HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Columbus Blue Jackets (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=31)
-   -   Speculation: Schneider Available??? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1079737)

BJFan1 01-13-2012 12:16 PM

Schneider Available???
 
I saw this on the Trade Thread boards...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucbourdon (Post 42368323)
Even tho most people already assumed this, Bob just said on Insider Trading that....

"Vancouver Canucks are getting significant offers for Cory Schneider. " - Bob McKenzie.

Chances canucks trade him at the deadline = slim, but you never know.


My question becomes... I believe he is a RFA at the end of the season. If the Canucks are thinking of moving him for some more fire power going into the playoffs, is there a chance the CBJ could make an offer at him to try and resign him as our #1 moving forward??? Do people still feel he can be a legitimate #1 goaltender???

I was curious how other CBJ fans felt about this as I did not see many CBJ responses in that thread... but here's an idea...

What kind of offer would the CBJ throw at them???

Kev22 01-13-2012 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BJFan1 (Post 42409873)
I saw this on the Trade Thread boards...




My question becomes... I believe he is a RFA at the end of the season. If the Canucks are thinking of moving him for some more fire power going into the playoffs, is there a chance the CBJ could make an offer at him to try and resign him as our #1 moving forward??? Do people still feel he can be a legitimate #1 goaltender???

I was curious how other CBJ fans felt about this as I did not see many CBJ responses in that thread... but here's an idea...

What kind of offer would the CBJ throw at them???

I think that if the Canucks trade him, it will be for more than Columbus is willing to give up. Also, if the Canucks trade him, it means they feel that Luongo can take them to a cup.

It will be interesting to see what they do because if they keep Schneider, I would have to think that Luongo will be available in the offseason.

Feicht 01-13-2012 01:29 PM

When I saw the thread I first thought it was about Mathieu Schneider :laugh:

Double-Shift Lassé 01-13-2012 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feicht (Post 42413455)
When I saw the thread I first thought it was about Mathieu Schneider :laugh:

Or

http://sharetv.org/images/one_day_at..._schneider.jpg

blahblah 01-13-2012 01:56 PM

Here we go again. Not that I want to add nothing of value, but I am. I'm not going to speculate on this. Unless the offer is too good for them to refuse there is no reason to move him. At that price, I don't want him.

Van has no cap space to work with an he makes little money. That makes the return in the form of picks or prospects, unless it's part of a bigger deal.

Not to mention Van would have to replace him.

I don't get the obsession with people thinking Van wants to move him (or has to).

EspenK 01-13-2012 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Double-Shift Lassé (Post 42413667)

Ah, memory lane

CrazyCanucks 01-13-2012 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blahblah (Post 42414925)
Here we go again. Not that I want to add nothing of value, but I am. I'm not going to speculate on this. Unless the offer is too good for them to refuse there is no reason to move him. At that price, I don't want him.

Van has no cap space to work with an he makes little money. That makes the return in the form of picks or prospects, unless it's part of a bigger deal.

Not to mention Van would have to replace him.

I don't get the obsession with people thinking Van wants to move him (or has to).

Half of the city wants the Canucks to keep him as the new starter and trade Luongo.

I think the Gilles can set a high price for him as he knows that he can fetch a good return back. It would have to include someone significant back, as they are in Cup win mode right now for the next 2-3 years.
The Salary cap issues they can work around. Ballard is not playing right now and he is eating up 4 million on the cap right now, so I think he would be involved in some sort of transaction with someone. Or he could just be sent to the minors and his cap hit is then gone.

I don’t know what on the CBJ the Canucks would need. If there was a player on the CBJ, someone like Carter to shore up the top 6 would be ideal.

blahblah 01-13-2012 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyCanucks (Post 42417003)
Half of the city wants the Canucks to keep him as the new starter and trade Luongo.

Not one person has given me a good reason why a cap starved team wants to get rid of an ELC goalie that can start at the NHL on a Cup contending team.

I can see Luongo as it offers as cost savings and you can get a backup easily enough.

But you aren't getting another Schneider for less than 1 million.

You are competing for a Cup and you can trade him this off season just as easily as you can now.

