The Copper & Blue: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: NFL Week One: Previews and Predictions for all 15 games

From Luongod to Bobby Loser: another season ends badly on the Wet Coast

I should like Roberto Luongo. I tend to sympathize with goalies, having been one myself  - many years ago, and more soccer than hockey, but it forever changed how I experience the game. I learned to watch the game from the inside out, from the goal on out, in a similar manner as I learned to listen to music from the bottom up when I played tuba in the school band. So today I like bass players and I like goalies. Go figure.

Most goalies, that is. For whatever reason I have never taken a shine to Luongo, all the way back to his junior days. I respect his talent, and his four gold medals representing Canada, but the man himself leaves me cold.  Why doesn't Bruce like Luongo? It's one of those unanswerable questions like, "Why is the sky blue?" or "Why is Matt Cooke such a douchebag?" There's probably an answer out there if I looked hard enough, but it's almost certainly not worth the effort. It just is.

So let's try to leave personal feelings aside and just examine the statistical record. While we're at it we can touch a couple of hot buttons: the wisdom of big money contracts for goaltenders, and "clutch" performance.

Luongo arrived in Vancouver amid much hooplah in the summer of 2006. After six playoff-free NHL seasons, he had forced a trade by refusing various generous Florida contract offers. Vancouver was interested, after years of being burned by Dan Cloutier's erratic goaltending, especially in the playoffs. Ultimately a deal was worked out and Luongo became one of the very few Canadian-born stars in the past quarter century who crossed the border heading north, quickly coming to terms with his new team on a handsome four-year, $27 MM pact, making him the highest paid netminder in the league. The new saviour was introduced to an immediately adoring public, and parade routes were planned. Canucks' problems were solved!

It's now four years later, and the first contract has run its course. Was it money well spent? Two analyses after the jump.

Star-divide

The first is a WOWY analysis of Luongo's last two teams, Florida and Vancouver. I've looked at the 8 seasons 2001-10, of which BobbiLu played four seasons for each team. To be frank I'm not sure how much value can be taken from such an analysis, since there are SO MANY other factors at play. But my thinking was, if one team acquired a difference-maker and one team lost one, surely the fortunes of both would/could/should change accordingly.

Uh, not so much.

In Luongo's last four years in Florida the Panthers allowed 965 goals; in the following four they reduced that slightly to 958. In Vancouver's previous four years with Cloutier & Co., they allowed 868 goals; under Luongo that improved all the way to 858 GA. So based on raw goals against, Luongo's new team improved by all of 3 goals more than his old one did. (Both teams actually improved by about 50 GA when compared to league average scoring rates, which increased by about 11 goals a season in the more recent period.)

The standings are less kind than that. The Panthers rose significantly from a .442 Pts% in 2001-06, to .520 in 2006-10. Some of that is due to the change in the GBFL* points system given the addition of the shootout. In real terms of points over league, the Panthers improved by some 13% during the Luongoless period. Didn't help them much, they missed the playoffs every single year. The last year they made it was way back in 1999-2000, the year before Luongo arrived in Florida. (*Gary Bettman's Free Lunch)

Meanwhile, in Vancouver, the team's points percentage improved very marginally from .596 to .604, more than all of which was due to change in the points system. Expressed as points over league average, the Canucks actually regressed by about 3%. They made the playoffs 3 times in each 4-season stretch, with Luongo's team faring marginally better in the postseason than the "Dynasty" Canucks of the early 21st Century.

All that said I think the expectation for any team over a period of years is regression to the mean, which is what we have seen in both cases. Florida likely would have got better with or without Luongo, Vancouver likely would have regressed. All we can say with certainty is that Luongod didn't deliver the Canucks to the promised land.

* * *

The second analysis looks at how each of Luongo's seasons in Vancouver reached its denouement:

2006-07: This was unquestionably Luongo's best season in Vancouver. He won 47 games, posted a career best 2.29 GAA, made the second All-Star team. He carried on with a very solid playoff run, outduelling Marty Turco in a gripping (as in clutching and grabbing) seven-game set with the Stars, then played brilliantly for most of the second-round series against the eventual Cup champion Ducks. Alas it all came crashing down when BobbiLu lost his focus in the second overtime of the series-ending Game Five and decided he could be a referee as well as a goalie. While he was busy barking at the zebra, Scott Niedermayer was letting go a soft 65-footer from the boards that somehow found its way through, ending the series. It was an awful end to what had been to that point a terrific performance. It still left a bit of a bitter taste for Canucks fans to chew on all summer, even as their new hero hadn't yet developed clay feet.

