Total misconception. Canucks D was brutal last season—Lou bailed the team out way more than he should have to, but that's what elite goalies do.
He (and Schneider at times) was the Canucks MVP last season, and you won't find too many Canuck fans who disagree with that. - Fosco
It seems to me that Loungo fell out of favor with a large # of Cannucks fans. Also aren't they looking to move him out of there? IMO, I think that Stanley cup was it for him. This past years playoffs was no help either.
It seems to me that Loungo fell out of favor with a large # of Cannucks fans. Also aren't they looking to move him out of there? IMO, I think that Stanley cup was it for him. This past years playoffs was no help either. - Buffalo--Sabres
He fell out of favour with some fans, for several different reasons, one being that Schneider appears to be at least as good as Lou, he's younger, cheaper, and more likeable. But even most of those fans will admit that the goaltenders were the Canucks' MVP's this past season, and the defense took a step backwards.
He fell out of favour with some fans, for several different reasons, one being that Schneider appears to be at least as good as Lou, he's younger, cheaper, and more likeable. But even most of those fans will admit that the goaltenders were the Canucks' MVP's this past season, and the defense took a step backwards. - Fosco
I still think he is good, but the video game gives him nearly unbeatable status. Its just frustrating.
...Cut out the bickering on both sides. Today. You can't handle it, you don't know each other well enough to establish what's harmless or not. Don't go against this rule:
6. Respect your fellow HockeyBuzzers
No name calling. And you’re not being clever if you say “any moron knows” or “only an idiot doesn’t understand.” You’re being disrespectful. Talk more about hockey and less about each other. Although playful banter is allowed, that does not mean anything goes, if the banter breaks any part of the code of conduct, it isn’t playful and it is not acceptable. When “Player X stinks" turns into "You stink" you've crossed the line. And yes, the Moderators decide where the line is.
If you violate the rule, you are subject to get banned. This is the last warning on the matter. Don't ask me about it, don't PM anyone, next time it happens, before you start in to reply to someone, ask yourself if it's worth getting banned. I'm sick of you derailing threads.
Total misconception. Canucks D was brutal last season - Fosco
And yet, Doughty would be the 3rd best D-Man in Vancouver. It's a joke.
EA does their ratings like this:
Does the player play for Vancouver? If yes, make them better than they really are.
Does the player play for a team that beat Vancouver in the playoffs? If yes, lower their ratings and make them suck.
Does the player play for a team that isn't Vancouver nor beat them in the playoffs? If so just pick a random rating
Is the player someone who you don't know much about? If so just throw a dart at a dartboard and go with what that says, research is stupid!
Kopitar should be rated a 90+, Brown should be an 89+, Doughty should be a 90+, and Quick should be a 93+.. To have Doughty as an 87, Kopitar as an 86, and Brown as an 84 is a joke. Kopitar isn't even the Kings top center in the game.
I still think he is good, but the video game gives him nearly unbeatable status. Its just frustrating. - Buffalo--Sabres
Fair enough. I just wanted to point out that Luongo's success isn't all the product of the team in front of him, and that the Canucks success has a large part to do with Lou.
It's only fans that look at the Canucks record last season, but didn't watch the games who think Lou was just along for the ride.
Location: Isn't Cooley 5"11? You know who else is 5"11? Sydney Crosby. - Scabeh Joined: 04.06.2011
Aug 20 @ 7:18 PM ET
Every rating is bullpoop, It won't ever be fixed until they become harsh and realistic. A third liner isn't an 80, a goon isn't a 76. If they lowered everything to realistic terms it would be a balanced game. It might piss people off, but (frank) them. The point is to make the best game. You can't have a game where every team has a 90 rating. They need to change the system and not felate people.
And yet, Doughty would be the 3rd best D-Man in Vancouver. It's a joke.
EA does their ratings like this:
Does the player play for Vancouver? If yes, make them better than they really are.