You guys are inventing trades and needs that don't exist. There is zero reason to change up your mix right now. Someone like Cater to shore up your top six? What the hell kind of hole you going to create with that move? Luongo is about it and I'm not sure you can move that contract.

Doug19 01-13-2012 04:05 PM

Can't think of any good reason to trade significant assets for a very unproven goalie that gets to play behind one of the leagues best defenses.

mt-svk 01-13-2012 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feicht (Post 42413455)
When I saw the thread I first thought it was about Mathieu Schneider :laugh:

Me too :D

punk_o_holic 01-13-2012 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blahblah (Post 42414925)
Here we go again. Not that I want to add nothing of value, but I am. I'm not going to speculate on this. Unless the offer is too good for them to refuse there is no reason to move him. At that price, I don't want him.

Van has no cap space to work with an he makes little money. That makes the return in the form of picks or prospects, unless it's part of a bigger deal.

Not to mention Van would have to replace him.

I don't get the obsession with people thinking Van wants to move him (or has to).

Not sure about right now but going into the season, they were high on Eddie Lack. I think they're comfortable for him to slide into the backup role in the NHL if need be.

That Canucks fan mentioned adding Ballard into the deal to make a trade work if they were getting high priced players in return. I don't want any part of him, even if it means getting Schneider.

I know you have to give to get and I wouldn't but would anyone trade Ryan Johansen for Schneider? I could see them asking for him because he is a Vancouver native.

pete goegan 01-13-2012 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by punk_o_holic (Post 42441211)
Not sure about right now but going into the season, they were high on Eddie Lack. I think they're comfortable for him to slide into the backup role in the NHL if need be.

That Canucks fan mentioned adding Ballard into the deal to make a trade work if they were getting high priced players in return. I don't want any part of him, even if it means getting Schneider.

I know you have to give to get and I wouldn't but would anyone trade Ryan Johansen for Schneider? I could see them asking for him because he is a Vancouver native.

I would not want to trade a high-end center prospect for an unproven goalie (or maybe even a proven one!).

CrazyCanucks 01-14-2012 03:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pete goegan (Post 42445273)
I would not want to trade a high-end center prospect for an unproven goalie (or maybe even a proven one!).

How is unproven? Just wondering from a another teams perspective. Some people in Vancouver see him differently and is actually a better option than the current #1 guy. It would be interesting to see from an outside perspective what makes him unproven
Personally I think he stays until the off season.

Would he be any worse than the current guy you have? Also, wouldnt it be better to get a goalie who has played on a winner and knows what it takes to be a winner, and already has that work ethic?

How do you upgrade your current G situation if you dont want to trade for an unproven or a proven goalie?

punk_o_holic 01-14-2012 04:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyCanucks (Post 42452021)
How is unproven? Just wondering from a another teams perspective. Some people in Vancouver see him differently and is actually a better option than the current #1 guy. It would be interesting to see from an outside perspective what makes him unproven
Personally I think he stays until the off season.

Would he be any worse than the current guy you have? Also, wouldnt it be better to get a goalie who has played on a winner and knows what it takes to be a winner, and already has that work ethic?

How do you upgrade your current G situation if you dont want to trade for an unproven or a proven goalie?

Maybe unproven=never played a full season as a starter in the NHL.

A lot of the fans think that Schneider's play/numbers is based on playing on a elite team. They feel if he was playing in Columbus, his numbers wouldn't be as great. Which is may or may not be true.

I think they would be willing to trade something good for a proven goalie(Miller,Ward,heck, maybe even Luongo) but not someone young(Schneider,Bernier,Lehner). Mind you the 3 proven goalies have NTC. Is Luongo's a complete 100% NTC or is it limited to a list of teams/doesn't kick in until the future? My dream is to get Jacob Markstrom but he's Florida's future number 1 goalie and yes he's young and unproven but I like him and would give a lot to land him.

I would offer a contract to Vokoun and see if he takes it. He's getting up their in age so a nice final retirement contract might entice him to sign here. Word from the fans here said that Vokoun did state he would move to Ohio when he retires. Think Dublin, Ohio, not sure how far apart the two cities are. I would then somehow move Mason and bring in a younger goalie to be the backup so he can learn and take over Vokoun when he retires.

