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.

Toronto Maple Leafs- Goalie Situation #2

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-17-2012, 08:51 AM
  #51
Rinzler
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mississauga
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by You Know View Post
Exactly, just like when Rask supplanted Thomas as the Boston starter a couple of seasons ago. Oh wait.
That situation is different. We are talking about the star player former captain being benched when the season is on the line and Luongo was playing well.

That didn't happen in Boston, Thomas was terrible that year and lost his starter status long before the playoffs.

Rinzler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 08:58 AM
  #52
Kylie Sven Opossum
DocClownSucker
 
Kylie Sven Opossum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Socratic Method Man View Post
You believe you found flaws in another's logic, yet you don't take the time to proofread your own logic.

Do you truly believe there is NOT a flaw in your logic? Let me repeat your statement: " If Luongo was truly one of the best goalies in the league, he wouldn't be on the trade block".

Lets try a thought experiment. We are in the year 1994. We are the GMs of our team and our goalie tandem consists of Patrick Roy and Dominik Hasek. They are both quite good goalies, and Hasek is posting ridiculous 93+% save precentages, with Roy posting still amazing 92+% save percentages.

They both want to play every game of the season. This presents a potential problem. So what should we do? Perhaps we consider trading Roy away?

Well, assuming what you say is logical - "If Luongo was truly one of the best goalies in the league, he wouldn't be on the trade block"

Then the following phrase must also be logical - "If Roy was truly one of the best goalies in the league, he wouldn't be on the trade block."

Then in our situation, If we were to trade Patrick Roy to another team, it would mean Roy is not one of the best goalies in the league.

Yet we know this cannot be true, because Roy is easily amongst the top 10 goalies of all time. It just so happens that Hasek is too.

Thus, your statement CANNOT be logical. It does not follow logic. So it is logically flawed, and thus, absolutely meaningless.

I wish posters would check to see if what they are saying violates logical cohesion before they post. Especially when their post is criticising the logic of another poster.
To me the poster's intention is clear; he isn't arguing whether or not luongo should be on the trading block, but rather if he is as good as some say...

Roy, he ain't.

Kylie Sven Opossum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 09:13 AM
  #53
Evil Edler
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Evil Edler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,764
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kylie Sven Opossum View Post
To me the poster's intention is clear; he isn't arguing whether or not luongo should be on the trading block, but rather if he is as good as some say...

Roy, he ain't.
You missed the point.

Evil Edler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 09:14 AM
  #54
Intense Rage
Registered User
 
Intense Rage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,114
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kylie Sven Opossum View Post
To me the poster's intention is clear; he isn't arguing whether or not luongo should be on the trading block, but rather if he is as good as some say...

Roy, he ain't.
I agree with this. Luongo is not the goalie that I think is capable of carrying his team in order to win a Cup. Having watched him closely the past few years, I have to say having him on my team in the playoffs would be a nail biting experience as I would never be sure which goalie I am going to get. The guy will never be the kind of guy that inspires confidence in his team come playoff time.

The only way I would be willing to take a shot with him on my team is if my team's window was small and there were absolutely no alternatives in goal. Somehow I don't see either Toronto or Florida fitting the bill.

Intense Rage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 09:15 AM
  #55
Dark Knight
ScorchedEarthRebuild
 
Dark Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,309
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Model T View Post
The bolded just blows my mind every time I see it on these boards, which is often because Leafs fans are numerous and chittery.

Let me ask you this. The Leafs are supposed to be interested in Rick Nash. Do you think you could, in real life, trade Mike Komisarek and a 4th to get Rick Nash?

If you think yes: stop reading now, please don't ever speak to me.
If you think no: now consider that Luongo is a top 10 player in the league at his position and is on a good contract (yes, even though it runs until he's 43, since he's going to retire before than happens). Rick Nash is not a top 10 player in the league at his position, is debatable for top 20 at his position, and is on a terrible contract (yes, even though it ends before he's 43).

The Canucks also don't have to trade Luongo, since they can in fact keep using a goalie tandem, and they can in fact pay Schneider any salary he can reasonably demand and keep him. It's not the best of situations but guess what, they can afford to do it and I think they're a lot more likely to suck it up than to slaughter their team for the sake of the Leafs.

