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.

Roberto Luongo XXVI - Love me Lu (Admin Warning: Post 178)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-30-2012, 11:45 PM
  #26
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,247
vCash: 500
So untouchables from Florida are : Bjugstad, Huberdeau, Markstrom (don't want or need anyway), Gudbranson, are those the young players that you will absolutely not move?

Could Kulikov be available?

If the Canucks wanted Petrovic or Howden they probably wouldn't have moved their 2010 1st with both left on the board. Those prospects are not dry desirable to me.

I'd like to appease luongo by moving him to the place he wants to be, but not at the expense of making an uneven trade, so if Lu isn't willing to go elsewhere and Tallon won't give a good young player it probably won't happen.

I think Lu staying might be the best option anyways.

arsmaster is online now  
Old
07-30-2012, 11:53 PM
  #27
Ched Brosky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by huntison View Post
Hossa for Luongo

lets do this!
We could possibly get that
For NHL 13 GM connected (HF boards league) I started with Toronto, their GM offered me MacArthur Kulemin Colborne and a 2nd but once Chicago's GM offered me Hossa for Lou, he upped his offer to JVR Gardiner Colborne for Luongo and Ballard and then CHicago upped theres to Hossa + Bolland for Luongo and Malhotra and Raymond. Toronto's final offer was JVR Grabovski Gardiner Colborne for Luongo Raymond Ballard Tochkin. Went with Chicago with the uncertainty of the Toronto GM staying in the league.

So just like that we only need 2 teams to drive up the price for Luongo

Ched Brosky is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 11:58 PM
  #28
doglover8891
rajinikanthfan1
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 484
vCash: 500
Van-florida

To florida
luongo
jensen
first round pick 2013
raymond

to canucks
theodore
Jonathan Huberdeau


reasons for panthers: panthers get a upgrade for goaltending and luongos wife is from florida, and he lives in florida and thats where he wants to finish his career in florida and they get a speedy goal scorer raymond and good first round pick and a top prospect with a bright future

reason for canucks: theodore has one year left on his contract and he will provide schneider as a good backup and canucks get a top prospect

we can add more in this trade what do you people think??

doglover8891 is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 12:00 AM
  #29
Avs44
Registered User
 
Avs44's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 7,571
vCash: 3319
No way you get Huberdeau with the deal revolving around Luongo, even if you throw in a bunch of other mid pieces. He is just way to good and has way to much potential. I doubt Florida would trade him unless the offer is so good they cannot refuse. The kid is a keeper.

Avs44 is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 12:06 AM
  #30
Markstrom Rules
Sup
 
Markstrom Rules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Country: United States
Posts: 16,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
So untouchables from Florida are : Bjugstad, Huberdeau, Markstrom (don't want or need anyway), Gudbranson, are those the young players that you will absolutely not move?

Could Kulikov be available?

If the Canucks wanted Petrovic or Howden they probably wouldn't have moved their 2010 1st with both left on the board. Those prospects are not dry desirable to me.

I'd like to appease luongo by moving him to the place he wants to be, but not at the expense of making an uneven trade, so if Lu isn't willing to go elsewhere and Tallon won't give a good young player it probably won't happen.

I think Lu staying might be the best option anyways.
Vancouver can keep him then, I wont lose any sleep.

Markstrom Rules is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 12:08 AM
  #31
KISSland
Registered User
 
KISSland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,682
vCash: 500
Luongo, Raymond to Washington for Johansson, 3rd should Holtby falter.

Raymond replaces Johanssons production.
Washington gets an elite goaltender.

Johansson fills in Keslers spot while he's out till December/January.
Slots in the third line once Kesler returns.
Gillis commits robbery.

KISSland is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 12:09 AM
  #32
Respect Your Edler
Thank You 52
 
Respect Your Edler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: China
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,221
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
Vancouver can keep him then, I wont lose any sleep.
I think we will keep him. We don't need the cap space and we don't need any of the pieces being offered. It's not unheard of to make a player wait half a season for a trade. Who knows, maybe something gets done during training camp.

Respect Your Edler is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 12:18 AM
  #33
Peasy
All In The Game Yo
 
Peasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: North Bay
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,344
vCash: 485
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverback91 View Post
We could possibly get that
For NHL 13 GM connected (HF boards league) I started with Toronto, their GM offered me MacArthur Kulemin Colborne and a 2nd but once Chicago's GM offered me Hossa for Lou, he upped his offer to JVR Gardiner Colborne for Luongo and Ballard and then CHicago upped theres to Hossa + Bolland for Luongo and Malhotra and Raymond. Toronto's final offer was JVR Grabovski Gardiner Colborne for Luongo Raymond Ballard Tochkin. Went with Chicago with the uncertainty of the Toronto GM staying in the league.

