HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Roberto Luongo

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-12-2009, 02:46 PM
  #76
phlocky
Registered User
 
phlocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moobles View Post
Yeah that'd be smart. Let's move two of our top players because they're *******- Daniel only being able to net two goals last game and Henrik a measly assist.

Sedins played and play good and there's no sense in moving them, I hope we don't lose them over the off-season. Our 'scrub' forwards played a good offensive game (though it could've been better) last game, that wasn't our problem it was our defense and defensive coordination.

Wow, so your offensive players weren't your problem and Luongo STILL couldn't advance you past the 2nd round??? All anyone wants to talk about here is how the Flyers defense needs improving. If that's the case then why would Luongo be the answer here??? Is the Flyers defense heads and tails above Vanc's??? Does Luongo need an elite defense in front of him to go along with a very good offense in front of him to have a chance of winning??? That's basically what you are saying.

If Vanc isn't a terrible team in front of him then, if he's as great as everyone makes him out to be, he should be able to carry them to playoffs success, something he has yet to do. The fact is that Luongo has shown that he CAN'T carry a team on his back in the manor of a Brodeur or Roy.

phlocky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 02:47 PM
  #77
Habsterix*
@Habsterix
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 500
As quickly as they jumped on the Canucks' bandwagon, as fast are the rats at deserting the ship now...

Habsterix* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 02:51 PM
  #78
phlocky
Registered User
 
phlocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,230
vCash: 500
Again, if he's signed or has an agreement ot an extension in principle in place then I'd be willing to trade Carter, a goo prospect and a 1st. I think that's more than enough and probably the highest price ever paid for a goalie. I don't think Patrick Roy even returned close to that much and he had already won the cup when he was traded. Honestyl, Roy at the time he was traded to th Avs >>> Luongo right now (even if extended).

phlocky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 02:59 PM
  #79
bobbyacro
 
bobbyacro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 328
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Lou View Post
I would not be opposed to trading him depending on the return. It would signal a full scale rebuild though so we'd most likely be looking for top-end prospects, and a chance to move up in this years draft. Then we'd tank next year and go for the lottery, and build on Hodgson/Schneider/Whoeverwedraft/WhoeverwegetintradeforLuongo.
Good luck fitting that on the back of a Jersey.

bobbyacro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 03:04 PM
  #80
ShootIt
Registered User
 
ShootIt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: 561
Country: United States
Posts: 7,086
vCash: 500
Vokoun
Allen
JBo's rights.

ShootIt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 03:27 PM
  #81
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 34,278
vCash: 500
Ryane Clowe, Jonathan Cheechoo, and a high pick or prospect except for Petrecki. That would be all I'd be willing to offer Vancouver for Roberto Luongo from the Sharks' perspective.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 03:35 PM
  #82
The Pucks
Registered User
 
The Pucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,589
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Ryane Clowe, Jonathan Cheechoo, and a high pick or prospect except for Petrecki. That would be all I'd be willing to offer Vancouver for Roberto Luongo from the Sharks' perspective.

And what do you do with Nabakov?


Nabakov, Vlasic and SJ 1st would get Vancouver thinking I would suspect.

The Pucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 03:38 PM
  #83
The Pucks
Registered User
 
The Pucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,589
vCash: 500
Despite everybody being on Luongo's case now, I tend to think alot of Vancouvers lack of success in the 2nd round are because of the horrible play of Ohlund and Mitchell. The fleet footed Chicago forwards made the two of them look bad, real bad.

But another persepective, was Vancouvers defence that bad or Chicagos forwards that good?

The Pucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 04:18 PM
  #84
myrocketsgotcracked
Registered User
 