I'm a Flames fan and despise the Canucks and even I'm ticked off by this attitude. Luongo's got his flaws but they are not severe enough that he's not still one of the best goalies in the league.
Holy! What an overreaction.

The Leafs ARE interested in Rick Nash and are willing to pay a good price for him but it is none other than Scott Howson whose asking price is so ridiculous that even a big-name obsessed freak like Glen Sather is having second thoughts about it. 2 quality roster players and 2 prospects is the price that has been publicized. Count me as a Leafs fan who loves Nash and would love him on Toronto, but won't be willing to pay that price at all.

As far as Luongo is concerned there is a bit of uncertainty on what his perceived value is. Gillis hasn't been very vocal about it and even Nonis and Burke have been hush hush. Both fan bases are delusional to an extent but if you go by what the reporters are saying, which is that there is no significant interest shown in Luongo despite him being a top 10 Goalie in the league, because of his monster of a contract. It is absolutely within limits to try to low-ball Canucks into giving him away for a lesser deal.

To be honest, Canucks fans are absolutely delusional for even asking about Jake Gardiner and the 5th overall that I see time to time from their fan base. I die a little inside.

When the Flyers were in cap trouble, Steve Yzerman low-balled them and acquired Simon Gagne (back when he was actually a solid player) for Matt Walker and a 5th, I believe. No way that was Simon Gagne's actual value, but Holmgren's hands were tied and that was the best package offered at that time.

Burke might pay a little bit more based on who Luongo is and the fact that he likes when both teams benefit from the deal, but based on his inflated deal the Canucks should be lucky to get anything of value for him.

And I disagree with you that they can keep Luongo after this fiasco. It is clear that the fans want a change and Schneider is the golden boy now. If Schneider plays another year where his playing time is uncertain, he might be turned off to the extent that he plans to move out or sign an offer sheet.

The most I'd offer from the Leafs is a Tim Connolly who will have to go for salary purpose but is a solid top 9 forward + a 2nd round pick. The absolutely most I'd do is maybe give Joe Colborne along with Mike Komisiarek. Colborne is one of our better prospects.

Something can be worked around it with a minor addition in terms of a prospect or pick but not much more. They're not getting Kadri, Gardiner, Schenn or 5th overall that they're dreaming for. That's what I call delusional, not Leafs fans.

__________________
http://www.turbozone.ca/wp-content/uploads/Turbozone_for-postup.jpg
Dark Knight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 09:26 AM
  #56
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,301
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Knight View Post
The most I'd offer from the Leafs is a Tim Connolly who will have to go for salary purpose but is a solid top 9 forward + a 2nd round pick. The absolutely most I'd do is maybe give Joe Colborne along with Mike Komisiarek. Colborne is one of our better prospects.

Something can be worked around it with a minor addition in terms of a prospect or pick but not much more. They're not getting Kadri, Gardiner, Schenn or 5th overall that they're dreaming for. That's what I call delusional, not Leafs fans.
So an okay prospect and something with less value than nothing? Rather put Luongo on waiver then touch Komisarek. Read my post prior because while I agree fifth overall and Gardiner are a non-starter, as they should be. You and other proposing absolute garbage is just as equally delusional. Luongo makes Toronto a playoff team next season. The hell does Komisarek do in Vancouver besides fetch Gatorade?

Bourne Endeavor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 09:42 AM
  #57
Intense Rage
Registered User
 
Intense Rage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,114
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
So an okay prospect and something with less value than nothing? Rather put Luongo on waiver then touch Komisarek. Read my post prior because while I agree fifth overall and Gardiner are a non-starter, as they should be. You and other proposing absolute garbage is just as equally delusional. Luongo makes Toronto a playoff team next season. The hell does Komisarek do in Vancouver besides fetch Gatorade?
Does he really? There is always something wrong with the Leafs every year, its either the goaltending wasn't good enough, the defense was not good, the PK sucked, etc...

Eventually you just have to admit the problem is systemic. Leafs may tank even with Luongo in the pipes next year. They will just find new ways to lose.