It's to bad St Louis is in the same division as Columbus. The way Elliot is playing, I wonder if they would trade Halak. Also, Elliot is a UFA after this season, I would not want Columbus to go after him.

CrazyCanucks 01-14-2012 05:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by punk_o_holic (Post 42452409)
Maybe unproven=never played a full season as a starter in the NHL.

A lot of the fans think that Schneider's play/numbers is based on playing on a elite team. They feel if he was playing in Columbus, his numbers wouldn't be as great. Which is may or may not be true.

I think they would be willing to trade something good for a proven goalie(Miller,Ward,heck, maybe even Luongo) but not someone young(Schneider,Bernier,Lehner). Mind you the 3 proven goalies have NTC. Is Luongo's a complete 100% NTC or is it limited to a list of teams/doesn't kick in until the future? My dream is to get Jacob Markstrom but he's Florida's future number 1 goalie and yes he's young and unproven but I like him and would give a lot to land him.

I would offer a contract to Vokoun and see if he takes it. He's getting up their in age so a nice final retirement contract might entice him to sign here. Word from the fans here said that Vokoun did state he would move to Ohio when he retires. Think Dublin, Ohio, not sure how far apart the two cities are. I would then somehow move Mason and bring in a younger goalie to be the backup so he can learn and take over Vokoun when he retires.

It's to bad St Louis is in the same division as Columbus. The way Elliot is playing, I wonder if they would trade Halak. Also, Elliot is a UFA after this season, I would not want Columbus to go after him.

Do you watch any Canuck games, or just Oil and CBJ? If so, you must have seen him play at some point, and what do you think of his play? Would you say most CBJ fans that say they dont want Schneider because he is unproven dont want to be stuck with another Mason?

How did you become a fan of both those teams and not the Nucks?
Why would Vokun retire to Ohio? Family?

Here's a list of UFA Goalies, slim pickings.... Trade route and paying a hefty price is probably the only way to get a good goalie for next year... Howson or whoever takes over needs to make the G priority #1. You cant go into a 4th year with Mason. He is done.

Huet, Cristobal » G CHI 36 $5,625,000 2012 (UFA)
Brodeur, Martin » G NJD 39 $5,200,000 2012 (UFA)
Roloson, Dwayne » G TBL 42 $3,500,000 2012 (UFA)
Niittymaki, Antero » G SAN 31 $2,000,000 2012 (UFA)
Mason, Chris » G WIN 35 $1,850,000 2012 (UFA)
Leighton, Michael » G PHI 30 $1,550,000 2012 (UFA)
Vokoun, Tomas » G WAS 35 $1,500,000 2012 (UFA)
Ellis, Dan » G ANA 31 $1,500,000 2012 (UFA)
Gustavsson, Jonas » G TOR 27 $1,350,000 2012 (UFA)
Hedberg, Johan » G NJD 38 $1,250,000 2012 (UFA)
Clemmensen, Scott » G FLA 34 $1,200,000 2012 (UFA)
Auld, Alex » G OTT 31 $1,000,000 2012 (UFA)
Biron, Martin » G NYR 34 $875,000 2012 (UFA)
Backlund, Johan » G PHI 30 $800,000 2012 (UFA)
Conklin, Ty » G DET 35 $750,000 2012 (UFA)
Harding, Josh » G MIN 27 $750,000 2012 (UFA)
Raycroft, Andrew » G DAL 31 $650,000 2012 (UFA)
Danis, Yann » G EDM 30 $650,000 2012 (UFA)
McElhinney, Curtis » G PHO 28 $625,000 2012 (UFA)
Montoya, Al » G NYI 26 $601,000 2012 (UFA)
Elliott, Brian » G STL 26 $600,000 2012 (UFA)
Sanford, Curtis » G CLB 32 $600,000 2012 (UFA)
Johnson, Brent » G PIT 34 $600,000 2012 (UFA)
Emery, Ray » G CHI 29 $600,000 2012 (UFA)
Nabokov, Evgeni » G NYI 36 $570,000 2012 (UFA)
Lawson, Nathan » G MTL 28 $550,000 2012 (UFA)
McKenna, Mike » G OTT 28 $550,000 2012 (UFA)
Leggio, David » G BUF 27 $525,000 2012 (UFA)
Sabourin, Dany » G WAS 31 $525,000 2012 (UFA)
Bacashihua, Jason » G PHI 29 $525,000 2012 (UFA)
Munroe, Scott » G PIT 29 $525,000 2012 (UFA)
Climie, Matt » G VAN 28 $525,000 2012 (UFA)
Mannino, Peter » G WIN 27 $525,000 2012 (UFA)
MacIntyre, Drew » G BUF 28 $525,000 2012 (UFA)

