack.

orcatown is offline  
Old
11-23-2012, 10:16 PM
  #585
Pseudonymous
Registered User
 
Pseudonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollywood Burrows View Post
3/4 of the teams in the NHL use that play regularly. When it works it's amazing. Remember Kesler's goal against Nashville? Blame Edler for not keeping his head on a swivel. Also blame Gillis for letting Hoffer walk
Im sure those 3/4 of teams do not do it over and over and over and over and just have it in their regular rotation. I also dont think they'd do such a repeated play in the playoffs against the same team over and over.

Pseudonymous is offline  
Old
11-23-2012, 10:17 PM
  #586
Pseudonymous
Registered User
 
Pseudonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maccas View Post
It wasn't too bad when we had Ehrhoff who would pick it up and skate it in but after he left they continued to use it and it just didn't work..... at all.
Watching them mess around in the Neutral Zone last season almost made me want to cry. Don't get me started on the short handed goals against the kings
Ehrhoff indeed helped alot

Pseudonymous is offline  
Old
11-23-2012, 10:20 PM
  #587
Wisp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,081
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=orcatown;55991463]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
Luongo in Vancouver:

06-07: .921
07-08: .917
08-09: .920
09-10: .913
10-11: .928
11-12: .919

So he had his best statistical year (by far) under Melanson and then he had his 4th best year again under Melanson.

And he's not ignoring Melanson. What a joke. You can clearly see all the adjustments he has made with the help of Melanson. Hell, they both even discussed that he played that deeply in only until he could figure out how to adjust to what Melanson was teaching him.

If he is improving under Melanson how come his save percent(as you number indicate) dipped last year. And how come his GAA went from .211 to .241. How can you say he is statistically improving when the stats say otherwise. Cherry picking one year to prove yourself in the face of the obvious decline statistically in the last year is clearly silly and contrived. If he is getting better thaen that should be evident in the most recent stats. Right?

Moreover, as the article below indicates, there was obvious friction b/w Melanson and
Luongo last year. Surely you're not saying that this kind of friction over styles is good for Luongo.

http://www.vanhockey.com/2012/04/19/...o-long-luongo/

Moreover, this repeats the hassle he has with Price indicating something of pattern with good goalies that don't go with the Melanson system.

Saying that there is some expert (apparently the only person in Vancouver who knows about goal-tending) is just a way of not taking on the responsibility of providing your own support for your case. My bet is that you have no way of knowing whether Woodley would disagree with me or not and that you only say this because you have little else to support your case that Melanson has been good for Luongo and, increasingly, it appears Lack.
That article is hardly "reported everywhere." It looks like the first of its kind and all it does suggest Schneider is better suited to Melanson's style, which I would agree with. Old dog, new tricks, etc.

I've actually gone and ask Woodley thoughts on the topic via twitter. Whether he humors me or not is up to him, though.

Wisp is online now  
Old
11-23-2012, 10:26 PM
  #588
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,758
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2 View Post
I'm going to disagree here. Luongo had 1 month with any decent number of games that was less than .920. His October .869 ruined his season which was .925ish otherwise and October and we all know that was a team wide funk not just Luongo. That's quality tending and as good or better than anything that came earlier: equal equal to 06-07, and only bettered by the 10-11.



That can't be argued against, he really struggled to adapt early. You only need to look at his month by month numbers for 10-11: .907 .914 .922 .947 .923 .942 .961. But Luongo adapted, found a way to incorporate elements of new technique that worked best for him. and destroyed the league from Jan on. In the playoffs I thought he actually struggled to keep his end of season form and style.
Yes Luongo got better when he began to ignore Melanson. And that's the whole point. When he tried the Melanson style - down early, stay deep - he was having trouble. Only got back to playing well when he went back to the style that had first made him good.

Tonite Lack gave up three goals because he was so deep. On the first and fourth they went high over the shoulder because there was so much room. On the PP play goal he got beat high from the blue line because again he was right on his line.