So just like that we only need 2 teams to drive up the price for Luongo
Except this is real life.

Peasy is online now  
Old
07-31-2012, 12:27 AM
  #34
Ched Brosky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peasy View Post
Except this is real life.
Obviously the bidding won't go that high (actually never say never) but it goes to show what having more than 1 team interested does. These are fans of those teams willing to offer those kind of assets up so the GMs I'm sure are willing to give up some assets too.

Ched Brosky is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 12:58 AM
  #35
JayBeautiful
Nature Boy
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Maple Ridge BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 448
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
So i guess you was among the one saying Luongo worth more than (Stamkos or Doughty) + Brown back in 2008!

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...d.php?t=502458

That's fricken 5 yrs ago


Proven or not doesnt really matter, what matter is not the past, but the expectation we have for a player.

I would rather have a unproven player i expect to play like a star, than a proven star i expect to decline and be average.
So you'd rather take players like
2003 - Zherdev 4th overall
2004 - Barker 3rd, Montoya 6th, Valabik 10th overall
2005 - Brule 6th, Skille 7th, Lee 10th overall
2006 - Mueller 7th, Sheppard 8th overall
2007 - Gagner 6th, Ellerby 10th overall
2008 - Filatov 6th, Bailey 9th
All these players were expected to be stars but for whatever reason never met expectations and you say you wouldn't trade them for a proven star

JayBeautiful is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 01:02 AM
  #36
Generic User
Dynamic as they come
 
Generic User's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Country: United States
Posts: 6,567
vCash: 500
Just because a few players drafted top 10 in the last decade were busts doesn't automatically make Luongo worth a top 10 pick++

Generic User is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 01:22 AM
  #37
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayBeautiful View Post
So you'd rather take players like
2003 - Zherdev 4th overall
2004 - Barker 3rd, Montoya 6th, Valabik 10th overall
2005 - Brule 6th, Skille 7th, Lee 10th overall
2006 - Mueller 7th, Sheppard 8th overall
2007 - Gagner 6th, Ellerby 10th overall
2008 - Filatov 6th, Bailey 9th
All these players were expected to be stars but for whatever reason never met expectations and you say you wouldn't trade them for a proven star
Quote:
Originally Posted by Generic User View Post
Just because a few players drafted top 10 in the last decade were busts doesn't automatically make Luongo worth a top 10 pick++
We have to go with the ODDS.

Under the last CBA, having young player able to contribute on ELC/cheap contract was a more important factor for team winning the cup than Having an Elite 5 000 0000$ + goalie.


2006: Carolina – Ward (684 000$) / Edmonton – Roloson (1 672 000$)
2007: Anaheim – Giguere (3 990 000$) / Ottawa – Emery (925 000$)
2008: Detroit – Osgood (800 000$) / Pittsburg – Fleury (1 3000 000$)
2009: Pittsburg – Fleury (5 000 000$ / Detroit – Osgood (1 500 000$)
2010: Chicago – Niemi (826 875$) / Philadelphia – Leighton (600 000$)
2011: Boston - Thomas (5 000 000$) / Vancouver - Luongo 5 333 333$
2012: Los Angeles: Quick (1 800 000$) / New Jersey Brodeur: 5 200 000$

And How much a proven goalie like a Luongo is an upgrade on the random cheap UFA goalie.

Just take the last year batch...

Elliott .940% (600 000$)
Smith .930% (2 000 000$)
Giguere .919% (1 500 000$)
Luongo .919%
Harding .917%
Vokoun .917% (1 500 000$)
Theodore .917% (1 500 000$)

The question here is how much an upgrade Luongo at 5 000 000$ + is on a cheap Theodore 1 500 000$ or Markstrom down the line to warrant giving their future?

Back in 2008, what if LA traded Doughty and Brown for Luongo... how much a 5 333 000$ Luongo would be an upgrade on a cheap 1 800 000$ Quick ? Do you think it is enough an upgrade to justify the loss of a Brown or a Doughty?

Maybe in 4-5yo from now, Luongo to Florida will look like a similar story and most Florida fan will express their gratitude to their GM because he never traded their best prospects for Luongo while a cheap Markstrom will lead the team.

The same can be say about the Varlamov and Halak trade..Does Halak (.926%) (3 750 000$) is significantly better than a cheap 600 000$ Eliott .940% to justify the lost of Eller?