Does the player play for a team that beat Vancouver in the playoffs? If yes, lower their ratings and make them suck.
Does the player play for a team that isn't Vancouver nor beat them in the playoffs? If so just pick a random rating
Is the player someone who you don't know much about? If so just throw a dart at a dartboard and go with what that says, research is stupid!
Kopitar should be rated a 90+, Brown should be an 89+, Doughty should be a 90+, and Quick should be a 93+.. To have Doughty as an 87, Kopitar as an 86, and Brown as an 84 is a joke. Kopitar isn't even the Kings top center in the game. - bluecoconuts
I don't really disagree with a few of your points.
The Canucks D as a unit was bad, but certain individuals played quite well. That being said, Doughty should definitely be ranked as high as the better Canucks D.
If Miller is a 92, than yes, Quick should be higher.
Kopitar should be at about 90—I don't know about higher. Brown should be at 88 or 89.
I was a bit pissed that Schneider is only 83, and that Burrows is ranked lower than Booth.
There's always bound to issues with stuff like this. It's not the easiest thing to quantify certain aspects of a players game. But yes, some of the mistakes EA made with their rankings appear to be pretty glaring.
I don't really disagree with a few of your points.
The Canucks D as a unit was bad, but certain individuals played quite well. That being said, Doughty should definitely be ranked as high as the better Canucks D.
If Miller is a 92, than yes, Quick should be higher.
Kopitar should be at about 90—I don't know about higher. Brown should be at 88 or 89.
I was a bit pissed that Schneider is only 83, and that Burrows is ranked lower than Booth.
There's always bound to issues with stuff like this. It's not the easiest thing to quantify certain aspects of a players game. But yes, some of the mistakes EA made with their rankings appear to be pretty glaring. - Fosco
When I say 90+ I just mean 90 is the lowest that I feel he should be at. He's very well in all three zones, he's just really underrated around the NHL. However you don't tie for first in goals, assists, points, and +/- in the playoffs for nothing. He plays every zone well, him and Brown were lethal on the PK, his offensive skills are there, instincts, etc. I feel that Brown should be an 89, but I wouldn't be that upset with an 88... And 84 though is a rip, of all the people, you'd think that EA would know what Brown could do, given that they're Vancouver fans. Brown was the best player in that series.
Doughty would be the best D-Man on most teams, certainly Vancouver. Top pairing for sure, but instead they have him rated 87. I understand he had a down year, but he turned it on the second half, and certainly in the playoffs he was often one of the best players on the ice (as well as Quick and Kopitar).
I don't really understand the ratings so I'll have to look at them in detail once I get the game, but from first glance it looks like they horribly underrated some of the Kings.
Most people seem less than pleased about their teams ratings. They seem very sloppy, misspelled names, etc. It really disappointed me after I was so excited for the game.
Location: I'm bi. Why limit yourself with half of the possible delicious pleasures of life - Fredo, ON Joined: 02.26.2007
Aug 20 @ 7:40 PM ET
Every rating is bullpoop, It won't ever be fixed until they become harsh and realistic. A third liner isn't an 80, a goon isn't a 76. If they lowered everything to realistic terms it would be a balanced game. It might piss people off, but (frank) them. The point is to make the best game. You can't have a game where every team has a 90 rating. They need to change the system and not felate people. - AdamFrench
...Cut out the bickering on both sides. Today. You can't handle it, you don't know each other well enough to establish what's harmless or not. Don't go against this rule:
6. Respect your fellow HockeyBuzzers
No name calling. And you’re not being clever if you say “any moron knows” or “only an idiot doesn’t understand.” You’re being disrespectful. Talk more about hockey and less about each other. Although playful banter is allowed, that does not mean anything goes, if the banter breaks any part of the code of conduct, it isn’t playful and it is not acceptable. When “Player X stinks" turns into "You stink" you've crossed the line. And yes, the Moderators decide where the line is.