If Lack continues like this he is going to get burnt badly all season and be little use to the Canucks. The times when Lack has been good is when he challenges the shooter and then kaliedscopes back into this net. He has quickness and needs to use it. Right now he is negating this by using such a defensive way of playing IMO

orcatown is offline  
Old
11-23-2012, 10:44 PM
  #589
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,758
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Wisp;55991701]
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
That article is hardly "reported everywhere." It looks like the first of its kind and all it does suggest Schneider is better suited to Melanson's style, which I would agree with. Old dog, new tricks, etc.

I've actually gone and ask Woodley thoughts on the topic via twitter. Whether he humors me or not is up to him, though.
Article clearly shows that there was friction b/w Melanson and Luongo - that they were incompatible. My question is why would Melanson try to radically change Loungo when Luongo was already one of the best goalies in hockey.

Why not try to adapt to the attributes that Luongo had. Luongo IMO had to play with passion and athleticism. He had to challenge and use his natural instincts. Instead Melanson wanted Luongo to restrict his style and play passively along his goal line. A good coach would have realized his style didn't suit his player and instead built on the attributes his player did have.

Melanson didn't because he brings only one thing to the table - the style he played. That was mostly sliding, on your pads, from side to side along the goal line. That style may have suited Melanson and even might suit Schneider. But he doesn't suit many goalies and it appears to me that Lack is not well suited to that way of playing.


Nor did it suit Price and when Montreal realized that and that Price was going backwards under Melanson, they made the right move and got him out of there.

Why people have to so devoted to Melanson in spite of the obvious problems he has here an elsewhere dumbfound me. I know everyone wants to dump on Luongo but the coach might be equally the problem. Luongo's melt down in big situations is indeed Luongo's responsibility but if you have someone screwing with your belief in your style it's not going to help.

I think there is plenty of room to be concerned thatLlack is not developing properly under Melanson. Others haven't.

orcatown is offline  
Old
11-23-2012, 11:01 PM
  #590
Reverend Mayhem
Registered Nurse
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,095
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
^ Hey, we could always have Clark-era Luongo who sported a .921, .917, .920, .913 SV% under him. Compared to a .928, .919? I'll take that.

Melandson has been one of our better coaching moves. Same with Brown and firing Walter.

Reverend Mayhem is offline  
Old
11-23-2012, 11:40 PM
  #591
Wisp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,081
vCash: 500
Well, I referred Kevin Woodley to this thread using twitter and he bombarded me with some direct messages with his take. He disagreed with orcatown's claims of friction and wanted to stress that Luongo never ignored Melanson, and that all three (Schneider, Rollie, and Lu) worked together on adjusting the system down the road.

Cherry picking some quotes here, as Kevin asked some of it be left off the record.
- Rollie went outside system more for Lu but Cory 2, think learned from price
- truths to both sides, not lot of absolutes in goaltending + Melanson has at times been too rigid in system IMO but worked w/ Lu
- think – actually know as we talked about it – Lu would say Melanson helped game several ways: http://*******/UQhsRy (read article b4 it too)
- they worked together, which included over time Rollie freeing him up outside system, never did w/ Price ...
- but Cory also comes out to challenge situationally now. not letting rollie off hook, shocked when told me always blue ice in front of skates but he is also a great coach in lots of ways + seems to be adapting. the higher glove totally freed luongo's torso 4 lateral rotation, which in addition to activating hands also improved lateral movement on skates + knees (less forward flop). made saves vs Kings couldn't yr before
- lastly (for real) i agree with whoever pointed out Oct killed his stats last season especially. Better SV % than Pekka Rinne from Nov. 1 on!
- i'd stress that they worked together (all 3 of them) in agreeing to add depth in certain rush situations + it only make sense
- could say was also say sign of respect for Lu. Wasn't as flexible w/ Price, who likes to take extra depth + flow back to net (a rhythm thing). everyone must adjust


Also, from the article Kevin referred me too, about Luongo talking about improvements he made with Rollie:
http://magazine.ingoalmag.com/public...?i=100071&p=19


Last edited by Wisp: 11-24-2012 at 01:19 AM.
Wisp is online now  
Old
11-23-2012, 11:53 PM
  #592
Wisp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,081
vCash: 500
For those who don't know, Kevin Woodley is goalie analyst and covers the Canucks for NHL.com, plus writes and edits for InGoal magazine. He's played the position, and has a regular report with Canucks goalies and coaches + tenders around the league.