2007-08: The Canucks pulled one of their classic el foldos down the stretch run, blowing a four-point lead by losing 7 of their last 8 games (all in regulation) to miss the playoffs. Luongo, solid for most of the season, came apart at the seams, no doubt in large part to a difficult family situation he faced at the time. Unfortunate timing to say the least, but what we have to go on is the statistical record, which paints a bleak picture indeed. Luongo was pulled in three of his last six starts, posting horrendous numbers over that stretch: 1-5-0, .837, 4.59.The Canucks weren't much help, scoring just 13 goals in support. Still, there were games where a great goaltending performance could have forced overtime or even won it. None were forthcoming and the squad crashed and burned right out of the playoffs.

2008-09: Now captain of the Canucks, Luongo missed time due to injury early in the season but posted solid numbers in the season, leading Vancouver to the Northwest Division title. In the playoffs he had a great first series as the Canucks swept aside St. Louis. Next up were Chicago Blackhawks. Canucks got off to a good start, winning Game One 5-3 despite blowing a 3-0 lead in the third, but it was all downhill from there as the Hawks won 4 of the last 5 to win the series going away. Luongo famously melted down in the decisive Game Six, in which 5 goals of support turned out to be insufficient in a crushing 7-5 defeat. Luongo's numbers for the series were an unflattering 2-4, .879, 3.52. The Canucks mustered 19 goals of support and held the Hawks to 173 shots, but 21 of those found twine resulting in another second-round exit.

2009-10: Another NW crown for the Canucks, although Luongo himself had underwhelming numbers by his usual standards, with his .913 Sv% representing his worst since his rookie season back with the Islanders. For the third year running Vancouver's team goals against crept upward, although they greatly improved their offence in the process. Come the playoffs and the Canucks again managed to win their first round series in a six-game test against Los Angeles. Luongo's play wasn't great with a Sv% of just .893, but he delivered several memorable saves with games on the line. After that came the Hawks and it was a near replay of the previous year. Vancouver won Game 1, then lost their grip as Chicago came on. Luongo was unable to hold a 2-0 lead in Game 2, then came apart on home ice where he allowed 16 goals in 3 games, all losses. Once again his teammates averaged 3 goals of support with 18 in the series, but their goaltender's numbers were worse: 2-4, .897, 3.52. Have a nice summer.

* * *

The Contrarian Goaltender confirms that any goalie will suffer fluctuations in his Save Percentage over short stretches of games. Give or take 2007-08 Luongo's results in the highlighted 6-game segments have been within CG's expected range, albeit at the lower end. The thing about it is that these aren't randomly selected strings of games, but in each case the last 6 games of the season which decided said season in a negative way each time. Luongo picked an inopportune time for his game to go south, three years in a row.

And/or, his team did. As always team results and indivudal results are tied together in a Gordian knot, and there's no Alexandrian solution to easily disentangle the two. The Canucks had trouble with the Blackhawks, from the goal right on out. It would be unfair to place all of the reason for failure on Roberto Luongo's doorstep; besides, there's no room cuz Dustin Byfuglien is already camped out there.

It is the goaltender's lot that such stretches of 5-7 games define entire seasons, be it the stretch drive or each individual playoff series. Whereas a player at another position like a Mikael Samuelsson might see production ebb and flow and have teammates pick him up, when it happens to the goalie for even one series, you're done. To contend for the Cup, a team needs at the very least, consistent production between the pipes, with breakdowns isolated to individual bad games rather than "slumps".

As for the mammoth contract being an effective use of cap space, it's hard to make a case for it, isn't it? Pains me to say it, cuz I do believe in difference-making goalies. Canucks were a NW contender and playoff disappointment before Luongod arrived, and not a huge amount seems to have changed. To his credit, Luongo's got three NW Division titles, and three first-round playoff wins (not to mention that Olympic gold medal), but the Canucks have been the third seed in the playoffs each time and don't seem to be making anything resembling a push to the top of the Conference. When they meet a better team they get beat, and their big-ticket netminder has been unable to steal the series (give or take the Dallas series, which was an evenly matched affair in which both goalies were awesome). Indeed, the last two years he hasn't held up his end of the bargain, and in 2010 was outplayed by Antti Niemi and his $827,000 contract. Maybe the Canucks would have been better served to sink those millions into a stud blueliner instead.

