REVscene Automotive Forum
Page 269 of 1214 « First 169219259260261262263264265266267268 269 270271272273274275276277278279319369769 Last »
Show 25 post(s) from this thread on one page

REVscene Automotive Forum (https://www.revscene.net/forums/)
-   Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events (https://www.revscene.net/forums/vancouver-off-topic-current-events_50/)
-   -   The Official 2011/2012 Canucks Thread (https://www.revscene.net/forums/647779-official-2011-2012-canucks-thread.html)

pamplemousse 10-18-2011 09:30 PM
Posted via RS Mobile

Noir 10-18-2011 09:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AzNightmare (Post 7619897)
I wasn't able to catch this game at all.
From the sounds of it, probably a good thing I didn't.

Must have been a strange game. 0-0 until 3rd period.
And then NYR opens a can of whoop ass...

I know just reading stats alone don't tell the whole story.
But 15/19 vs 40/40 saves?

:fulloffuck:

That sucks!
It was essentially a stalemate for 85% of the game; but that 1 goal opened up the flood gates and before we knew it, #2 happened shortly thereafter and goals 3 & 4 followed in even quicker succession.

Harvey Specter 10-18-2011 09:40 PM
The better goalie won tonight. Looks like we're in for an up and down start.

Gh0stRider 10-18-2011 09:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MG1 (Post 7619888)
So lots of sweeping tonight? :D
people were getting kicked out during the 3rd period. we were doing them a favor. they dont wanna watch this game :troll:

LP700-4 10-18-2011 09:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jah Dean (Post 7619931)
The better goalie won tonight. Looks like we're in for an up and down start.
Actually, the better TEAM won. I know Luongo is a great guy to blame our losses on, and we might have been better if he stepped it up. But 0/7 on the PP is not an excuse either.

NYR had good offense, defense, and Lundqvist was great because Luongo sucked hard.

Anyways, as everybody else here has said, its better for them to lose games now, and improve, than to win every game now and bomb the last half of the season.

Gh0stRider 10-18-2011 09:48 PM
40 shots 0 goals
19 shots 4 goals

:fulloffuck:

spoon.ek9 10-18-2011 09:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noir (Post 7619868)
Correct, Luongo isn't the reason we're 0/7. But mind you, when you mentioned "tonight was pathetic... and that there wasn't much going on tonight," you also don't get 7 PPs when you're not doing anything; in fact, PP's are an indication that you're pushing the other team on their heals... and moreso if one is in a game with a string of PP's in their favour.


I'm not going directing this at you so I'm going to just make this statement in general, but this is just one of the best examples why I hate that mofo Lu. I can't stand the team getting thrown under the bus time and time again just because Lu is a made-man in the franchise. The team owned everyone on that game tonight save for 1 player... Lundquvist.
i agree with you and to be fair, this wasn't any one player's fault. i'm just so disappointed that we couldn't muster a single goal on the night we honour rypien. i'm also sick of lu's annual october slump. just because it's expected, doesn't mean it's acceptable. he just looks mentally tired and unprepared out there. it's as if he's still playing in the final few games of last year..

also, for the sake of argument, at least 3 of the penalties were offensive zone penalties for the rangers. lack of discipline on their part really heh. they were just lucky we couldn't capitalize on any of em.

Great68 10-18-2011 09:58 PM
Watching the end of the Buffalo-Montreal game made me miss Ehrhoff. :(

Noir 10-18-2011 10:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LP700-4 (Post 7619952)
Actually, the better TEAM won. I know Luongo is a great guy to blame our losses on, and we might have been better if he stepped it up. But 0/7 on the PP is not an excuse either.

NYR had good offense, defense, and Lundqvist was great because Luongo sucked hard.