Intense Rage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 09:53 AM
  #58
therealkoho
Gary says it's A-OK
 
therealkoho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: the Prior
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nucks N Canes View Post
The richards signing as well as kovy and savard all show teams that are willing to spend momey in the future that they arent getting value for. Why is luongo any dofferent?

Exactly this, why is a third party team expected to pay for the "mistake" made by the club who wants to move the contract?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< <

While I in no way believe that Luongo can be had for Lombardi and a 4th rnd/pk as an example, I also do not believe that Gillis is going to get a bucket full of picks, prospects and front-line NHL players, precisely because of the contract. Unless the deal is perhaps expanded into a multi-player deal.

What is true is that for that contract to be moved Gillis will have to take back money, that is the reality of the cap world, if you don't think so then you just haven't been paying attention to the league. However it would not be short term money it would have to something in the medium range, perhaps a JMLiles type contract who is a useful player plus a prospect and a pick with some conditions attached.

therealkoho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 10:08 AM
  #59
You Know
Registered User
 
You Know's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rinzler View Post
That situation is different. We are talking about the star player former captain being benched when the season is on the line and Luongo was playing well.

That didn't happen in Boston, Thomas was terrible that year and lost his starter status long before the playoffs.
So this situation is worse, and Luongo has to be moved because he played well and lost his starter status for a couple of games instead of losing that role for a big chunk of the season? He played so well he has to be moved?

You said it would be a nightmare to manage for a whole season and that one has to be moved quickly. I've cited an example as to why I don't think that is the case.

Only on HFBoards is having two stellar goaltenders who have shown that they have been able to play well together as a tandem a liability.

You Know is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 10:30 AM
  #60
GordieHoweHatTrick
Registered User
 
GordieHoweHatTrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 13,814
vCash: 500
The most significant aspect people keep overlooking is that if the Canucks keep Luongo, they may only be able to re-sign Schneider to just a year.

If Vancouver keeps Luongo who really thinks Schneider will sign for anything more than just a year (then hit UFA next off-season)? I'd like to see a show of hands of fans who are delusional enough to think they could keep two #1s on the same team without any dissension.

People act like the ball is in Toronto's court (I can't disagree that there may be some pressure to make a move) but if Canucks fans care enough about their own team they'll start looking at it from their pov instead of trolling Maple Leafs fans. Gillis could gamble and try and keep both but I bet the writing will be on the wall for Schneiderand his camp, at the point he'll go UFA next off-season.

Can't wait to see the list of naive fans who think Schneider is so selfless that he'll run the risk of playing second-fiddle for the better parts of his career or that Luongo will be ok playing second fiddle because "he wants what's best for the team."


Last edited by GordieHoweHatTrick: 06-17-2012 at 10:37 AM.
GordieHoweHatTrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 10:35 AM
  #61
GordieHoweHatTrick
Registered User
 
GordieHoweHatTrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 13,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by You Know View Post
So this situation is worse, and Luongo has to be moved because he played well and lost his starter status for a couple of games instead of losing that role for a big chunk of the season? He played so well he has to be moved?

You said it would be a nightmare to manage for a whole season and that one has to be moved quickly. I've cited an example as to why I don't think that is the case.

Only on HFBoards is having two stellar goaltenders who have shown that they have been able to play well together as a tandem a liability.
Rask wasn't approaching UFA pal, the situations are not similiar. Look outside the box

GordieHoweHatTrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 10:46 AM
  #62
sabresandcanucks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GordieHoweHatTrick View Post
The most significant aspect people keep overlooking is that if the Canucks keep Luongo, they may only be able to re-sign Schneider to just a year.

If Vancouver keeps Luongo who really thinks Schneider will sign for anything more than just a year (then hit UFA next off-season)? I'd like to see a show of hands of fans who are delusional enough to think they could keep two #1s on the same team without any dissension.

People act like the ball is in Toronto's court (I can't disagree that there may be some pressure to make a move) but if Canucks fans care enough about their own team they'll start looking at it from their pov instead of trolling Maple Leafs fans. Gillis could gamble and try and keep both but I bet the writing will be on the wall for Schneiderand his camp, at the point he'll go UFA next off-season.

