Luongo wins the big game

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by opendoor

It's pretty amazing how everyone loves to shift the goalposts. Several months ago, Luongo wasn't even going to make the team, with Fleury and Ward making it in favor. Then once he made the team he'd be the 3rd string goalie because Fleury was more clutch, or if he was the backup it'd just be to pander to the fans. Then once he was cemented as the backup he'd get his token game, but there's no way he'd supplant Brodeur. Then when he came in, everyone was predicting he'd choke against Russia and Canada wouldn't even medal. Now that he won the gold medal by winning 4 elimination games in 6 days people try and find ways to undermine the accomplishment. Yet Miller, who had the benefit of playing Switzerland twice, Norway, and a Finland team that gave up about 2 minutes into the game is heralded.

Yes Luongo had a great team in front of him, but how many goalies win any kind of championships without great teams in front of them? There's a reason that only 2 teams in the last 20 years have won the Stanley Cup without having top 10 scoring in the league.

I wouldn't worry about it too much. It's a Flames board, so of course you're going to get lots of comments suggesting he isn't good, no matter what he does. That's just how it goes. I'm sure on CDC there's posters saying Iggy sucks and held Crosby down the whole tournament.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by 6FeetDeep

...at the end of the day the guy with by far the most pressure on him won the game.

Yes. And that guy's name is Sidney Crosby.

[MelBridgeman]

He makes the save on the Parise goal, things would be different, a save like that would of made him legendary, but instead the legend will be Iginla to Crosby, GOLD

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by flameswin

I wouldn't worry about it too much. It's a Flames board, so of course you're going to get lots of comments suggesting he isn't good, no matter what he does. That's just how it goes.

Except that I haven't seen a single poster in this thread suggest that Luongo is not a good goaltender. The general consensus has been that he played a good game; good enough to win. I think the real argument here concerns what the win means for Luongo's career, his reputation and his future. I am not alone in thinking that Luongo's gold medal on its own does not suddenly catapult him into the realm of clutch goaltenders. There are still a lot of questions concerning his performance.

Originally Posted by flameswin

I'm sure on CDC there's posters saying Iggy sucks and held Crosby down the whole tournament.

Bullocks. And here is a great example of what I am getting at: Iginla's performance is by and large being recognized for what it was; a great hockey performance at a critical moment in the game, while on the other hand, there are still fans and media pundits that are suspicious of Luongo's big-game abilities.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by opendoor

So anything less than a shutout on 36 shots is unacceptable? Give me a break. I'm not going to sit here and try and argue that he stole the game or something, but he was not outplayed by Miller yesterday. If Luongo "cracked" then what do you say about Miller's two bad goals (at least bad if you're using the standard most seem to be applying to Luongo) and his 2 or 3 misses which were saved by the goalposts in the most important game of his life?

Nothing because I would be so upset that Luongo let in two weak goals that it didn't need to come down to OT. But like Mel said who cares no one will remember Luongo in 10 years people will remember Iginla to Crosby, GOLD!

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by HOOT

Nothing because I would be so upset that Luongo let in two weak goals that it didn't need to come down to OT. But like Mel said who cares no one will remember Luongo in 10 years people will remember Iginla to Crosby, GOLD!

I hate to break it to you, but most non Flames fans aren't going to remember Iginla's play either. How many people talk about Esposito's pass to Henderson (or even know it was Esposito who made the pass)? That is Crosby's goal and in the eyes of most Canadians, that's who'll be remembered.

I guess you also agree that Miller cracked, though to be fair, neither he or Luongo came close to Kiprusoff's, Halak's, or Lundqvist's choke jobs in the tournament.

[Gerry]

Originally Posted by HOOT

Nothing because I would be so upset that Luongo let in two weak goals that it didn't need to come down to OT. But like Mel said who cares no one will remember Luongo in 10 years people will remember Iginla to Crosby, GOLD!

Except that by most standards, he did not let in 2 weak goals. He did not save on 2 good chances and did save on other good chances. Allowing a tip in from in close and another on a scramble are not two weak goals.

The reality is that in 10 years most hockey fans will remember Crosby. That's it.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Gerry

The reality is that in 10 years most hockey fans will remember Crosby. That's it.

Agreed. I think Luongo put it quite well after the Germany game:

"We're here to play for our country. There's no individualism here. We're all working for the same goal here: to win the gold medal. In the future, 20 years down the road, nobody's going to remember who played in goal. But they'll remember that we won.

[Daradon]

Yup, credit where credit is due. He made some big saves and won the big game. I'm glad he was in goal for us. It was his time.

Now hopefully this isn't the start of something in Vancouver. He can plateau here and now...

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by opendoor

I hate to break it to you, but most non Flames fans aren't going to remember Iginla's play either. How many people talk about Esposito's pass to Henderson (or even know it was Esposito who made the pass)? That is Crosby's goal and in the eyes of most Canadians, that's who'll be remembered.

That's fine with us as we aren't trumpeting that Iginla won Canada the gold medal. The title of this thread bothers me a bit. I guarantee that team Canada wins the game no matter which of the three goaltenders they had in net. It just happened to be Luongo but IMO he was pretty shaky and the team won despite the better goaltender being at the other end.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

That's fine with us as we aren't trumpeting that Iginla won Canada the gold medal. The title of this thread bothers me a bit. I guarantee that team Canada wins the game no matter which of the three goaltenders they had in net. It just happened to be Luongo but IMO he was pretty shaky and the team won despite the better goaltender being at the other end.