Anyways, as everybody else here has said, its better for them to lose games now, and improve, than to win every game now and bomb the last half of the season.
eh? Did you watch the first 2 periods? Here's the Shot-On-Goal summary by period

NYR - 5/4/10 = 19
VAN - 13/15/12 = 40

So even when NYR picked it up on the 3rd period, we still had more offense.

trancehead 10-18-2011 11:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noir (Post 7619990)
eh? Did you watch the first 2 periods? Here's the Shot-On-Goal summary by period

NYR - 5/4/10 = 19
VAN - 13/15/12 = 40

So even when NYR picked it up on the 3rd period, we still had more offense.
lol its only 10vs12 based on shots. but we did have a number of opportunities that we didnt capitalize on.

its okay anyways. not the end of the world. first game back for kes anyways so it clearly sent shockwaves throughout the lineups.

cody looked good once again. hes def a keeper

GrapeDrink 10-18-2011 11:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noir (Post 7619990)
eh? Did you watch the first 2 periods? Here's the Shot-On-Goal summary by period

NYR - 5/4/10 = 19
VAN - 13/15/12 = 40

So even when NYR picked it up on the 3rd period, we still had more offense.
I didn't catch the so obviously I don't know if this applies to this game but more shots on goal doesn't really mean your team is playing better offensively, I was watching the Sharks versus the ducks game the other day, the shots was like 50-20 but the scoring chances were probably 50/50.

Ronin 10-19-2011 12:42 AM
I'm doing a little research for a blog post but basically, this is what I've found.

Using the past 3 years as a sample size (since these are the years that Luongo has come under the most scrutiny)...

Luongo has posted the 2nd highest average wins per year (37...Kipper is #1 with 39 but also plays, on average, *13* more games than Luongo per season...therefore he loses more games than Lu per season....25 to 16)

Luongo has the third lowest GAA in that time (Thomas -> Brodeur -> Luongo) but keep in mind that Luongo has averaged more games per year than both. Thomas' numbers are the best (2.18) mostly because of his wicked season last year but the year before, he was under .500 with a 2.56. Brodeur has a 2.33 to Lu's 2.36 but Brodeur was also under .500 last year with a 2.45. Luongo on the other hand, had a 2.56 in '09-10 but still posted 40 wins. His worst statistical year was when he was limited to 54 games in '08-09 but still won 33 of them with a 2.34 and NINE shutouts. On the basis of Luongo's consistency but Brodeur and Thomas' superior numbers, I'd call this a wash between the three.

Put this together with the fact that he is the 7th highest paid goalie. He does NOT make $10m. He makes $6.716 this year with a $5.33m cap hit. In the NHL world where billionaires pay the salaries, cap hit is the only number that matters.

The numbers seem to back up that Luongo has been one of the best, most consistent goalies in the league since he's joined the Canucks (I'd include past 3 years but that would require more math and his first three years were just as good) and how Luongo Haters are crazy.

If you're wondering if anyone is a better value...I didn't bother with most of them but the only other goalies worth looking at outside the top-10 cap hits are Pekka Rinne and Jonathan Quick. Rinne at $3.4m has averaged 31 wins a season while Quick is a bargain at $1.8m and 31 wins as well. However, that's 6 fewer wins than Luongo and while Rinne only averages one more loss per season, Quick averages 21 losses per season to Luongo's 16.

Still think he's overpaid? Feel free to refute my points. Seriously...if I've overlooked something here, I'd love to hear it so I can look into it further.

SkinnyPupp 10-19-2011 12:46 AM
Wat
Posted via RS Mobile

b0unce. [?] 10-19-2011 12:55 AM
trade lu for future considerations.

Ronin 10-19-2011 12:58 AM
TL;DR: Stats say Luongo is awesome. Judging him on a per game or even per month basis is useless. His averages over the last three years are as good or better than everyone else.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyPupp (Post 7620243)
Wat
Posted via RS Mobile
Did all the words scare you? If you want it as one giant block of text, I can do that too.

Spoiler!


Quote:
Originally Posted by b0unce. [?] (Post 7620249)
trade lu for future considerations.
I'd agree because Schneider seems to be awesome and costs way less but Lu is proven (hasn't won fewer than 35 games per season apart from the one season he was injured all the time and he won 33) while Schneider hasn't even had a starting job yet. If that was even a possibility, that would free up close to $4.5m in cap space to pursue a trade for a top-6 forward or top-4 defenseman.

b0unce. [?] 10-19-2011 01:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin (Post 7620252)
TL;DR: Stats say Luongo is awesome. Judging him on a per game or even per month basis is useless. His averages over the last three years are as good or better than everyone else.
too hot and cold. no consistency. we praise his name when he decides to play well. we want to run him out of town after every loss.