blahblah 01-14-2012 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by punk_o_holic (Post 42441211)
Not sure about right now but going into the season, they were high on Eddie Lack. I think they're comfortable for him to slide into the backup role in the NHL if need be.

Yeah, that's what you do on a legitimate chance for the puck, trade who might be the better goalie and remove your goal tending depth.

If they are going to consider moving him, I don't see it until the end of the year when they start looking at his new contract. At that point they might try and move Luongo first.

Friedrich 01-14-2012 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyCanucks (Post 42452021)
How is unproven? Just wondering from a another teams perspective. Some people in Vancouver see him differently and is actually a better option than the current #1 guy. It would be interesting to see from an outside perspective what makes him unproven
Personally I think he stays until the off season.

Would he be any worse than the current guy you have? Also, wouldnt it be better to get a goalie who has played on a winner and knows what it takes to be a winner, and already has that work ethic?

How do you upgrade your current G situation if you dont want to trade for an unproven or a proven goalie?

He said he didn't want to trade a very high-valued center prospect for a goalie. Not that he wouldn't trade for a goalie at all.


I like the Vokun idea. Plus we have a lot of money coming off the cap next year.

It baffles me how we traded or lost to UFA our two best defensive defensemen (not that that says much) and replace both of them with.... Martinek. I was never for trading Klesla especially. Now he's 1-7-8 +5 in 38 games. Halfway through our miserable season last year he was 3-7-10 +10. I think he would have complimented Wiz nicely.

Anyway, I agree with Blah. It doesn't make any sense that Van would trade Schneider, especially at the deadline when he's RFA and they're making a run. It would make more sense to wait until the end of the season and trade Luongo.

pete goegan 01-14-2012 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyCanucks (Post 42452021)
How is unproven? Just wondering from a another teams perspective. Some people in Vancouver see him differently and is actually a better option than the current #1 guy. It would be interesting to see from an outside perspective what makes him unproven
Personally I think he stays until the off season.

Would he be any worse than the current guy you have? Also, wouldnt it be better to get a goalie who has played on a winner and knows what it takes to be a winner, and already has that work ethic?

How do you upgrade your current G situation if you dont want to trade for an unproven or a proven goalie?

As punk said, he's unproven because he has 50 starts in the NHL and never more than 25 in a season. And, as Bugg pointed out, I don't object to trading for Schnieder, only to giving up Johansen for him. Sure, I'd like to have a winner with a strong work ethic in goal; but I really have no idea if he'd be better than Mason on this team. Well, that's not true, I'm fairly sure he couldn't be worse, but that's not enough to inspire such a trade for me. Others, I'm sure, will differ.

JACKETfan 01-14-2012 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pete goegan (Post 42455023)
As punk said, he's unproven because he has 50 starts in the NHL and never more than 25 in a season. And, as Bugg pointed out, I don't object to trading for Schnieder, only to giving up Johansen for him. Sure, I'd like to have a winner with a strong work ethic in goal; but I really have no idea if he'd be better than Mason on this team. Well, that's not true, I'm fairly sure he couldn't be worse, but that's not enough to inspire such a trade for me. Others, I'm sure, will differ.

We have become so jaded.

