BTW...LeBrongo just made the following statement....
"All the people that were rooting for me to fail, at the end of the day, they have to wake up tomorrow and have the same life that they had before they woke up today," "They have the same personal problems they had today. I'm going to continue to live the way I want to live and continue to do the things that I want to do with me and my family and be happy with that. They can get a few days or a few months or whatever the case may be on being happy about not only myself, but the Vancouver Canucks not accomplishing their goal, but they have to get back to the real world at some point."
I've always seen Luongo as a fraud because I didn't think he could get it done. He was incredibly shaky for Canada against the US last year, but he still managed to get a gold.
That being said, 8 goals in 7 games isn't his fault. His team was outplayed for the majority of the series and still managed to hang on and get it to 7. Last year with Leighton...we scored 22 goals in 6 games. All we needed was average goaltending and we couldn't even get that.
hell yes. 10000 times yes. in the finals, leighton played the way everyone expected him to play when he came to the flyers. this year, luongo played like michael leighton. epic fail.
If we're setting the bar for SC Finals failures: goaltender, this must be primary. Your leaders need to lead. Holmgren paid minimal attention to goaltending, and it ended up being a significant factor in losing in the Finals. Luongo is paid to be a star, but performed well below what should be expected.
However, it's a team sport, and it is unbelievable that the Canucks went 0-for-Boston without any sustained level of competitiveness.
Some commentary on Boo-ongblow. Still can't get over Thomas' stellar effort in the playoffs...1.98 GAA and .940 Sv percentage...
He stopped an incredible 238 of the Canucks’ 246 shots in the finals for a .967 save percentage. That’s even better than his .940 mark and 1.98 goals-against average for the entire postseason.
"People are going to point the finger at Luongo - he gives up three goals on 10 shots in this game," said TSN hockey analyst Bob McKenzie.
"He's certainly not going to get the benefit of the doubt because of the debacle in Boston in Game 6 where he gave up three goals on eight shots and the game got completely away from him on a night when Vancouver could have clinched the Stanley Cup. Back-to-back [poor] games, it's going to be difficult for Roberto Luongo to dodge the bullet on that one."
"And fair enough. He's a marquee goaltender, he makes a lot of money, they've got him signed to a long contract, and the expectation is that he needs to be better."
"The play on the second goal starts with a 60-foot wrist shot and though Luongo has never been a great catcher of the puck - he's been a blocker - you've got to be able to catch this puck so the play is dead," said Ferraro. "Seidenberg takes a long wrist shot and it hits Luongo right in the Orca Bay crest, falls in front and Marchand gets to keep the puck alive and does great work to earn a goal."
"Luongo was not able to get out of his own way and after the Game 6 debacle; you know this was going to be a challenge for him. In this game he wasn't worse than average, but it wasn't good enough."
And while Luongo will certainly be the biggest lightning rod for criticism in Vancouver, McKenzie said that the Canucks lack of offense is also to blame for the Canucks Stanley Cup failure.
"The flip side of that is how good would [Luongo] have had to be to win Game 7? He can't go out and score goals. There is going to be a double-barreled attack on the Vancouver Canucks after Game 7."
I understand the lack offense. i really do. But Luongo certianly didnt make it easier on his teammates. He put alot of pressure on them starting with game 3. he gave up 19 goals in lesss then 9 periods up in Boston. Even last year as good as our offense was in the playoffs wouldnt of been able to overcome that.