Can't wait to see the list of naive fans who think Schneider is so selfless that he'll run the risk of playing second-fiddle for the better parts of his career or that Luongo will be ok playing second fiddle because "he wants what's best for the team."
Perhaps,

but it's a little of both...The Leafs need a goaltender but neither side wants to lose this trade. Even if Vancouver only signs Schneider to a one year contract that will still buy them another year to potentially shop Luongo...Lets be honest, the market might be at its peak mid next season ( assuming there is a season ) if somebodies starting goalie goes down.

Vancouver needs either a top 4 D man or a top 6 forward coming back in any Luongo trade...if they cannot get that now they would be best to be patient...

As for the Leafs, if they are committed to the rebuild, they should look at Bernier and let him and Reimer battle it out next season.

sabresandcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 10:46 AM
  #63
JKsilverstick*
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 884
vCash: 500
One of the closest comparisons in recent memory is the Brian Campbell trade. A top pairing defenceman with too big of a cap hit, and a starting goalie with too long of a cap hit. In a cap world, contract length like that is probably a bigger concern, but ignoring that, very similar situations.

What did Chicago get for Campbell? An AHL player signed to a 3-year 3.1 million dollar cap hit.

The Luongo deal will likely be similar, if it even happens. The benefits to trading Luongo will be escaping a longer cap hit and a larger cap hit, just like Chicago. Which means it would probably be somebody expendable in the 3-million dollar range like Lombardi or Armstrong, and maybe a mid-range pick that can be thrown in.

At first glance, salary dump and a pick seems like too little. When you actually look into the situation, that's pretty much exactly what can be expected.

As for people suggesting that Vancouver will just leave Luongo on the team, that is a very hard thing to do after your fans have more-or-less run the player out of town.

JKsilverstick* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 10:52 AM
  #64
CommonMeans*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JKsilverstick View Post
One of the closest comparisons in recent memory is the Brian Campbell trade. A top pairing defenceman with too big of a cap hit, and a starting goalie with too long of a cap hit. In a cap world, contract length like that is probably a bigger concern, but ignoring that, very similar situations.

What did Chicago get for Campbell? An AHL player signed to a 3-year 3.1 million dollar cap hit.

The Luongo deal will likely be similar, if it even happens. The benefits to trading Luongo will be escaping a longer cap hit and a larger cap hit, just like Chicago. Which means it would probably be somebody expendable in the 3-million dollar range like Lombardi or Armstrong, and maybe a mid-range pick that can be thrown in.

At first glance, salary dump and a pick seems like too little. When you actually look into the situation, that's pretty much exactly what can be expected.

As for people suggesting that Vancouver will just leave Luongo on the team, that is a very hard thing to do after your fans have more-or-less run the player out of town.
You realize that Brian Campbell is less of an impact player than Luongo and also has a cap hit that is 1.8mil higher, right?

CommonMeans* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 10:53 AM
  #65
sabresandcanucks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JKsilverstick View Post
One of the closest comparisons in recent memory is the Brian Campbell trade. A top pairing defenceman with too big of a cap hit, and a starting goalie with too long of a cap hit. In a cap world, contract length like that is probably a bigger concern, but ignoring that, very similar situations.

What did Chicago get for Campbell? An AHL player signed to a 3-year 3.1 million dollar cap hit.

The Luongo deal will likely be similar, if it even happens. The benefits to trading Luongo will be escaping a longer cap hit and a larger cap hit, just like Chicago. Which means it would probably be somebody expendable in the 3-million dollar range like Lombardi or Armstrong, and maybe a mid-range pick that can be thrown in.

At first glance, salary dump and a pick seems like too little. When you actually look into the situation, that's pretty much exactly what can be expected.

As for people suggesting that Vancouver will just leave Luongo on the team, that is a very hard thing to do after your fans have more-or-less run the player out of town.
Thats being too selective,

Vancouver fans will post the Jeff Carter trade to CBJ last summer as their example. The difference between Chicago's and Vancouver's situation is that Vancouver is not in a CAP bind. Vancouver can be patient so long as Schneider signs for at least one year.

sabresandcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 10:57 AM
  #66
GordieHoweHatTrick
Registered User
 
GordieHoweHatTrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 13,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabresandcanucks View Post
Perhaps,

but it's a little of both...The Leafs need a goaltender but neither side wants to lose this trade. Even if Vancouver only signs Schneider to a one year contract that will still buy them another year to potentially shop Luongo...Lets be honest, the market might be at its peak mid next season ( assuming there is a season ) if somebodies starting goalie goes down.