Now BobbiLu enters a Brave New Contract. It's easy to imagine Vancouver fans being less happy with the new 12-year commitment than they were the last time, even though the actual cap hit is reduced due to that ridiculous "retirement contract" loophole. Next year Luongo's actual salary goes from an obscene $7.5 MM, most of any goalie in hockey, to $10,000,000, most of any player in hockey. If you think Shawn Horcoff got it in both ears for not being a $7 MM player, imagine the long knives that will come out in Vancouver next year pretty much anytime Luongo so much as allows a soft goal.

Questions about his captaincy already abound: should any goalie be captain? especially this one??  It pains me again to say that too has been a failed experiment: captain goalies Charlie Gardiner and Bill Durnan remain among my heroes, but then again I never heard their post-game press conferences.

I'm reluctant to put a huge amount of stock in all of the above or draw any rock-solid conclusions, because both the macro- and the micro-statistics conceal at least as much as they reveal. It's just one case study, with lots of mitigating factors. Did BobbiLu let down the Canucks, or did the Canucks let down BobbiLu? I could ponder that all summer long ... ;)

1 recs  |  Comment 33 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Around SB Nation

The Barely-Landers

Sep 2010 from Lighthouse Hockey - 4 comments

September 8th Open Ice

Sep 2010 from Nucks Misconduct - 236 comments

Tuesday Caps Clips

Sep 2010 from Japers' Rink - 389 comments

Comments

Display:

Did BobbiLu let down the Canucks, or did the Canucks let down BobbiLu? I could ponder that all summer long

 Both.

by Sean Zandberg on May 20, 2010 2:14 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

Answer to one question

I can’t argue with your logic here. He hasn’t really proven he’s worth all that they gave away for him. However, I do have an answer for one of your preamble questions.

Why is the sky blue? Because if it was green, we wouldn’t know when to stop mowing!

Have a good day!

by Strawman4464 on May 20, 2010 2:49 PM PDT reply actions  

He hasn’t really proven he’s worth all that they gave away for him

Bertuzzi, Auld and Bryan Allen. Works for me! Lou will rebound. He had better.

BTW, in 2006-07 the team was thin up front a played a tight defensive game. That benefited Lou’s numbers as well

by Sean Zandberg on May 20, 2010 3:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

The main thing the Canucks “gave away” was four years of $6.75 MM of cap space. Acquisition price was trivial by comparison.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on May 20, 2010 8:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

I still don't see what the 10 million he gets paid next year

has to do with anything. In the cap era all that matters is the cap hit. Which is 5.3 million per season. Couple that with below market value deals for the Sedins, Kesler and Burrows not to mention young players on the verge like Hodgson and the Canucks are in great shape cap wise for next year. With Mitchell and Demo off the books we have 17 players under contract and roughly 10 million to spend. More if we can offload Kevin Bieksa. The only people that the 10 million figure affects are Luongo and the owner’s accountant.

That isn’t an obscene cap hit for a good goalie. And since there is no way to know which ELC goalie, or career journeyman on league minimum contract, is going to get hot how do you build your team? Stud D men aren’t easy to get a hold of and even if you have a bunch of them if your goalie gets hot for a couple rounds you aren’t guaranteed of anything since that goalie can start sucking at any moment. You have to get the best goalie you can at a reasonable cap hit, which is what we have now, and try to build around them.

The Niemi comparison is also a bad comparison since the Hawks are clearly the best team in the NHL and it’s not looking like it’s close at this point. Niemi and Luongo had a running rebound battle in the last round. As in who could give out more and the only reason Luongo lost is cause our D wasn’t good enough to clear the front of the net and the Hawks’ D was that good. But again the Hawks are a unique situation because they are so good and so deep.

"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"He's got a man deep..wait, no that IS Mandeep!!" - Don Taylor

by Section 312 on May 20, 2010 3:29 PM PDT reply actions  

The reason I bring up the $10 MM is that not everybody in the fanbase — even one as undeniably sophisticated as Vancouver’s :) — bothers to differentiate between salary and, uh, “salary”. If people don’t like a guy, they’ll bring up the Higher number and bitch about it. A lot.

