Has the hockey world soured on Roberto Luongo?

4 Comments

Thumbnail image for 2-luongo.jpgIt’s natural to envision better things for a good player on a bad team. Sometimes it even works out. Just look at Kevin Garnett winning a title with the Boston Celtics if you need a solid example. For years, Roberto Luongo toiled away on horrible teams and put up great numbers. This made many believe that Luongo was just a good supporting cast away from stardom.

So far it’s looking like that conventional wisdom was half-true and half-false. He’s been solid each regular season as a member of the Canucks, with save percentages ranging from 91.3 to 92.1. Unfortunately, things have fallen apart a bit in the postseason, as his playoff save percentages dropped from an excellent 94.1 to a very good 91.4 percent and now a mediocre 89.2.

Hockey scribes have taken notice of his struggles. First, here’s Cam Cole of the Vancouver Sun.

But on a night when the Vancouver Canucks needed him most, all Roberto Luongo could offer was mediocrity, and plenty of it. And if that sounds more than a little familiar, congratulations: you can remember all the way back to the night a year ago right about now when the Chicago Blackhawks closed out the Canucks by scoring a converted touchdown on their goalie.

Steve Simmons of the Toronto Sun used to be “a Luongo guy” but hasn’t been impressed by his recent performance and thinks that the “statute of limitations” on him delivering in the clutch is up.

Can’t say I’m a Luongo guy anymore. I’ve seen too many flaws. I’ve seen too many nights he was supposed to great and wasn’t. I’ve seen too many playoff series like this one, where he doesn’t rise to the occasion.

This is not the next Patrick Roy or Martin Brodeur. The statute of limitations has run out on that happening. You can’t allow 11 goals against in two home playoff games and expect to win anything, let alone be anything.

Luongo leaves you expecting more, wanting more. The great goalies win games when it matters most. He doesn’t.

Regardless of public sentiment, Vancouver committed to him completely in both tangible (a lifetime contract) and intangible (naming him their “captain”) ways. 

How do you feel about Luongo? Is he a legitimate star? At least a solid No. 1? A possible bust? Let us know in the comments.