Now that we've gotten over Mason, Commodore, Wiz, et al, is there ANY player or coach we will place our trust in? (I mean, besides a non-concussed Crosby)

pete goegan 01-14-2012 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JACKETfan (Post 42455227)
We have become so jaded.

True enough. It's pretty hard to resist, for even the most optimistic among us.

GScott 01-14-2012 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyCanucks (Post 42452021)
How is unproven? Just wondering from a another teams perspective. Some people in Vancouver see him differently and is actually a better option than the current #1 guy. It would be interesting to see from an outside perspective what makes him unproven
Personally I think he stays until the off season.

Would he be any worse than the current guy you have? Also, wouldnt it be better to get a goalie who has played on a winner and knows what it takes to be a winner, and already has that work ethic?

How do you upgrade your current G situation if you dont want to trade for an unproven or a proven goalie?

Funny thing is much of the same was said 3 years ago about another goalie. In fact he went on to win the Calder. How has that worked out? As many have said Schneider is unproven because he has yet to be "the guy" and play an entire season. Mason played better and for a longer stretch only to crumble under the pressure of being the franchise goalie. No guarantee Schneider will fare any better.

With that said there is no way I would trade Johansen or the #1 pick for Schneider or any other goalie. A serviceable goalie can be had during free agency. With a competent defense the CBJ do not need an elite goal tender and I certainly wouldn't give up what little offense they have to get one.

Xoggz22 01-14-2012 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyCanucks (Post 42452021)
How is unproven? Just wondering from a another teams perspective. Some people in Vancouver see him differently and is actually a better option than the current #1 guy. It would be interesting to see from an outside perspective what makes him unproven
Personally I think he stays until the off season.

Would he be any worse than the current guy you have? Also, wouldnt it be better to get a goalie who has played on a winner and knows what it takes to be a winner, and already has that work ethic?

How do you upgrade your current G situation if you dont want to trade for an unproven or a proven goalie?

I think maybe there isn't clarity on the point at hand....It's not about not wanting Schneider (if it is, those people are crazy), it's about not giving up a player like Johansen to get him. Have you seen the difference in defense play between the two teams (and I'm not just talking the 6 defensemen although there is a huge discrepancy there too). I'm sure Schneider would help maks some of our significant defensive difficiencies, however, it is only one piece. The other is having a future franchise Center which many of us believe Johansen will be.

Two independent things here. Yes to Schneider, no to moving Johansen from this fans perspective.

CrazyCanucks 01-14-2012 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xoggz22 (Post 42457971)
I think maybe there isn't clarity on the point at hand....It's not about not wanting Schneider (if it is, those people are crazy), it's about not giving up a player like Johansen to get him. Have you seen the difference in defense play between the two teams (and I'm not just talking the 6 defensemen although there is a huge discrepancy there too). I'm sure Schneider would help maks some of our significant defensive difficiencies, however, it is only one piece. The other is having a future franchise Center which many of us believe Johansen will be.

Two independent things here. Yes to Schneider, no to moving Johansen from this fans perspective.

So what would be a good goalie to focus in on? Going back to the UFA list I posted earlier, there is not a whole lot out there. Either they are all older, like 34 and above, or career backups. Ray Emery is only 29, and he has proven to be a good goalie in the past. Other than that, not sure if Nabakov day's are past him or not, but he would be the other ok looking one.

v3rs3 01-14-2012 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by punk_o_holic (Post 42452409)
Think Dublin, Ohio, not sure how far apart the two cities are.

Dublin is a suburb of Columbus.

Xoggz22 01-14-2012 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyCanucks (Post 42462341)
So what would be a good goalie to focus in on? Going back to the UFA list I posted earlier, there is not a whole lot out there. Either they are all older, like 34 and above, or career backups. Ray Emery is only 29, and he has proven to be a good goalie in the past. Other than that, not sure if Nabakov day's are past him or not, but he would be the other ok looking one.

I think Schneider would be great. I like several other "backups" ready to start - maybe Lidback, Enroth, Holtby and I'm sure there are a few others. I'd like to see what Dekanich offers when healthy. I just don't think Johanssen is the price to give up. I would move Carter before Johanssen if we had to.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:32 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.