To this neutral observer, Chicago had the stronger goaltending overall. Niemi had a couple of bad moments in the losses, but then again, there were only two of those from his perspective.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on May 20, 2010 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

The first comment is bang on

it’s already started and the contract hasn’t even kicked in yet. It’s annoying cause it’s such a lazy way to try to argue your point. “If Luongo was a 10 million dollar goalie he would have made that save…blah blah blah” You can argue Luongo isn’t as good as it seems and do it intelligently. You just did in fact. So lazy to just point to a salary number that has no impact on the cap. Just lazy.

I watched all the games in the Hawks series and I don’t think Luongo let out any more rebounds than Niemi. And he made just as many big saves. But the “bounces” went the Hawks way. And I don’t mean that in a lucky way. They are better than the Canucks. So they got to rebounds and lose pucks before us at both ends. We need to get better on D and you will see Luongo perform much like Niemi has so far. Stopping the first shot and not having to deal with very many rebounds. Luongo’s 5 on 5 save % was very very good against the Hawks. It was the PK where we were let down. Of course the PK is the time when it’s harder to control rebounds and you need your D to clear them.

"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"He's got a man deep..wait, no that IS Mandeep!!" - Don Taylor

by Section 312 on May 20, 2010 4:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

The first comment is bang on it’s already started and the contract hasn’t even kicked in yet

Thanks. I know of what I speak, cuz we just went thru the exact same thing here in Edmonton. Shawn Horcoff just played the first, most expensive year, of his 6-year extension and his legion of detractors couldn’t spit the words “seven million” venomously enough. His second long-term, biggish money deal, similar to where Luongo will be next year. And that was for a guy who has been an Oiler lifer, who has done nothing but skate his bag off for the team since the day he was drafted, a guy who blocked a last-second shot with his face to save a playoff game at the Joe, and who later cashed in on what the org. deemed was a market value deal. Doesn’t matter. He’s a bum. Boooo!! What, they’re announcing his name on the PA because he scored a point? BOOOOOO!!!!!

There are knee-jerk fans in every city – even Edmonton! – and I know for a fact there’s a population of them in Van City. So, next year when BobbiLu is the highest paid player in the league, he’ll be OK as long as he’s actually the best player in the league on that given night, otherwise don’t be surprised if it becomes open season.

Question for you Canucks fans: did Luongo’s Olympic success right in Vancouver improve his profile? Or has the goodwill drained out with the latest playoff demise?

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on May 20, 2010 5:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

Most of us agree that he

wasn’t good enough this past playoff and probably the one before. But I think we all think the team D wasn’t good enough this year either and the better team beat us. Luongo needs to be better but he needs help. There is one guy on NM that hates Luongo. Prima donna, over rated, over paid, choker, not elite, and more. Not sure why he hates him so much but it’s going to be a miserable 10-12 years for him.

"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"He's got a man deep..wait, no that IS Mandeep!!" - Don Taylor

by Section 312 on May 20, 2010 6:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

My observation from a distance is that his form is off. He seems to be guessing, making the first move in a lot of cases. Sometimes he’ll make the spectacular-looking stop – think that “game saver” vs. the Kings when I think it was Dustin Brown had the breakaway and Luongo did this weird flop and somehow made the stop – but technically he wasn’t very sound these playoffs or really most games I saw him this year. I used to call that “the windmill style” back when Bill Ranford was winding down his career here, and he never did get it back together.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on May 20, 2010 7:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

The weird thing is, no matter who the Oilers have in net, from JDD to Mathieu Garon, our goalie seems to outperform Luongo. I’ve never seen the magic of this player myself, though assume others have, given that contract of his.

Some might say the long-term stinker trend of his playoff performance comes down to bounces/luck, but I’d rather have a goalie who wrestles Fortuna to the ground and slaps on a chokehold. These great goalies do exist. Bernie Parent, Billy Smith, Patrick Roy and Grant Fuhr to name four.

I don’t know if these guys were clutch goes or not, but I do know they were great ones, and Luongo doesn’t remind me of them in the slightest.

by David Staples @ The Cult of Hockey on May 20, 2010 3:41 PM PDT reply actions  

Every stat I have ever read has shown

that there is no such thing as being “clutch” in sports. Past performance in key situations has no bearing on expected current performance. Not too sure about hockey as the stats are limited but in other sports there is no such thing as a “clutch” player.

