Luongo Thread - Scorcher 6: Global Meltdown (Mod Warning Post # 694)
View Single Post
08-20-2012, 08:40 PM
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: No Matter Which Rink
Just got to get to the playoffs, and "anything can happen". Teams that need a #1 goalie, are saying just that. There may only be a handful of places where Luongo would currently fit, but Luongo is a goalie that has proven to be one of the best #1's in the regular season. Why couldn't "anything happen" for a team with Luongo? I don't get it. Mike Leighton nearly won the cup, for.... Pete's sake!
I'm completely with Gillis on this one: if teams will only offer semi-scrubs and cap-dumps for Luongo, then let them stew in their own mess until they come crawling back with an actual hockey deal. I don't expect the world, but a top prospect, or a fairly high-quality NHLer, or top 10 draft pick is a must.
Only those who don't fully understand how his contract works, say it is too long. When he retires, he retires with no future cap-hit. Until then, he will be a starting goalie and completely worth his cap-hit. Pretty damn simple.
There is only 2 questions about Luongo: Would he screw-over his new team (down the road) and play out his full contract if he can't perform anymore, as a pricey back-up or AHLer? and ... How will Luongo/Schneider/Canucks deal with things if they can't reach a deal by the time the next season starts. The answer to the 1st question is pretty obvious, and I don't think the 2nd question "drops" Luongo's value (maybe a smidge or two, but not massively). Teams percieve that they might be able to out-wait Van, but that is a dangerous game to play, as Van is very likely to make the playoffs either way, while the team in need of a #1.... not so much. Van has the valuable asset that is in a position that is in a denial-demand. Inerested teams see Luongo's value, and want him. They say his contract is too big/long - that is their nearly-exclusive means of de-valuing him.... but don't be fooled, it's complete garbage: You either want him and his contract, or don't want him at all. There is none of this " I don't want him because of his contract, but I'll take him if I can get him for cheap" garbage. They would still be paying the same contract!
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by RunYouOutOfTheRink