I probably should have asked him about Lack too, but he said he was with his family and sent me a big rant about the topic anyways, so I don't want to bother him again this evening.


Last edited by Wisp: 11-24-2012 at 12:06 AM.
Wisp is online now  
Old
11-24-2012, 01:14 AM
  #593
B-rock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,077
vCash: 500
The Luongo Mellanson rift is total BS fabrication. Luongo improved under Mellanson once he adapted to the style.

B-rock is offline  
Old
11-24-2012, 07:45 AM
  #594
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,758
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by B-rock View Post
The Luongo Mellanson rift is total BS fabrication. Luongo improved under Mellanson once he adapted to the style.
Melanson wanted Luongo to play a certain style and Luongo did not conform to that style. Article says Canucks (and certainly Melanson was involved here) threw up their hands and let Luongo go back to his style. I call that friction. Does it rise to the level of rift. Maybe not but I never said that.

As far as the Price situation goes the following articles indicates that problems that can arise when you try to force a goal tender to play a way that does not necessarily suit his natural instincts.

http://www.habseyesontheprize.com/20...-1-carey-price

I think as you look at how Lack is playing you have to at least consider the possibility that the style Melanson teaches may not be right for Lack. Just like with Price he is trying to get Lack to play butterfly along the goal line. Didn't work with Price and that is why Melanson was fired. I don't know why people can't consider that a coach who has cookie cutter approach to goal-tending might not be best at bringing along a player who doesn't suit the that style.

Also with Luongo the poor numbers that Luongo had early last year, when they were trying to force Melanson's style on him, are indication that Melanson style did not work with Luongo. It was only after Luongo abandoned that style did his play improved. So how can you say Melanson improved him. Beyond that, Luongo had one of the worse years statistically last year under Melanson's direction. And from some accounts it was Melanson that had a voice in pulling Luongo for Schneider during the playoffs. If he was so improved why would Melanson be suggesting this move.

As far as Woodley goes, I think he agrees that Luongo abandoned the basic style that Melanson was trying to impose and only adopted a couple of minor changes like the positioning of his glove hand. If so, then Woodley is supporting the idea that Melanson and Luongo did not see eye to eye on how Luongo should play. That Luongo might have tried to incorporate a couple of Melanson's suggestion. (such as with his glove) does not negate the point that Luongo resisted the much bigger alterations Melanson was preaching.

What I see, in the end, is a taking an outstanding goalie in Luongo (good enough for Team Canada in the Olympics) and trying to make major alterations in his game when very little change was necessary. Sure he had a couple of tough playoff games but this major attempt to absolutely overhaul Luongo's game seemed a total over-reaction. And in the end these changes didn't work and probably did little more than screw with Luongo's head.

What is also troubling at present is the play of Lack. He looks just like Price when Price was really having problems. Terribly deep, down early and mostly on his knees in the butterfly. It's the same passive style Price was playing and Price never got back on his game till he started to get higher in his crease and maintain a stand up stance longer.