myrocketsgotcracked's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country:
Posts: 1,871
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by phlocky View Post
So I have a queation, are the Nucks just a terribel team or what??? I mean Luongo is suppoe to be an absolutely awesome goalie and he puts up nice numbers and all but what has he really done in the playoffs??? In 3 years with the Nucks he's won just 2 playoff series so is it that he's really not that great or is it that the entire team in front of him sucks???
the team in the 07 playoff weren't very good. especially in the 2nd round, where the sedins were sick and a declining naslund on the first line. our 2nd line had jan bulis on it! cooke and kesler was hurt. our best skaters that playoff was linden, pyatt and ohlund. we were up against 2 norris trophy winners and a whole lot of offense in the ducks. we were outshot 2-1 in the 2nd round, and luongo was the only reason we had a chance to win every game. don cherry said that was the greatest playoff goaltending performance he had ever saw!
the team this year is miles better on paper. and the way they dominated the blues in the first round, seems to be capable of something special. but somewhere along the way he lost his focus against the hawks. maybe it was the constant traffic in front of him, the accidental/on purpose bumping, or whatever, luongo wasn't playing up to par this series. he wasn't always bad, he was awesome in the first 2 periods of game 1, first period of game 2, first period of game 6 and all of game 3 and 4. so he played fine for most of the series, but when he (and his D) wasn't on top of his game the hawks scored in bunches.
i guess what i'm trying to say is, don't count out luongo yet. 3 out of 4 playoff series he played in, he was awesome. against the hawks he was average for his standard, and played well enough at times, but the hawks was just too good offensively.

as for a trade, how about luongo + 1st rounder in 09 for carter + sbisa?? too much? not enough?

myrocketsgotcracked is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 04:21 PM
  #85
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 34,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Pucks View Post
And what do you do with Nabakov?


Nabakov, Vlasic and SJ 1st would get Vancouver thinking I would suspect.
Nabokov would either list teams he would accept going to or gets bought out/waived. With only one year remaining on his deal, like Luongo, it's not that big of a hit to the Sharks.

There's no way that the Sharks would part with Marc-Edouard Vlasic for Roberto Luongo and his one year. This trade is based on his current deal with no foresight to an extension. I sincerely doubt he would re-sign with San Jose so his value in a trade to them is going to take a dive.

You're not going to get any player under the age of 25 that's already playing a pivotal role in the NHL for Roberto Luongo.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 04:26 PM
  #86
The Pucks
Registered User
 
The Pucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,589
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Nabokov would either list teams he would accept going to or gets bought out/waived. With only one year remaining on his deal, like Luongo, it's not that big of a hit to the Sharks.

There's no way that the Sharks would part with Marc-Edouard Vlasic for Roberto Luongo and his one year. This trade is based on his current deal with no foresight to an extension. I sincerely doubt he would re-sign with San Jose so his value in a trade to them is going to take a dive.

You're not going to get any player under the age of 25 that's already playing a pivotal role in the NHL for Roberto Luongo.
What your not giving any consideration or value to is that you get exclusive negotiating rights with Roberto for a full year. You can not make the blanket statment that your only dealing for one year of his services because of his contract.

But if you were the GM of San Jose and were talking a deal for Roberto its pretty safe to say that you wouldnt be spending to much time on it, the phone wouldnt be getting answered after the 1st call.

The Pucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 04:34 PM
  #87
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 34,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Pucks View Post
What your not giving any consideration or value to is that you get exclusive negotiating rights with Roberto for a full year. You can not make the blanket statment that your only dealing for one year of his services because of his contract.

But if you were the GM of San Jose and were talking a deal for Roberto its pretty safe to say that you wouldnt be spending to much time on it, the phone wouldnt be getting answered after the 1st call.
And you're giving very little consideration to the other GM who is basically being asked to pay a very heavy price without any sort of guarantee. No GM in his right mind is going to give up any young NHL asset for one season of a superstar. You can't ask a GM to think beyond what is guaranteed given that the asking price for the player is what most will be asking.

This is why Roberto Luongo is not going to be dealt unless the Canucks tank it next year and they can dump him at the deadline. Exclusive negotiating rights for a year is not worth trading a young NHL asset.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 04:59 PM
  #88
Luck 6
\\_______
 
Luck 6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,476
vCash: 500
If we're trading Lu we expect high end value. He screwed us last night... But he's still an all-star goalie.

If we're talking Philly I'd want Carter and JVR or Giroux coming back.

I think something along these lines would be good for both teams... Especially if the twins don't re-sign. Vancouver would be extremely deep down the center with young talent in Kesler, Carter, and Hodgson. We'd just have to hope Schnieder can step in before too long... Throw a long term deal at J-Bo maybe... See what we can do!

Philly gets an all-star goalie and instantly becomes a cup contender... They have enough young forward talent waiting in the minors to fill the excess.

