HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
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.

Luongo to Columbus

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-30-2012, 02:04 PM
  #51
416Leafer
Registered User
 
416Leafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post
You also leave out the Raycrofts and the Masons, who started early, and very promising, and then faltered due to rushed development. Every goalie is different, and while I don't think Markstrom is far away, a year or two more of development would help more then hinder. If Tallon thought it was 3-4 years off, he wouldn't have signed Clem or Theo to short term contracts.
Raycroft/Mason weren't highly touted. They never had particularly good AHL or OHL numbers. They were both just a flash in the pan. I'm talking about guys who were drafted with high potential and then improved and maintained a high potential up until when they started in the NHL.

Markstrom has already put up very good numbers in both the SEL and AHL. He's not comparable to two guys who had mediocre OHL/AHL numbers and then each had one good season in the NHL before crashing back down.

He's obviously not a guarantee. Nothing is. But at the moment he's widely considered one of the best, if not the best goalie prospect in all of hockey, and he's at the age where he's expected to jump full time to the NHL very soon. Not 3-4 years from now. Luongo makes no sense for Florida.

416Leafer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:04 PM
  #52
sully1410
Registered User
 
sully1410's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Turner Valley, Alta.
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,597
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post
A top six playmaking winger for Kesler.

A replacement 2 C that is a better 3 C when Kesler's recovered.

A top 4 RHD, or at least that can play the right side.

Futures are a plus, but again, knowing the big future names are off limits, I'm unsure who is there and available outside of probably the top 5 prospects.

EDIT: Oh, and a 3rd/4th line guy that can hit, fight and take a regular shift.
I totally agree with the rest of it, but why a top 4D? Bieksa, Hamhuis, Edler and Garrison seem like a pretty good D to me man.

sully1410 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:06 PM
  #53
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 416Leafer View Post
I think most people disagree with that statement. Everyone except for Vancouver fans seem to think Markstrom is 1-2 years away. He played 32 games in the AHL this year with great stats as well as 7 games in the NHL this year with great stats. He's been considered one of the top top goalie prospects in the world for a few years, and will be 23 this upcoming season.

Rask became a starter at age 23 and then lost it to a Vezina/Conn Smyth winner.
Price became a starter at 20.
Fleury became a starter at 20.
Schneider was already playing like a starter and splitting the role at 24-25, while Markstrom would have Theodore to share duties with at that age.

That's a comparison to similarly highly touted/highly drafted goalie prospects who actually maintained their good play after being drafted. So why do you expect Markstrom to not become a starter until he's 26-27 and then still need another 1-2 years after that of sharing the crease with Luongo? Effectively not becoming a fully fledged starter until the age of 28-29?? When other goalies of similar pedigree became starters at his current age or younger?
What about Pekke Rinne? Ryan Miller?

For every Jon Quick, there is a guy who is developed slowly...

I'm of the opinion that Cory Schneider was developed almost as good as you can possibly develop a goalie.

3 years in college.

3 years in the AHL- two splitting time, finalized with a 60 game season with a starters work load.

Followed by a slow introduction to the NHL game (25 games behind a Vezina Candidate, followed by a more 1a/1b season with 35 games).

Cory Schneider was in the position that Markstrom is now. If he followed that same development plan, Markstrom would be inline for 40-50 starts in the AHL next year, and possibly one more the year following, then would be inline to start 20-30 NHL games in 3 years, possibly 35-40 the following year.

So in 5 years, Florida may be in the same predicament Vancouver is now...what might be missed by the casual observer, is that Markstrom has had 2 (?) knee surgeries at his young age. I'm not saying that is a massive concern, or makes him a bad prospect, but he's still just a prospect, and not one I'd be comfortable banking the future of my franchise on. Nor do I think feeding him to the Wolves earlier than later is the best option for him.

I think Florida is a good fit for Luongo for more reasons than just hockey, but I don't really see them being in a position to move their prospects...I think last year was a fluke, and I don't see them competing for the division or a playoff spot this year, even with Luongo (definitely not sold on their goalies now).

arsmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:07 PM
  #54
candyman82
Registered User
 
candyman82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 2,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post
A top six playmaking winger for Kesler.

A replacement 2 C that is a better 3 C when Kesler's recovered.

A top 4 RHD, or at least that can play the right side.