Perhaps my title was misinterpreted a bit. I didn't mean Luongo was the reason Canada won the game, I just meant that he has always been labeled as a choker and a guy who couldn't win the big games, and he was the goaltender in a big game (one of the biggest in history) and the team won.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by flameswin

Perhaps my title was misinterpreted a bit. I didn't mean Luongo was the reason Canada won the game, I just meant that he has always been labeled as a choker and a guy who couldn't win the big games, and he was the goaltender in a big game (one of the biggest in history) and the team won.

I'm on the same page with Estrada on this one: Should we create individual threads dedicated to Thornton, Heatley, et. al. for finally winning the "big game"?

The title of the thread is a little pretentious; if he had performed a goaltending clinic in the process of securing the victory, then by all means it warrants its own mention. But under the present circumstances it comes across as an apologetic for a player of whom there are still legitimate questions.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

That's fine with us as we aren't trumpeting that Iginla won Canada the gold medal. The title of this thread bothers me a bit. I guarantee that team Canada wins the game no matter which of the three goaltenders they had in net. It just happened to be Luongo but IMO he was pretty shaky and the team won despite the better goaltender being at the other end.

Too bad the "better goaltender" blew a routine save and lost the game for his team. He also let two shots get by him in the 3rd which rang off the post.

Not that I disagree that Luongo wasn't a massive factor in the win. He did his job, played very well, and helped Canada win the game, but he wasn't a game breaker. At the same time he also didn't get the luxury of being invisible for most of the game like some of his teammates did.

I also think it's disingenuous to suggest that any of the 3 goalies could have easily won that game. In the month or two leading up to the Olympics Luongo was playing far better than either Brodeur or Fleury. If those guys couldn't get wins for their regular teams why are people so sure they'd do the same for Canada? Besides Brodeur already had his chance against the Americans and he blew it. Might he have played better this time? Maybe, but Team Canada's brain trust seemed to believe that Luongo gave them a better chance to win and they were proven correct.

I do find it pretty funny that in the past on here I've suggested that several cup winning goaltenders weren't absolutely crucial to their team's success and won their cups more based on decent play and having a fantastic team in front of them. That line of thinking didn't seem to hold much water with everyone on here but I guess everyone's changing their opinion now that they can't slag Luongo looking at it that way. All I heard about was how clutch Fleury was, despite him putting up god awful numbers in the playoffs in his cup winning year and little credence was given to the team he had in front of him. Methinks we won't be hearing much about Fleury anymore from Luongo's detractors.

[Johnny Canuck]

Originally Posted by HOOT

Nothing because I would be so upset that Luongo let in two weak goals that it didn't need to come down to OT. But like Mel said who cares no one will remember Luongo in 10 years people will remember Iginla to Crosby, GOLD!

In 10 years no one save flame fans are going to remember Iginla passing the puck to Crosby.

The highlight of that game will forever be Crosby scoring in overtime and the celebration that ensued. Not a pass from Iginla, or a save by Luongo.

[SkunkyJosh]

Am I the only one who says that the ref helped the Canada to score in overtime? Sure, they are part of the game but this was horrible to see.

[kirant]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

Here's my take on it. Team Canada didn't win the game because Luongo stole any games in the tournament. They won because of the whole team package. Luongo made the saves when he had to. It's kind of like Detroit really. People will continue to criticize him until he carries a team to a championship (like Brodeur and Roy).

This. Luongo did what he was asked to do. He never stepped up his game, he never carried the team on its back (Though you could make a case of the Slovakia game). He was the second starter of the Olympic team. He never pulled a Miller or a Hiller (or whoever the Lavian goaltender was).

He's going to get questioned until he's forced to take the team HIMSELF through a round.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by kirant

He's going to get questioned until he's forced to take the team HIMSELF through a round.

He already did it in 06-07. Vancouver got shut out 3 times yet they still won the series.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by SkunkyJosh

Am I the only one who says that the ref helped the Canada to score in overtime? Sure, they are part of the game but this was horrible to see.

Hmmm, I was actually looking at it the opposite way. Going in it looked like he broke up the play more than he helped it.

Regardless of whether it changed the play enough to cause the goal, refs and linesmen are considered part of the rink and one has to expect them to get in the way sometimes.

[sa226]

Originally Posted by SkunkyJosh

Am I the only one who says that the ref helped the Canada to score in overtime? Sure, they are part of the game but this was horrible to see.

I do see what you are saying, on the play Crosby was carrying it back to the point where I assume he intended to pass it, the puck got caught in the refs skate, so Crosby was forced to stab at it with one hand to get it down low to Iginla and the rest is history.

It can be argued that had the puck not got caught in the refs skate Crosby wouldn't have passed it to Iginla and Crosby wouldn't have gotten a step on Rafalski and received the pass in the open

It can also be argued that he would have turned and passed it to Iggy regardless.

Impossible to prove either way.

If in fact the ref aided in the goal, in my opinion it in no way cheapens the goal.

The fact of the matter is Crosby beat Rafalski cleanly off the wall, Iginla won a puck battle and made a great pass, and Crosby made a great shot for the goal. End of story.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by Johnny Canuck

In 10 years no one save flame fans are going to remember Iginla passing the puck to Crosby.

The highlight of that game will forever be Crosby scoring in overtime and the celebration that ensued. Not a pass from Iginla, or a save by Luongo.

You're only saying that because you are a Canucks fan.