If you violate the rule, you are subject to get banned. This is the last warning on the matter. Don't ask me about it, don't PM anyone, next time it happens, before you start in to reply to someone, ask yourself if it's worth getting banned. I'm sick of you derailing threads.
When I say 90+ I just mean 90 is the lowest that I feel he should be at. He's very well in all three zones, he's just really underrated around the NHL. However you don't tie for first in goals, assists, points, and +/- in the playoffs for nothing. He plays every zone well, him and Brown were lethal on the PK, his offensive skills are there, instincts, etc. I feel that Brown should be an 89, but I wouldn't be that upset with an 88... And 84 though is a rip, of all the people, you'd think that EA would know what Brown could do, given that they're Vancouver fans. Brown was the best player in that series.
Doughty would be the best D-Man on most teams, certainly Vancouver. Top pairing for sure, but instead they have him rated 87. I understand he had a down year, but he turned it on the second half, and certainly in the playoffs he was often one of the best players on the ice (as well as Quick and Kopitar).
I don't really understand the ratings so I'll have to look at them in detail once I get the game, but from first glance it looks like they horribly underrated some of the Kings.
Most people seem less than pleased about their teams ratings. They seem very sloppy, misspelled names, etc. It really disappointed me after I was so excited for the game. - bluecoconuts
The people at EA are from all over the world. There are just as many from Alberta as there are from BC, as well.
I've had acquaintances who've worked there and there are just as many Canuck haters as Canucks fans. Most are actually not sports fans. Though they may have short changed some players on other teams, they didn't do the Canucks any favours—most are about where they should be, and some have also been short-changed.
Personally, I don't think Doughty deserves to be any higher than Edler or Hamhuis. He had one very good year, and has since taken a step back. Will he get back to where he was? Probably, but at this point, like I said, he shouldn't be any higher than Edler or Hamhuis.
The way he's played the last two seasons, he wouldn't be the best D on Vancouver.
Personally, I don't think Doughty deserves to be any higher than Edler or Hamhuis. He had one very good year, and has since taken a step back. Will he get back to where he was? Probably, but at this point, like I said, he shouldn't be any higher than Edler or Hamhuis.
The way he's played the last two seasons, he wouldn't be the best D on Vancouver. - Fosco
Did you stop watching the playoffs after Vancouver was eliminated? Doughty was amazing, and would take over games quite often. A few people were saying that the Conn Smythe was between him, Quick, or Brown, any of those three were considered well deserving. He was also very good at the end of the season, not only on offense but his defensive game as well. He was very much back in his Norris form by the end of the season.
Did you stop watching the playoffs after Vancouver was eliminated? Doughty was amazing, and would take over games quite often. A few people were saying that the Conn Smythe was between him, Quick, or Brown, any of those three were considered well deserving. He was also very good at the end of the season, not only on offense but his defensive game as well. He was very much back in his Norris form by the end of the season. - bluecoconuts
I don't base my opinion of a player on a single playoffs. These ratings aren't based on a single playoffs either.
I didn't think he was that great in the Vancouver series, but I'm glad to hear he picked up his game.
He's still yet to prove he can regain his form from two seasons ago and sustain it.
I don't base my opinion of a player on a single playoffs. These ratings aren't based on a single playoffs either.
I didn't think he was that great in the Vancouver series, but I'm glad to hear he picked up his game.
He's still yet to prove he can regain his form from two seasons ago and sustain it. - Fosco
Okay, well I disagree, it should be based on their last sample size, in these games playoffs should count.
Do you at least agree that Vancouver is highly overrated in the game? Their defense for example, has one player rated in the 70's. Everyone else is in the 80's, with an 84, and two 88's..... LA, which was the second best defense in the regular season, has 3 players in the 70's, and 2 in the low 80's with Doughty at 87.
There is no justification for that. Vancouver is rated 4.5 across the board, the only team to be rated as such. There's favoritism in play, and to me it seems pretty obvious.