I don’t want to come off like a jerk but I assume your talking about head to head match-ups cause if your arguing that Oiler goalies out perform Luongo over the course of a season the stats certainly don’t back that up. In fact that stats don’t back up the other assertion either.

October 19th – Edmonton 2 – Vancouver 1 – Bulin out played Luongo but both were very good
October 25th – Vancouver 2 – Edmonton 0 – Luongo shuts out Oilers standing on his head at times with Canucks battling injury bug
November 28th – Vancouver 7 – Edmonton 3 – We scored 7 so no way the OIlers goalie out dueled Luongo
December 26th – Vancouver 4 – Edmonton 1 – Luongo stopped 24 of 25 to beat JDD easily
January 20th – Vancouver 3 – Edmonton 2 (OT) – Luongo stopped 31 of 33 shots to Dubnyk 26 of 29
March 23rd – Edmonton 3 – Vancouver 2 – Luongo struggled and JDD was very good

"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"He's got a man deep..wait, no that IS Mandeep!!" - Don Taylor

by Section 312 on May 20, 2010 3:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

These great goalies do exist. Bernie Parent, Billy Smith, Patrick Roy and Grant Fuhr to name four

Right, those guys who had all star teams playing in front of them… Those guys… Right…

Remember when St. Patrick couldn’t “wrestle Fortuna” to a bronze medal in 98? Or Grant Fuhr’s post-oilers career?

I’m a little young to heap derision on the clutch abilities of Parent and Smith, but seriously?

Forget Luongo, the idea of “clutch” goalies is silly. Noone is terrible in the off season and suddenly “turns it on” for the big save. Big goalies choke, little goalies choke, everybody has a bad run.

You don’t always remember that because of the hall of famers scoring goals in front of them

by Nanodummy on May 22, 2010 12:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

The blue color of the sky is due to Rayleigh scattering. As light moves through the atmosphere, most of the longer wavelengths pass straight through. Little of the red, orange and yellow light is affected by the air.

However, much of the shorter wavelength light is absorbed by the gas molecules. The absorbed blue light is then radiated in different directions. It gets scattered all around the sky. Whichever direction you look, some of this scattered blue light reaches you. Since you see the blue light from everywhere overhead, the sky looks blue.

by zys on May 20, 2010 6:28 PM PDT reply actions  

Thanks Zys! This was one I already knew, I was just blueskying when I threw that question out there.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on May 20, 2010 7:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

I was curious about why you decided to do your Luongo WOWY with sets of seasons rather than comparing his team with and without him within individual seasons. Any WOWY analysis has many confounding factors to begin with, as you’ve pointed out, so it seems odd that you decided to choose Vancouver w/o Luongo one year and Vancouver w/ Luongo the next. I mean, the 2005-06 Canucks 15 guys play in 60 games. The 2006-07 Canucks had 14. Only 6 were the same. Why do you think this would be better than an in-season comparison (assuming you do)?

With the clutch stuff, I don’t buy it. In addition to the evidence that he isn’t clutch, there’s also some evidence that he is. I remember him being the only reason the Canadians even had a chance to win the WJC’s the year he started. He came in as a replacement for the WC’s and for Olympics and Canada won both tournaments. His 5-5 record in playoff overtime isn’t truly superb but his .951 save percentage is (“only” .924 if you take out his best game). I just think an argument about whether or not he’s a clutch tender will come down to confirmation bias (i.e. preferring the data that supports your original point).

by Scott Reynolds on May 20, 2010 7:34 PM PDT reply actions  

1) The macro-analysis was to look – in a quick and dirty way – at the big picture. Did Luongo’s arrival in Vancouver put the team to the next level? Return it to the previous level? Did his departure from Florida signal the end of the franchise? I recognize it’s flawed, said as much when I introduced it and again at the end. Just a different way to consider the matter. WOWY on the biggest scale – when a guy is with a team, and when he’s not. It’s more an experiment than anything.

For individual season WOWY, just look at the Canucks stats page and compare him to the backup(s). I wanted to do something a little more than that.