The kind of blind belief in Melanson expressed here, especially in light of his firing in Montreal, his problems with Luongo and the current play of Lack, seems to lack any degree of critical analysis. Just saying you know Melanson is doing the right thing seems more an attempt to make yourself feel good about the situation rather than trying to analyse it.

orcatown is offline  
Old
11-24-2012, 09:16 AM
  #595
Wisp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,081
vCash: 500
Quote:
The kind of blind belief in Melanson expressed here, especially in light of his firing in Montreal, his problems with Luongo and the current play of Lack, seems to lack any degree of critical analysis. Just saying you know Melanson is doing the right thing seems more an attempt to make yourself feel good about the situation rather than trying to analyse it.
Discrediting those who disagree you is not cool, orcatown, especially when one of the voices is a professional goalie analyst who has first hand access with Luongo, Schneider, and Melonson. I referred to him because I trust own my instincts over your take and wanted to confirm that with the thoughts from someone who has a much, MUCH clearer picture of the situation than all of us combined. No offense to you, orcatown, but you don't have all nearly enough information to reach the conclusions you're reaching and you're letting your obvious biases fill in the gaps.

Quote:
Woodley is supporting the idea that Melanson and Luongo did not see eye to eye on how Luongo should play.
No he's not. Kevin was CLEAR that Luongo and Melanson cooperated in making adjustments and improvements. You;re being willfully ignorant on what was actually said to suit your argument.

He is actually following the thread still, fyi.
Quote:
just saw your antagonists response, some incorrect interpretations but don't think anything will change tint on glasses he sees Melanson in
I think that's probably true. Will agree to disagree, if you like.


Last edited by Wisp: 11-24-2012 at 09:40 AM.
Wisp is online now  
Old
11-24-2012, 09:48 AM
  #596
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,841
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
Also with Luongo the poor numbers that Luongo had early last year, when they were trying to force Melanson's style on him, are indication that Melanson style did not work with Luongo. It was only after Luongo abandoned that style did his play improved. So how can you say Melanson improved him. Beyond that, Luongo had one of the worse years statistically last year under Melanson's direction. And from some accounts it was Melanson that had a voice in pulling Luongo for Schneider during the playoffs. If he was so improved why would Melanson be suggesting this move.
I do find it interesting that you are more willing to blame Melanson rather than the fact that the team took the pre-season off for the most part and the whole Stanley Cup hangover thing. Should the teams blame Melanson for the defenses and offenses general malaise as well?

The fact that Luongo had one of his best years ever after a pretty brutal first month should point that some of the changes worked. Also, improvement is a process and sometimes things have to get worse before they get better when learning new techniques.

DJOpus is offline  
Old
11-24-2012, 10:27 AM
  #597
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,758
vCash: 500
Seems to me , I have tried to provide both evidence and arguments to support what I say.

1) Melanson was fired in Montreal because of his lack of success with Price. He wanted Price deeper and quicker into the butterfly. New coach Groulx let Price be more aggressive and get out to the top of his crease and Price improved immediately.

2) Whatever he was trying with Luongo didn't work and as expressed in the earlier article in the Province, there was exasperation with Luongo for his unwillingness to follow Melanson's style. Saying they gave up on trying to change Luongo indicates this.

3) Lack is currently playing the Melanson system and not looking that good.

Wherever he has gone Melanson has always tried to get the goal tender to play the way he did. I say it doesn't suit everyone and he should be adapting his style to the goalie he has to work.

You seem to have no opinion or argument outside of your total reliance upon what Woodley says. You seem to say that because Woodley says it, it is not necessary to watch and come up with your own opinions. Man, think for yourself.

Moreover, Woodley saying that they were cooperative doesn't mean there wasn't disagreement. Indeed as the article cited above indicates there had to be some disagreement about how Luongo should play. That's indicated by the statement the club (and Melanson must have been instrumental in this) "gave up on trying to change Luongo". Doesn't that at least suggest frustration.

Nobody is reinterpreting anything. If there was initial agreement that Luongo would try to change to suit Melanson and then they had to give up on trying to get Luongo to change then clearly someone was not seeing eye to eye. The accommodation Melanson made was apparently to give up and be satisfied with minor adjustment like keeping his glove hand up. That's like saying the teacher and student co-operated then the teacher agreed to stop trying to correct the student as long as the student kept his pencil sharp.