Futures are a plus, but again, knowing the big future names are off limits, I'm unsure who is there and available outside of probably the top 5 prospects.

EDIT: Oh, and a 3rd/4th line guy that can hit, fight and take a regular shift.
I don't know if a deal can be made between the Jackets and Canucks that really helps both teams. David Savard is one of our stronger RH defensive prospects who may become the odd man out with the additions of Erixon and Murray. We are very low on playmakers, but if Johansen steps up his game Brassard could become available. Jared Boll or Colton Gillies could be part of a deal for the 3rd/4th liner bit. I would would be very hesitant to give up any of our recently acquired pieces, for the first time in Jackets history we seem to have really solid depth. Additionally, you would almost have to take back Steve Mason in order to make the money work.

candyman82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:09 PM
  #55
candyman82
Registered User
 
candyman82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 2,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 416Leafer View Post
Raycroft/Mason weren't highly touted. They never had particularly good AHL or OHL numbers. They were both just a flash in the pan. I'm talking about guys who were drafted with high potential and then improved and maintained a high potential up until when they started in the NHL.

Markstrom has already put up very good numbers in both the SEL and AHL. He's not comparable to two guys who had mediocre OHL/AHL numbers and then each had one good season in the NHL before crashing back down.

He's obviously not a guarantee. Nothing is. But at the moment he's widely considered one of the best, if not the best goalie prospect in all of hockey, and he's at the age where he's expected to jump full time to the NHL very soon. Not 3-4 years from now. Luongo makes no sense for Florida.
Well, Mason didn't really play much in the AHL, which I think was a huge problem for him

candyman82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:19 PM
  #56
KISSland
Registered User
 
KISSland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,682
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by candyman82 View Post
I don't know if a deal can be made between the Jackets and Canucks that really helps both teams. David Savard is one of our stronger RH defensive prospects who may become the odd man out with the additions of Erixon and Murray. We are very low on playmakers, but if Johansen steps up his game Brassard could become available. Jared Boll or Colton Gillies could be part of a deal for the 3rd/4th liner bit. I would would be very hesitant to give up any of our recently acquired pieces, for the first time in Jackets history we seem to have really solid depth. Additionally, you would almost have to take back Steve Mason in order to make the money work.
I'd take Brassard and Mason for Luongo and a pick, or throw in Raymond.. Then waive Mason.

Assuming we get Doan too:

Sedins Burrows
Booth Kesler(Brassard) Doan
Higgins Brassard Hansen/Kassian


KISSland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:25 PM
  #57
416Leafer
Registered User
 
416Leafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
What about Pekke Rinne? Ryan Miller?

For every Jon Quick, there is a guy who is developed slowly...
Miller was an NHL starter by age 25, and could have been the year before if it wasn't for the lockout. Not to mention he was drafted 138th overall, meaning he needed more development time.

Same can be said of Rinne. Guys drafted in later rounds are generally expected to take a lot longer to develop. They're considered "project" picks. Markstrom was drafted 31st overall.

So it would actually be better to compare him to highly drafted goalies who didn't pan out. But most of them had their development stall within the first few years after getting drafted, whereas Markstrom has continued to put up great numbers. I can't think of many examples of goalies who were drafted high, and then continued to put up exceptional numbers at the CHL/AHL level for the next 3-4 years, but then completely fell flat when they hit the NHL. The ones that don't pan out at the NHL level tend to have had worse numbers than Markstrom at the lower levels.

Examples:
-Marek Shwarz: Drafted 17th overall in 2004. In the AHL he put up .899 and .891 save % seasons
-Al Montoya: Drafted 6th overall 2004. Best AHL season was a .914 save %.
-Corey Crawford: Drafted 52nd overall 2003. Best AHL season was a 0.909 save %.

Markstrom on the other hand put up a 0.927 save % this year. His last season in the SEL he put up the same save %. His only "down" year since being drafted was his first year in North America, which for a goalie can easily be attributed to adjusting to the wider ice-surface/shooting angles. Not to mention, look at his WJC/WC statistics, both are superb.

Some goalies value goes down after being drafted, some goalies have it go up. Markstrom has had his go up. There's every reason to expect him to be the next Rask, and no reason to expect him to be the next Montoya/Shwarz.

416Leafer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:26 PM
  #58
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Figz14 View Post
I'd take Brassard and Mason for Luongo and a pick, or throw in Raymond.. Then waive Mason.