2) re: “clutch performance”, I brought it up at the beginning because that is one way to interpret the micro-scale stats (playoff series-sized bites) but you’ll notice I never did return to it or draw any conclusions. That was deliberate, cuz I don’t really have any. Closest thing I got is in that paragraph about the difficulty of disentangling individual from team performance. I’m really ambivalent on that whole question, tell you the truth. I just threw the word out and let it kind of hang there and let the reader draw his/her own conclusions.

I also mentioned his success in international play several times. I actually wasn’t overly impressed with his play in the Olympics, but he won the games and at that level of compeition that’s the thing that matters most.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on May 20, 2010 8:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

PS

The most interesting aspect of the whole thing for me was evaluating the contract. We’re far enough into the cap era now to see major deals signed since the lockout get played out, and I think it’s worthwhile to look at them and say “was it worth it?” I think this is one area we can say that the teams themselves are still figuring out, and it is Hugely important in the cap era. In this case the guy held out for a move, got it, became the highest paid player at his position, and … ? We actually know the answer to that cuz it’s been played out and those four seasons are on the record.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on May 20, 2010 8:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think I’d rather give big money to Lu than pretty much any other goalie, but I’m now utterly ambivalent as to whether it’s ever a good idea.

by Passive Voice on May 20, 2010 9:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

And… he posted a .918 save percentage over the length of the contract (regular season and playoffs) which is likely near the top of the league among goalies to face at least 4000 shots. He’s also been one of only four goalies to put up .910 or better in each of the four seasons while facing at least 1000 shots in each one (Lundqvist, Luongo, Nabokov, Vokoun) which speaks to the consistency of both his health and his performance. Which leaves you with the “is he really clutch?” question. If the answer there is “I don’t know” which seems like the most reasonable one to me given the information we have, I don’t know what more you want from a top-end goalie. He’s mostly healthy and mostly good. Unless you believe that teams should never ever ever pay goalies (which maybe you do), I don’t see how it follows that Luongo is poor value.

by Scott Reynolds on May 20, 2010 11:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

The contract argument I buy. I think there is fairly conclusive evidence that you can do very well with non-elite goalies and save the money and put it to better use elsewhere on your roster. However, if you had asked me when he came over from Florida whether or not I thought the contract out of line, I wouldn’t have thought so. I’ve also learned a l lot in those four years. .

I was rather meh about your article though, because you did a sort of maybe, kind of sloppy analysis using some numbers. You’d probably have been better off doing a proper analysis, rater than a weak one that kinda, sorta falls in line with your conclusions. That is weak sauce and not all that helpful really.

As an aside, I don’t know is if this view of goalies, that they are mostly equivalent and big contracts aren’t warranted unless they are in a very small elite group (Vokun + a couple) and even then you might be better of with the money elsewhere, is widespread among NHL management. Obviously Colorado management thinks this is the case, but other than that I don’t know.

by rsm on May 20, 2010 11:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

Colorado fucking nailed that one. I was feeling pretty clever about considering it a money signing until I heard that most of the Oilers fans in our midst had also identified Anderson as a top target.

by Passive Voice on May 20, 2010 11:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

I was rather meh about your article though, because you did a sort of maybe, kind of sloppy analysis using some numbers. You’d probably have been better off doing a proper analysis, rater than a weak one that kinda, sorta falls in line with your conclusions. That is weak sauce and not all that helpful really.

Not sure what you mean by “proper analysis”, but I don’t imagine mine was a conventional one, for which I don’t apologize. Just trying some new ideas. There was a bunch of number crunching which I just summarized rather than posting a bunch of tables and stuff; maybe that would have appeared more impressive although I’m not sure how much it would have advanced the discussion.

I will say in my defence that analysis came first, conclusions second, and my conclusions were deliberately stated weakly because a) I tried, maybe too hard, to leave personal feelings out of it; and b) I don’t much believe in “clutch” anymore (although many would identify Luongo as a guy who has blown up in crucial games and hasn’t come through for his club). It seems to me that the key point in real or imagined clutch performance is not so much “what” as “when”. Timing is everything.

I actually do believe in paying for quality netminding, but in this particular case study I’m not prepared to conclude it was money well spent. The dollars were huge, relatively speaking; the performance, decent but not overwhelming.