Luck 6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 05:06 PM
  #89
The Pucks
Registered User
 
The Pucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,589
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
And you're giving very little consideration to the other GM who is basically being asked to pay a very heavy price without any sort of guarantee. No GM in his right mind is going to give up any young NHL asset for one season of a superstar. You can't ask a GM to think beyond what is guaranteed given that the asking price for the player is what most will be asking.
If Luongo was to be dealt I think your above statements would make you look very foolish.

The Pucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 05:21 PM
  #90
NWAvs
Registered User
 
NWAvs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Seattle
Country: Germany
Posts: 4,878
vCash: 500
Luongo for Brodeur STRAIGHT UP! What a shake up that would cause.

NWAvs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 05:31 PM
  #91
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 34,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Pucks View Post
If Luongo was to be dealt I think your above statements would make you look very foolish.
If you can give an instance where a superstar was dealt with one year to go and a young player is going the other way, I can see where you're coming from. However, that doesn't happen and it won't happen here either. Roberto Luongo's not going to get dealt just like Marian Gaborik wasn't dealt. Vancouver's not going to deal him for what is realistically out there. Philly's not going to trade JVR, Giroux, or Carter for one season of Roberto Luongo. No team is going to pay that much unless there is a contract extension agreed upon before the deal is made.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 05:39 PM
  #92
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Beukeboom Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luck 6 View Post
If we're trading Lu we expect high end value. He screwed us last night... But he's still an all-star goalie.

If we're talking Philly I'd want Carter and JVR or Giroux coming back.

I think something along these lines would be good for both teams... Especially if the twins don't re-sign. Vancouver would be extremely deep down the center with young talent in Kesler, Carter, and Hodgson. We'd just have to hope Schnieder can step in before too long... Throw a long term deal at J-Bo maybe... See what we can do!

Philly gets an all-star goalie and instantly becomes a cup contender... They have enough young forward talent waiting in the minors to fill the excess.
And that why you are delusional. We're talking about one year of a very good goalie who was the positive difference maker in ONE of his 4 post season series. And goalies NEVER get traded for the sort of value you're talking about, especially when they're ONE year from UFA eligibility.

I don't see how instantly PHI becomes a cup contender, as they have several holes on the blueline they need to address as well, and won't have the cap room to do so because they've got $7M tied up in a net. You're talking about trading 12+ combined years of contribution from Carter & Giroux for one year of Luongo.

Bottom line for me - for Luongo to earn $7M, he's got to steal his team at least one game per play-off series, and he sure didn't show that against Chicago. He had some great stats against STL, but I'm not sure if the was a reflection how dominant he was, or the Blues just being happy of making the P/O's.

Beukeboom Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 05:43 PM
  #93
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Beukeboom Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Pucks View Post
If Luongo was to be dealt I think your above statements would make you look very foolish.
Best goalie traded during his prime - Patrick Roy. Return - 2 highly regarding goaltending prospects (Thibault & ?-Fichaud), a nice 2nd liner (Martin Rucinsky), and a decent 3rd liner (Kovelenko-?). Even granted the Keenan factor, what has Luongo done over the last 3 years to significantly increase his value? He's still a great regular season goalie with a questionable instead of unknown play-off resume (2 series win in 3 years).

Goalies don't get traded for HUGE returns, especially guys who are making $7M and only signed for one more year. Expecting multiple young blue-chip assets is insanely optimistic IMO.


Last edited by Beukeboom Fan: 05-12-2009 at 05:54 PM.
Beukeboom Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 05:45 PM
  #94
The Pucks
Registered User
 
The Pucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,589
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
If you can give an instance where a superstar was dealt with one year to go and a young player is going the other way, I can see where you're coming from. However, that doesn't happen and it won't happen here either. Roberto Luongo's not going to get dealt just like Marian Gaborik wasn't dealt. Vancouver's not going to deal him for what is realistically out there. Philly's not going to trade JVR, Giroux, or Carter for one season of Roberto Luongo. No team is going to pay that much unless there is a contract extension agreed upon before the deal is made.
Let me throw this back at you, when was the last time an NHL "Superstar" was dealt with one year on his contract left before UFA?

The Pucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 05:49 PM
  #95
Ghostbuster
#FireEakins
 
Ghostbuster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 7,330
vCash: 156
Oilers offer
Gilbert+Chorney+Eberle+1st 10

Canucks get a possible top pairing puck mover. A great prospect D-man. Eberle who was amazing with Hodgeson at the World Juniors and our 1st. However this is only a dream as we'll never trade.