Vancouver needs either a top 4 D man or a top 6 forward coming back in any Luongo trade...if they cannot get that now they would be best to be patient...

As for the Leafs, if they are committed to the rebuild, they should look at Bernier and let him and Reimer battle it out next season.
That could be the case but no one could be certain of what the market will dictate 10 months from now. If Gillis keeps both Canucks fans need to understand he's gambling because in 10 months time the matter may be completely out of his hands -- Schneider will decide his own future and if Gillis decides to try and keep him at that point he may be forced to actually sell Luongo as a cap-dump to do so.

Delusional Leafs fans need to understand Komisarek isn't likely going to be involved and delusional Canucks fans need to understand neither Gardiner or the 5th is likely to involved either if we're going to have a sensible discussion.

This thread has done a real good job of highlighting the Maple Leafs and Canucks homers though, you know who you are. It's a pain to read y'all bicker back-and-forth.

GordieHoweHatTrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 10:59 AM
  #67
Petes2424
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,111
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabresandcanucks View Post
Thats being too selective,

Vancouver fans will post the Jeff Carter trade to CBJ last summer as their example. The difference between Chicago's and Vancouver's situation is that Vancouver is not in a CAP bind. Vancouver can be patient so long as Schneider signs for at least one year.
There's a big problem with Schneider only signing for one year. They dont want to head into next offseason in a terrible mess with Luongo very irritated and unhappy and Schneider approaching UFA. Luongo has to be moved over the next 8-10 months. If he's not, Schneider WILL walk for a guaranteed, no drama #1 spot.

Petes2424 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 11:01 AM
  #68
CommonMeans*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Petes2424 View Post
There's a big problem with Schneider only signing for one year. They dont want to head into next offseason in a terrible mess with Luongo very irritated and unhappy and Schneider approaching UFA. Luongo has to be moved over the next 8-10 months. If he's not, Schneider WILL walk for a guaranteed, no drama #1 spot.
Just stop with the fake-fix of having to deal Luongo soon. Again, if the value for Luongo is what some here suggest - one of a LACK and 2nd - then Schneider is traded instead. Fix over.

CommonMeans* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 11:07 AM
  #69
sabresandcanucks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Petes2424 View Post
There's a big problem with Schneider only signing for one year. They dont want to head into next offseason in a terrible mess with Luongo very irritated and unhappy and Schneider approaching UFA. Luongo has to be moved over the next 8-10 months. If he's not, Schneider WILL walk for a guaranteed, no drama #1 spot.
You gotta do what you gotta do, Gillis gets paid a lot of money to do a job. It is risky but you have to keep all your options on the table. They could still sign Schneider long term next year and bury Luongo in the minors...or they could trade Schneider and keep Luongo.

For all the talk about goaltending, Vancouver's real needs are finding another top 6 forward and top 4 D man. With Eddie Lack in the system they will be strong in goal regardless of who stays and who goes.

sabresandcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 11:17 AM
  #70
JKsilverstick*
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CommonMeans View Post
You realize that Brian Campbell is less of an impact player than Luongo and also has a cap hit that is 1.8mil higher, right?
Luongo is not that much more of an impact player than Campbell. His cap hit was 1.8 million higher, but also 6 years shorter. Goalies also receive less on average in trade than skaters, yet I still used a greatly superior cap dump than Chicago got (3 years vs. 1 year), and suggested throwing in a mid-round pick.

JKsilverstick* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 11:21 AM
  #71
CommonMeans*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JKsilverstick View Post
Luongo is not that much more of an impact player than Campbell. His cap hit was 1.8 million higher, but also 6 years shorter. Goalies also receive less on average in trade than skaters, yet I still used a greatly superior cap dump than Chicago got (3 years vs. 1 year), and suggested throwing in a mid-round pick.
I disagree on all fronts. Luongo is not a cap dump. Any deal attempting to paint it as such is ridiculous.