Thanks for your input.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on May 21, 2010 12:37 AM PDT up reply actions  

I for one enjoyed the unique approach to this analysis. The idea of a macro-WOWY isn’t relevant for most players, but for a savior such as Luongo was/is marketed, I think it is very relevant. It wasn’t as densely filled with numbers as other analyses – but goalies are a different beast.

Luongo’s appeal has definitely subsided since his move to Vancouver. I remember the fear of Vancouver’s potential when they acquired the stud goalie. To be clear, he still is one of the few top tier goalies, but the idea that Luongo can carry the team through a round seems less threatening each and every year… and Vancouver’s lineup at this point requires that.

IMO 6.7M in cap space was not worth it. I only can say that in hindsight and it is not like it was crippling, so I can pass no ill judgment on the contract. However, I’m guessing the 5.3M cap hit is going to look good for at least 3 years, and after that (if his play is subsiding) then likely the cap will rise over time to negate the issue. I could care less about the 10M paycheque and the only people who legitimately should are the Canuck-Gregor-counterparts.

by till_horcoff_is_coach on May 21, 2010 9:30 AM PDT up reply actions  

If you think 6.7M per season was too much coin over the four years, what do you think Luongo’s performance was worth over the last four seasons?

by Scott Reynolds on May 21, 2010 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions  

What about this analysis from Behind the Net?

Goaltender Performance vs Salary, 2005-2009

This one identified Luongo as one of the two rare cases (the other one is Vokoun) where a goaltender deserves a big salary.

by SJKel on May 21, 2010 10:55 AM PDT reply actions  

Well, Gabe named those two guys, I thought as examples. For sure it’s a short list, partly identified by Scott above when he included Lundqvist and Nabokov along with Vokoun and Luongo. I would add the obvious name of Martin Brodeur who didn’t quite make Scott’s 1000-shot threshold in one of the seasons (870) due to the only significant injury of his career, but who has posted Sv% over .910 in each of the last seven seasons, all but one of which he faced at least 1700 shots. Over the four years being considered here, Brodeur’s Sv% was actually slightly better than Luongo’s, at .919. Yet he reupped for a cap hit for $5.2 MM at the same time Luongo was holding out for way more than that, ultimately about 30% more. Now Brodeur clearly took a hometown discount so I’m not sure that we can hold him us as the gold standard, but let’s just say he left himself some room to outperform his contract whereas I don’t think you can say too many of these other guys did that.

The interesting thing is that in the post-lockout era, all of Brodeur, Luongo, Lundqvist, Nabokov, and Vokoun have had more bad moments in the playoffs than good. Not one of them has gone on any sort of extended postseason roll which has bought and paid for their contracts through additional playoff gates. Nabokov is the first to so much as make the conference final, and that appearance is long overdue when you consider the team he is on.

I don’t know if that’s just a cyclical thing … for awhile there pre-lockout, a big name goalie won the Cup every year – Belfour, Brodeur, Roy, Hasek, Brodeur again. But in the New NHL it’s been a different recipe for success. I suspect the biggest factor is sample size. But it doesn’t help make the case that goalies deserve Big money in the cap era.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on May 21, 2010 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

I’d suggest that the five guys above – with the possible exception of Nabokov – have been extremely good value since the lockout. Good goaltending makes a big difference so if you can get one of the dependably good goaltenders I’d say that it’s worth the investment.

The Brodeur comp for the contract is a bit goofy because of ages of the goalies involved. Brodeur was signed for his age 34 to 39 seasons while Luongo was signed for his age 27 to 30 seasons. Even if Brodeur was a slightly superior goaltender when the two deals were signed (and I don’t think he was), Luongo merited the bigger payday based on expected performance over the length of the deal. Frankly, I don’t think Brodeur took a discount at all. Fortunately for both the team and player, Brodeur has aged very well.

by Scott Reynolds on May 21, 2010 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well, Brodeur was the FAR more accomplished goalie when the deals were signed – 3 Stanley Cups vs. 0 career playoff games!, Vezina Trophies, yada yada – which used to make a huge difference on contracts. I would agree that past performance and sseniority are, and should be, a lesser consideration in the cap era.

IMO Brodeur was the better goalie when the deals were signed, and he’s the better goalie today. But I put a much bigger premium on non-save skills than most.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on May 21, 2010 1:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

Postseason is such a short time period that randomness alone can make all the differences. On the other hand, as you pointed out, teams are judged by whether they are able to succeed in the postseason and it affects their profit/loss significantly.