Ronin 10-19-2011 01:05 AM
Consistency should be judged on a per season basis...not per game. That's bandwagoner talk.

I mean, would it really matter if we lost every single game from now til the end of November and won every game from then on? We'd still be something like 54-19-9. That's pretty much what happened last year. We sucked and then we were awesome.

Everyone runs hot and cold.

b0unce. [?] 10-19-2011 01:07 AM
we're vancouver fans, every game is viewed under the microscope.

Ronin 10-19-2011 01:16 AM
I understand criticism. I mean, I think Lu's new belly flop move is ridiculous and has cost us a few goals but at the same time, calling for his head is just stupid. Finding another goalie of that caliber isn't easy.

Noir 10-19-2011 01:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrapeDrink (Post 7620155)
I didn't catch the so obviously I don't know if this applies to this game but more shots on goal doesn't really mean your team is playing better offensively, I was watching the Sharks versus the ducks game the other day, the shots was like 50-20 but the scoring chances were probably 50/50.
Well, I did catch the game and I can tell you (or maybe perhaps other viewers can vouch as well) that the chances were not 50/50, nor was it even close to being tilted on the NYR side save for the final 10 minutes.


BTW, more shots doesn't mean your team is playing better offensively, but it sure is a hell of a good indication to suggest it. You don't pad your shot stats by accident. You reach those numbers because:

a) Your players are adept at opening shooting lanes for the puck to go through.

b) Your forward players are crashing enough to get secondary chances (rebounds)

c) Your defensemen is holding the play at the blue line to keep offense alive a lot longer.


or also in the case of tonight:

d) Your team is playing well enough that it's forcing the other team to take penalties (as was tonight, we had 7 PP)



Also, for the people who like to just throw (blame defense), or we leave the goalie out to dry... Did you guys know that we got the first 2 penalties on the 1st period and it was looking like it was going to be one of those games... Yeah, NYR had zero shots on 2 PP and the tides turned and we got our share of PP.

b0unce. [?] 10-19-2011 01:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin (Post 7620266)
I understand criticism. I mean, I think Lu's new belly flop move is ridiculous and has cost us a few goals but at the same time, calling for his head is just stupid. Finding another goalie of that caliber isn't easy.
i know, i'm just frustrated with our team playing poorly.

SkinnyPupp 10-19-2011 01:35 AM
I get that you're a huge Canucks fan Ronin but all this "research" to prove your point is like those religious people who do the same. In fact I think I've heard you say many times that we should have "faith" in lu. If that helps, then great.
Posted via RS Mobile

Ronin 10-19-2011 01:44 AM
What...I press a tab in a chart on the stats page. It's just writing it down. This is nothing compared to the amount of research that goes into the week before hockey pool draft.

THAT shit involves goddamn Excel.

EXCEL. :lol

SkinnyPupp 10-19-2011 03:49 AM
Key stat to keep in mind is Stanley Cup rings. Thomas has one, Brodeur has a few.
Posted via RS Mobile

RiceIntegraRS 10-19-2011 05:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin (Post 7620261)
Consistency should be judged on a per season basis...not per game. That's bandwagoner talk.

I mean, would it really matter if we lost every single game from now til the end of November and won every game from then on? We'd still be something like 54-19-9. That's pretty much what happened last year. We sucked and then we were awesome.

Everyone runs hot and cold.
Play absolute shit in October, everyone wants your head and wants you traded.

Play excellent the rest of the year, it means absolutely nothing. See what you can do in the playoffs.

Win 15 Games in the Playoffs, you still suck. Win 16 Games in the Playoffs............ Kesler was a beast, Burrows was a monster, Sedins for MVP.

Thats what Vancouver people think of Luongo. And a part of me wishes he were traded and for the team to completely flop to show how much the team actually needs him. But obviously i dont want that to happen.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:25 PM.
Page 269 of 1214 « First 169219259260261262263264265266267268 269 270271272273274275276277278279319369769 Last »
Show 25 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net