Assuming we get Doan too:

Sedins Burrows
Booth Kesler(Brassard) Doan
Higgins Brassard Hansen/Kassian

EWWWWW!

You don't speak for the Canucks fan base, or at least this Canucks fan.

Not at all a fan of Brassard, nor do I think it makes sense to acquire Mason or add picks and Raymond.

Terrible.

arsmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:29 PM
  #59
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 416Leafer View Post
Miller was an NHL starter by age 25, and could have been the year before if it wasn't for the lockout. Not to mention he was drafted 138th overall, meaning he needed more development time.

Same can be said of Rinne. Guys drafted in later rounds are generally expected to take a lot longer to develop. They're considered "project" picks. Markstrom was drafted 31st overall.

So it would actually be better to compare him to highly drafted goalies who didn't pan out. But most of them had their development stall within the first few years after getting drafted, whereas Markstrom has continued to put up great numbers. I can't think of many examples of goalies who were drafted high, and then continued to put up exceptional numbers at the CHL/AHL level for the next 3-4 years, but then completely fell flat when they hit the NHL. The ones that don't pan out at the NHL level tend to have had worse numbers than Markstrom at the lower levels.

Examples:
-Marek Shwarz: Drafted 17th overall in 2004. In the AHL he put up .899 and .891 save % seasons
-Al Montoya: Drafted 6th overall 2004. Best AHL season was a .914 save %.
-Corey Crawford: Drafted 52nd overall 2003. Best AHL season was a 0.909 save %.

Markstrom on the other hand put up a 0.927 save % this year. His last season in the SEL he put up the same save %. His only "down" year since being drafted was his first year in North America, which for a goalie can easily be attributed to adjusting to the wider ice-surface/shooting angles. Not to mention, look at his WJC/WC statistics, both are superb.

Some goalies value goes down after being drafted, some goalies have it go up. Markstrom has had his go up. There's every reason to expect him to be the next Rask, and no reason to expect him to be the next Montoya/Shwarz.
Draft place is just a number...really doesn't factor into anything for me.

arsmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:31 PM
  #60
Kershaw
 
Kershaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country:
Posts: 25,519
vCash: 50
Doubt both sides would be interested. Luongo's gonna go to Florida on Tallon's terms or Toronto on Burke's terms.

Kershaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:35 PM
  #61
quat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Victoria BC
Posts: 8,795
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to quat
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kershaw View Post
Doubt both sides would be interested. Luongo's gonna go to Florida on Tallon's terms or Toronto on Burke's terms.
Wrong.

quat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:36 PM
  #62
416Leafer
Registered User
 
416Leafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
Draft place is just a number...really doesn't factor into anything for me.
And what about the way a player has played since being drafted? Markstroms SEL/AHL/WJC/WC numbers mean nothing? What about his NHL numbers this year? Also mean nothing?

416Leafer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:37 PM
  #63
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 416Leafer View Post
I think most people disagree with that statement. Everyone except for Vancouver fans seem to think Markstrom is 1-2 years away. He played 32 games in the AHL this year with great stats as well as 7 games in the NHL this year with great stats. He's been considered one of the top top goalie prospects in the world for a few years, and will be 23 this upcoming season.

Rask became a starter at age 23 and then lost it to a Vezina/Conn Smyth winner.
Price became a starter at 20.
Fleury became a starter at 20.
Schneider was already playing like a starter and splitting the role at 24-25, while Markstrom would have Theodore to share duties with at that age.

That's a comparison to similarly highly touted/highly drafted goalie prospects who actually maintained their good play after being drafted. So why do you expect Markstrom to not become a starter until he's 26-27 and then still need another 1-2 years after that of sharing the crease with Luongo? Effectively not becoming a fully fledged starter until the age of 28-29?? When other goalies of similar pedigree became starters at his current age or younger?
Frankly I don't really care what 'everyone' says. I think that crowning Markstrom as a sure fire great starting goalie is premature. In any event, he's slated to play in the minors this year and if he follows a similar career path as Schneider he would be a back up for a couple of seasons after that which puts him at close to age 26 or so. If he wins the job from Luongo then you look to trade Luongo at that time for what you can get. Then of course there is always the risk that he never even makes the jump successfully. Certainly all signs are promising but there is never any guarantee on that. I've followed hockey too long to call almost any prospect a sure thing. It seems to me that it would be a prudent move by Tallon to solidify his goaltending for the next 4 years and then worry about the 'problem' of having two great goalies after that.

vanwest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:39 PM
  #64
leesmith
"We're NEVER Done!"
 
leesmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 15,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
Many people are saying that Luongo cannot be traded to Columbus because he will not waive his NTC to go there.