CommonMeans* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 11:26 AM
  #72
Kylie Sven Opossum
DocClownSucker
 
Kylie Sven Opossum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godless Servant View Post
You missed the point.
um sure I did. The poster said Luongo is not great in playoffs, and that his contract is long and bloated; that was his point lol. If you want to argue whether this makes him a high-valued commodity with guaranteed high return, then be my guest.

Kylie Sven Opossum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 11:26 AM
  #73
stlblues57
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 190
vCash: 500
I just wanted to stop by and say that neither Halak or Elliott is going to be moved.

Carry on.

stlblues57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 11:27 AM
  #74
sabresandcanucks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JKsilverstick View Post
Luongo is not that much more of an impact player than Campbell. His cap hit was 1.8 million higher, but also 6 years shorter. Goalies also receive less on average in trade than skaters, yet I still used a greatly superior cap dump than Chicago got (3 years vs. 1 year), and suggested throwing in a mid-round pick.
This isn't a poor example by any means...but the situation was different, Chicago was frantic to get rid of that contract, I don't believe Vancouver is under the same pressure. Gillis will keep Luongo and sign Schneider to a one year deal if he has to.

Also, one could argue that Campbelle was a key reason why the Panther's made the playoffs this past season...proving that there is value in acquiring these older players with long contracts. Essentially, people need to understand that there is a player behind the contract who might be worth the danger their contract carries.

sabresandcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2012, 11:27 AM
  #75
Soups On
Registered User
 
Soups On's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Port Coquitlam
Country: Canada
Posts: 622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JKsilverstick View Post
One of the closest comparisons in recent memory is the Brian Campbell trade. A top pairing defenceman with too big of a cap hit, and a starting goalie with too long of a cap hit. In a cap world, contract length like that is probably a bigger concern, but ignoring that, very similar situations.

What did Chicago get for Campbell? An AHL player signed to a 3-year 3.1 million dollar cap hit.

The Luongo deal will likely be similar, if it even happens. The benefits to trading Luongo will be escaping a longer cap hit and a larger cap hit, just like Chicago. Which means it would probably be somebody expendable in the 3-million dollar range like Lombardi or Armstrong, and maybe a mid-range pick that can be thrown in.

At first glance, salary dump and a pick seems like too little. When you actually look into the situation, that's pretty much exactly what can be expected.

As for people suggesting that Vancouver will just leave Luongo on the team, that is a very hard thing to do after your fans have more-or-less run the player out of town.
You don't actually believe that do you? I can't fabricate the thought process behind one of LACK and a late round pick. I know Leaf fans want to get amazing value for their 'garbage' but in what World does that help the Canucks? Do they get better with one year of say Lombardi? There is so much room for a potential good trade and Gillis is gonna opt for that room. Toronto has some valuable assets (some being valued to high but I don't follow the Leafs enough to say they aren't) and their prospect pool can be replenished with their top pick this year (and potential to sign Schultz).

Both GM's realize they can both benefit from a trade and that's going to happen. No Luongo won't get Gardiner + the 5th overall and no way in hell will he get Mike ****in Komiserak + a late round.

Vancouver probably values Kulemin, Ashton and Frattin the most out of the TML forwards because of their natural ability to play RW effectively (we already have Sedin, Booth and Higgins who are above say MacArthur) and with tenacity. Schenn, though having a terrible season, would heavily help Vancouver if he can get back into form (and he will now that the turd known as Wilson is gone). Prospects like Ashton, Kadri and Colborne are needed for both parties, but Toronto can afford to give one of those assets up if it fixes their biggest issue since ever (Franchise goaltender). Out of LACK, I feel only Connolly would be targeted (1 year contract and partial replacement for Kesler)

I could see 1 of 2 possibilities happening if a FAIR deal goes down.

Schenn + Ashton/Colborne + Connolly + pick for Luongo + Raymond/Pick

Kulemin + Colborne + Connolly for Luongo + Raymond

My gauging of value again may be off because I've followed Luongo for years now and I know he's an excellent goaltender despite what all his rabid haters think. Note that Raymond is added as a compensation for Burke if he feels his forward depth is thinning out

After listing out the roster after both trades, I think Toronto is better off trading Schenn than Kulemin (point of strength rather than weakness).

Soups On is offline   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 12:52 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.