Ghostbuster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 05:53 PM
  #96
The Pucks
Registered User
 
The Pucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,589
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beukeboom Fan View Post
Best goalie traded during his prime - Patrick Roy. Return - 2 highly regarding goaltending prospects (Thibault & ?), a nice 2nd liner (Martin Rucinsky), and a decent 3rd liner (?). Even granted the Keenan factor, what has Luongo done over the last 3 years to significantly increase his value? He's still a great regular season goalie with a questionable instead of unknown play-off resume (2 series win in 3 years).

Goalies don't get traded for HUGE returns, especially guys who are making $7M and only signed for one more year. Expecting multiple young blue-chip assets is insanely optimistic IMO.
I will also throw in the well documented offer that was made to Vancouver the day they dealt for Luongo. Vinnie Lecavalier strait up for Roberto.

Its all about supply and demand, who is looking for what, and who the player is.

For an example, if Luongo was on the market and you were Vancouvers GM, who would you approach, Montreal or the Rangers? Montreal of course. Would Montreal be willing to anti up? No doubt.

At the time of the Roy trade, the players they received were extreamly highly thought of. The 3 players that Montreal got were Andrei Kovalenko, Martin Rucinsky and Thibault. All 3 were 25 or younger, all 3 were either already good NHL players or very highly thought of.

The Pucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 06:02 PM
  #97
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Beukeboom Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Pucks View Post
I will also throw in the well documented offer that was made to Vancouver the day they dealt for Luongo. Vinnie Lecavalier strait up for Roberto.

Its all about supply and demand, who is looking for what, and who the player is.

For an example, if Luongo was on the market and you were Vancouvers GM, who would you approach, Montreal or the Rangers? Montreal of course. Would Montreal be willing to anti up? No doubt.

At the time of the Roy trade, the players they received were extreamly highly thought of. The 3 players that Montreal got were Andrei Kovalenko, Martin Rucinsky and Thibault. All 3 were 25 or younger, all 3 were either already good NHL players or very highly thought of.
And none of the 3 players were elite players at the time of the trade. You're talking about the 2nd highest goal scorer in the league (who is still only 23'ish), and is locked up for 4 more years, as well as a blue-chip prospect. And Roy was a play-off warrior 2 time Cup winner, one of those times with an underdog team.

Luongo's value is significantly impacted on a team ability to sign him to a long term extension. With the salary cap, no GM is going to move multiple young (aka-cheap) assets for a guy who hasn't proven it in the P/O's IMO.

And as much as I'm a Hawks fan - it's not like they're the 80's Oilers. IMO, all he needs to do is not luck Havlat's shot go right through him in game 4 and the series is practically over.

Beukeboom Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 06:02 PM
  #98
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 34,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Pucks View Post
I will also throw in the well documented offer that was made to Vancouver the day they dealt for Luongo. Vinnie Lecavalier strait up for Roberto.

Its all about supply and demand, who is looking for what, and who the player is.

For an example, if Luongo was on the market and you were Vancouvers GM, who would you approach, Montreal or the Rangers? Montreal of course. Would Montreal be willing to anti up? No doubt.

At the time of the Roy trade, the players they received were extreamly highly thought of. The 3 players that Montreal got were Andrei Kovalenko, Martin Rucinsky and Thibault. All 3 were 25 or younger, all 3 were either already good NHL players or very highly thought of.
The day the Canucks acquired Roberto Luongo, he wasn't slated to be an unrestricted free agent the following year. Like it or not, contract status heavily affects player value.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 06:27 PM
  #99
The Vengabus
Registered User
 
The Vengabus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,672
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
The day the Canucks acquired Roberto Luongo, he wasn't slated to be an unrestricted free agent the following year. Like it or not, contract status heavily affects player value.
You're making yourself look foolish. This is exactly waht Pucks is talking about, that: Luongo did in fact only have one more year on his contract and the Lecavalier trade offer was the on the table assuming Nonis could not negotiate an extension with Luongo.

The Vengabus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2009, 06:31 PM
  #100
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 34,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Factorial View Post
You're making yourself look foolish. This is exactly waht Pucks is talking about, that: Luongo did in fact only have one more year on his contract and the Lecavalier trade offer was the on the table assuming Nonis could not negotiate an extension with Luongo.
He was a restricted free agent.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:03 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.