But in fact he can be be traded there even if he does not waive his NTC! Let me explain.....

Lou does not have a NMC, therefore Vancouver can put him on waivers. And guess what Columbus finished last place and will have first chance to pickup anyone on waivers. So Columbus can trade with Van by sending the necessary pieces through future considerations. Vancouver puts Luo on waivers and the deal is done. Obviously this would not look good for Gillis and will therefore most likely not happen. But it is an interesting scenario to consider and does give Gillis a little more leverage because he does have the right to do this.

Not sure the value that would come back to Van......Please feel free to post proposals.
Just because you COULD do it, doesn't mean you SHOULD do it. Better to sell him on the move by explaining the value of being the starter, having a strong defense in front of you and instantly becoming the best goalie in Columbus franchise history. (and he'd never have to worry about sucking in the playoffs!)

leesmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:43 PM
  #65
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 416Leafer View Post
And what about the way a player has played since being drafted? Markstroms SEL/AHL/WJC/WC numbers mean nothing? What about his NHL numbers this year? Also mean nothing?
No.

Read the post.

Excellent numbers, very good prospect...I've made my point on the subject of goaltender development. If you want to refresh yourself on those points, read the post again.

Have a boo, at Cory Schneider's stats in the AHL for reference.

Main point, that we're clearly not seeing eye to eye on is draft place - it doesn't matter.

arsmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:49 PM
  #66
416Leafer
Registered User
 
416Leafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
Frankly I don't really care what 'everyone' says. I think that crowning Markstrom as a sure fire great starting goalie is premature. In any event, he's slated to play in the minors this year and if he follows a similar career path as Schneider he would be a back up for a couple of seasons after that which puts him at close to age 26 or so. If he wins the job from Luongo then you look to trade Luongo at that time for what you can get. Then of course there is always the risk that he never even makes the jump successfully. Certainly all signs are promising but there is never any guarantee on that. I've followed hockey too long to call almost any prospect a sure thing. It seems to me that it would be a prudent move by Tallon to solidify his goaltending for the next 4 years and then worry about the 'problem' of having two great goalies after that.
Haha well I don't think 'everyone" "cares" that you think everyone and anyone wants Luongo when they simply don't. But thanks for the input!

And if Vancouver is having trouble trading Luongo now with his contract, how exactly does Florida plan on trading him in 3-4 years when he's 36-37 with 6-7 years left on his contract?

And if Tallon only needs to solidify goaltending for another 4 years... well.. Theodore will only be 36 this season. So going by Vancouver fan logic, he has another 7 years of NHL play left in him, so they're looking pretty dandy by the sounds of it.

416Leafer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:50 PM
  #67
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Here is a Little gem i found from 2008:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavabien View Post
Ok so assuming LA gets #1 overall I propose this:

Luongo for Brown, 1st pick (stamkos) and Cloutier

So LA gets a franchise goalie and Canucks get a potential franchise forward, a beauty 30 goal scorer in Brown plus the added bonus of a shot at the tavares sweepstakes with Cloutier in net.
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...6#post13514626

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:51 PM
  #68
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
No.

Read the post.

Excellent numbers, very good prospect...I've made my point on the subject of goaltender development. If you want to refresh yourself on those points, read the post again.

Have a boo, at Cory Schneider's stats in the AHL for reference.

Main point, that we're clearly not seeing eye to eye on is draft place - it doesn't matter.
Agreed. The fact that he was drafted 31st is not really relevant. Goalies develop at different rates. Florida seems to feel that Markstrom needs at least another year in the AHL before he even comes up as a backup. Having a great goalie mentor him for a few years would be a real plus for him, much like it was for Schneider. Worst case you end up with two great goalies. Not a bad problem. And on the chance that Markstrom can't make the jump to be a starting NHL goalie, you manage to solidify your goaltending. That's why I think Tallon is somewhat interested at least.

vanwest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:53 PM
  #69
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 416Leafer View Post
Haha well I don't think 'everyone" "cares" that you think everyone and anyone wants Luongo when they simply don't. But thanks for the input!