And I would say it was a darn good thing that Luongo did abandon the coaching of Melanson since his play radically improved when he did.

I really don't understand your defense (which seems no more than doggishly following some goal writer on twitter) of Melanson when there is plenty of evidence Melanson's techniques don't work with certain goalies. They didn't work with Price, they didn't work with Luongo (as his changed style of play under Melanson at the beginning of last season clearly indicate) and I think there is every indication they are not working with Lack. Tonite he was far too deep in the net and exposed far too much net up high.

If you want to defend Melanson then tell specifically how the major changes in style he brought to Price, Luongo and now Lack improved their play. Saying that Woodley says Luongo , Schnieder and Melanson worked smoothly together doesn't mean they worked effectively together to improve Luongo nor does it mean that Melanson worked well with Price or that he is now working effectively with Lack. Frankly I saw a drop in the play of both Price and Luongo when they tried Melanson's passive, deep in the net, down early in the butterfly, slide on your knees along the along the goal line approach and I see Lack's play slip as he tries the same technique.

There is nothing being twisted here but just some solid questions that should be asked of Melanson's coaching. Indeed, if it is screwing up Lack then we have a major issue.

orcatown is offline  
Old
11-24-2012, 10:39 AM
  #598
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,758
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
I do find it interesting that you are more willing to blame Melanson rather than the fact that the team took the pre-season off for the most part and the whole Stanley Cup hangover thing. Should the teams blame Melanson for the defenses and offenses general malaise as well?

The fact that Luongo had one of his best years ever after a pretty brutal first month should point that some of the changes worked. Also, improvement is a process and sometimes things have to get worse before they get better when learning new techniques.
Point is that Luongo's season only improved when he discarded the major changes Melanson tried to make. As the news article points out, the club gave up trying to change Luongo. So if we are talking about improvement as the season went on we are talking about the improvement made when Luongo disregarded Melanson's coaching and went back to challenging the shooters more. It wasn't that Luongo was sticking with Melanson's system and gradually improving - it was that he was abandoning Melanson's system (and probably wisely so) and thus getting better.

If you watched Luongo early in the season and then later clearly his style changed as he reverted back to previous style. I don't think anything can more graphically and conclusively prove that Luongo was not suited to the Melanson style and Melanson's attempt to push it on Luongo was misguided.

orcatown is offline  
Old
11-24-2012, 11:14 AM
  #599
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,841
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
Point is that Luongo's season only improved when he discarded the major changes Melanson tried to make. As the news article points out, the club gave up trying to change Luongo. So if we are talking about improvement as the season went on we are talking about the improvement made when Luongo disregarded Melanson's coaching and went back to challenging the shooters more. It wasn't that Luongo was sticking with Melanson's system and gradually improving - it was that he was abandoning Melanson's system (and probably wisely so) and thus getting better.

If you watched Luongo early in the season and then later clearly his style changed as he reverted back to previous style. I don't think anything can more graphically and conclusively prove that Luongo was not suited to the Melanson style and Melanson's attempt to push it on Luongo was misguided.
I'd argue that Luongo took on some of the changes that Melanson implemented by not as much as he had earlier in the season. Luongo started challenging but not as much as he had previously allowing him to get back to his net quicker. He also kept a higher glove hand which corrected an issue that he had been having with his glove for the past couple of years.

I am actually not a big Melanson fan, because of his issues with Price, but I will argue that some of the changes he brought have been helpful to Luongo once his changes were integrated with Luongo's style.

DJOpus is offline  
Old
11-24-2012, 11:35 AM
  #600
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 10,765
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisp View Post

He is actually following the thread still, fyi.


I think that's probably true. Will agree to disagree, if you like.
If Kevin Woodley is still reading this, do you think he could give some insight on how Lack's doing this year, and whether his struggles that orcatown pointed out are something to be concerned about?

vanuck is offline  
Closed Thread

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 04:44 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.