By the way, are you sure Nabokov is one of those? I don’t see that he had any high save percentage season since the lockout except for the current one. In fact, I believe Gabe argued that the larger sample size of the previous 4 seasons shows that he’s only an average goalie

What is Evgeni Nabokov worth?

by SJKel on May 21, 2010 12:45 PM PDT reply actions  

Well Scott set the parameters at the last four years, minimum 1000 shots and .910 Sv% each year. In Nabby’s case he was exactly .910 in two of those years, and his brutal .885 season in 2005-06 is just outside the four-year window. So to me he’s quite a bit more marginal than, say, Brodeur. Such are the limitations of setting thresholds. That said, he’s a big money, big rep goalie on a big rep team, so he’s the type of guy we should be considering when trying to determine value for money on goalie contracts.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on May 21, 2010 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, as Bruce said my parameters included Nabokov and excluded Brodeur when it should probably have been the reverse. And for what it’s worth, Vokoun will be too old to risk a big contract on when his pact expires after next season (assuming he wants more than a one or two year term). Brodeur is in the same boat when his deal expires in two years.

by Scott Reynolds on May 21, 2010 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

Luongo’s style of play has never really impressed me. I have nothing against Luongo the person, but as the goalie, it’s amazing to think how much he gets away with using his massive stature and flexiblity.

As a former goalie, I also tend to look at goalies a little more critically:

  • I’ve always thought his rebound control was below average. Especially when he was with the Panthers, opposing teams could get a get few extra whacks at the puck.
  • Luongo still has a weakness for breakaways. If you can deke Luongo, you’ve pretty much got an open net because Louie will be lying on his butt trying to make a desperation save.
  • Luongo, especially this year, looked like he had trouble directing the puck away.

Patty Marleau: An Erotic Life

Picked overall #2
Adored by the faithful
Trade rumors abound
Turns-around career
Year of the Cup?

Joe Pavelski: Real- American Mojo

by Will Bulldozer on May 22, 2010 12:58 PM PDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to SB Nation's Edmonton Oilers community.
Start posting about the Oilers »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

Northwest Standings

GP W L OTL PT
Vancouver 82 49 28 5 103
Colorado 82 43 30 9 95
Calgary 82 40 32 10 90
Minnesota 82 38 36 8 84
Edmonton 82 27 47 8 62

(updated 4.12.2010 at 6:21 AM PDT)

Oilers Stats Leaders

Stat

Forwards

Defense

TOI/G:

Horcoff (19:23)

Gilbert (22:24)

ESTOI/G:

Horcoff (14:24)

Visnovsky (17:14)

Points:

Penner (63)

Visnovsky (32)

Goals:

Penner (32)

Visnovsky (10)

Assists:

Penner (31)

Gilbert (23)

EV+/- /15

Penner (.152)

Smid (.090)

Shots:

Penner (203)

Gilbert (96)

Corsi/15:

Penner(.405)

Visnovsky (.460)

SCF/15:

Penner (5.241)

Visnovsky (4.517)

SCA/15:

Stortini (3.850)

Gilbert (4.360)

SCDiff/15:

Penner (.448)

Visnovsky (.122)

SBNation.com Recent Stories

Photo link

Dan Ellis Leaves Twitter; Can Athletes Have Truly Honest Public Opinions?

Photo +5 updates

SB Nation's Mock NHL Expansion Draft: Winnipeg And Quebec Select Their Teams

Vancouver Canucks' Willie Mitchell, centre, reacts as Calgary Flames' Michael Cammalleri, left to right, Jarome Iginla and Olli Jokinen, of Finland, celebrate Iginla's goal during second period NHL hockey action at GM Place in Vancouver, Tuesday, April 7, 2009.  (AP Photo/The Canadian Press, Jonathan Hayward) link

Is Willie Mitchell A Socialist?

More from SBNation.com >


Managing Editor

Kurri_small Derek Zona

Columnists

Willis_small Jonathan Willis

Laraque_horcoff_250x360_small Scott Reynolds

Zorg_small Bruce McCurdy

Small Jaysen Knight

Esaandstanley_small Benjamin Massey

Hat_small Lisa McRitchie

Neal_small Neal Livingston