And if Vancouver is having trouble trading Luongo now with his contract, how exactly does Florida plan on trading him in 3-4 years when he's 36-37 with 6-7 years left on his contract?

And if Tallon only needs to solidify goaltending for another 4 years... well.. Theodore will only be 36 this season. So going by Vancouver fan logic, he has another 7 years of NHL play left in him, so they're looking pretty dandy by the sounds of it.
I'm not sure why you're getting offended and attacking my post and the Vancouver fan base. I made a reasoned argument. If you have a reasonable response feel free to post it. Nowhere did I say that everyone wants Luongo. I said that it would not be unreasonable for Florida to acquire him so that Markstrom can have the time to develop.

vanwest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:54 PM
  #70
Kershaw
 
Kershaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country:
Posts: 25,519
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by quat View Post
Wrong.
Luongo's NTC says otherwise.

Kershaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:54 PM
  #71
Scottrockztheworld*
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,301
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 416Leafer View Post
Haha well I don't think 'everyone" "cares" that you think everyone and anyone wants Luongo when they simply don't. But thanks for the input!

And if Vancouver is having trouble trading Luongo now with his contract, how exactly does Florida plan on trading him in 3-4 years when he's 36-37 with 6-7 years left on his contract?

And if Tallon only needs to solidify goaltending for another 4 years... well.. Theodore will only be 36 this season. So going by Vancouver fan logic, he has another 7 years of NHL play left in him, so they're looking pretty dandy by the sounds of it.
Vancouver isn't having trouble trading him. I bet if Gillis said "screw it I'll lower my prices" he could trade him in a second.... but Gillis wants quality for quality. If The Panthers were to get Luongo & in 4/5 years he is being pushed out by Markstrom they could trade him for nothing (what some think he is worth) or send him to the minors. Luongo has a NTC not a NMC, if he is put on waivers he is either claimed or sent down, I doubt a 37/38 year old with millions in the bank is going to want to play in the AHL & ride the busses instead of being with his family.

There is a BIG difference between the quality/consistency that Luongo brings compared to Theodore.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kershaw View Post
Luongo's NTC says otherwise.
Gillis says otherwise.

Scottrockztheworld* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:56 PM
  #72
416Leafer
Registered User
 
416Leafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
I'm not sure why you're getting offended and attacking my post and the Vancouver fan base. I made a reasoned argument. If you have a reasonable response feel free to post it.
I made multiple points. Including pointing out how absurd it is that Florida can just "trade" Luongo in a few years when Vancouvers already having a ton of trouble trading him right now when his value is higher than it will be in a few years, as well as pointing out that they are already set short term with Theodore.

416Leafer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:56 PM
  #73
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,564
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockinghockey View Post
I don't understand why FLD would give anything for him, they have one of the top prospect goalies coming up and then Lou will just be going through this all over again. Lou has at least 5 yrs left in him.
The Leap from top prospect to top tier NHL goalie is a tough one. That's what makes Cory Schnider so valuable, he's shown he can play at the NHL level while a guy like Bernier hasn't.

Depending on a rookie goalie is not something that competitive teams should do...ever.

I actually think Luongo might accept a trade to Columbus...it's a lot closer to Florida then Vancouver is.

DJOpus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:58 PM
  #74
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 416Leafer View Post
I made multiple points. Including pointing out how absurd it is that Florida can just "trade" Luongo in a few years when Vancouvers already having a ton of trouble trading him right now when his value is higher than it will be in a few years, as well as pointing out that they are already set short term with Theodore.
Yes, you did make points after your attacks.
I think you're confusing having 'trouble trading Luongo' with wanting to get a reasonable price for him. He could be traded today if Gillis asked for less.

vanwest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 02:59 PM
  #75
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kershaw View Post
Luongo's NTC says otherwise.
Luongo's NTC allows Gillis and to a lesser extent, Luongo to dictate the terms...not Burke or Tallon.

Burke has absolutely no leverage to dictate any terms....Tallon moreso, because there is a clear upgrade to be had for him, with a player that *wants* to join his team.

It's not often high profile players choose to go to Florida, back to back off-seasons where Tallon could acquire a top pairing defensman and a top goalie would definitely help Florida continue to lure higher profile, top level free agents IMO.

arsmaster 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 01:03 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.