Do Varlamov (.913%) (2 833 333$) is so much an upgrade on a cheap Giguere (.919%) (1 500 000$) to justify giving away a first (Filip Fosberg)


Last edited by palindrom: 07-31-2012 at 02:11 AM.
palindrom is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 01:36 AM
  #38
smackdaddy
Hall-RNH-Eberle
 
smackdaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,683
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayBeautiful View Post
So you'd rather take players like
2003 - Zherdev 4th overall
2004 - Barker 3rd, Montoya 6th, Valabik 10th overall
2005 - Brule 6th, Skille 7th, Lee 10th overall
2006 - Mueller 7th, Sheppard 8th overall
2007 - Gagner 6th, Ellerby 10th overall
2008 - Filatov 6th, Bailey 9th
All these players were expected to be stars but for whatever reason never met expectations and you say you wouldn't trade them for a proven star
Really? Really?

smackdaddy is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 03:05 AM
  #39
Dr Beinfest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Orlando, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 1,014
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Respect Your Edler View Post
I think we will keep him. We don't need the cap space and we don't need any of the pieces being offered. It's not unheard of to make a player wait half a season for a trade. Who knows, maybe something gets done during training camp.
I think what a lot of people simply aren't understanding is that Florida does NOT need Roberto Luongo. It's very simple, yet for some reason not very well understood.

We have goaltending right now. We have goaltending for the future. We do not need to inherit such a contract.

Vancouver wants to get rid of him. They've got very few teams nibbling, and apparently Florida is one of the top nibblers. With that being said, Florida is in no rush. This is a simple situation where a guy like Dale Tallon is trying to take advantage of a team selling on an asset that's way undervalued. He did the same thing with Brian Campbell. The value of Campbell to Florida was HUGE, whereas the value of Olesz was vastly negative.

Holding onto Luongo could be a very stupid move if all potential suitors fix their goalie issues, but it could also raise his value and he could be moved at a higher price assuming the last bit I said doesn't happen.

But as it stands right now... Luongo's value is very low. That's why he hasn't been traded yet. That's why if he's traded before the season, there wont be that big of a return. Gillis knows it, and Tallon knows it. That's why this is taking so long.

Dr Beinfest is online now  
Old
07-31-2012, 03:46 AM
  #40
FrolikFan67
Registered User
 
FrolikFan67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,249
vCash: 500
Clemmensen/Theodore-NTC
Kopecky/Matthias/Santorelli/Upshall-NMC&mod NTC
Shore/McFarland/Robak
2nd/3rd in '13
1st/2nd in '14

this is what i see as being realistic, if vancouver doesnt want it then i guess we dont get luongo because bjugstad isnt going anywhere (and i highly doubt howden is either). a goalie needs to go the other way, most likely clemmensen. younger than theo, signed for 2yr at cheaper hit, and theo has a ntc w/ 1yr remaining and he signed here w/ the intention to retire here. he might waive since its vancouver, but idk. a prospect would go the other way, probably shore at most, if not him then possibly mcfarland or robak. tallon doesnt want to give up his 1st or even his 2nd for that matter it sounds for this upcoming draft. maybe he'll give the 2nd at most but the 1st is staying, maybe a 2nd/3rd in this upcoming draft and a 1st or 2nd in the following; just a guess. plus a roster player, either matthias or kopecky or even santo but i doubt theyd take him. outside shot at upshall, i dont think tallon will want to part w/ upshall. coming into last season he was the (realistic) FA i wanted the most and was ecstatic that we actually got him. we know what he's capable of as well as the type of player he is. tallon didnt sign him at 3.5per for 4yrs w/ a ntc for nothing. he could play on our 2nd line w/ hubs and goc, if he's healthy i think he can still be dangerous. plus, he has that ntc. idk if the value is there, but i dont think the panthers offer anymore. the only part that i can see being different are the 2 picks i threw out there.


Last edited by FrolikFan67: 07-31-2012 at 04:06 AM.
FrolikFan67 is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 03:54 AM
  #41
Markstrom Rules
Sup
 
Markstrom Rules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Country: United States
Posts: 16,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackdaddy View Post
Really? Really?
Haha seriously, Ellerby was never expected to be a star, he was considered a safe pick in a weak draft.

Markstrom Rules is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 03:57 AM
  #42
JuniorNelson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: E.Vancouver
Country: Australia-Aboriginal
Posts: 4,611
vCash: 50
I think the focus on Florida is misled. Luongo lives there, of course he wants to play at home. That isn't a strong enough reason to back away from a trade request, if he ever made one. What he said, was that he wouldn't block a trade. That's different than saying trade me to Florida.

The market will determine where Luongo goes and it is possible Gillis is letting Luongo and his agent do the phone calls. Gillis has proudly stated he won't ask a player to waive his no trade clause, which makes trading that player quite difficult.

Ottawa has return and is very close to Montreal with Ontario taxation.

If Luongo doesn't want to stay in Canada or go to Ottawa all he has to say is he wants to go to a playoff team, LOL! This will also add millions to his portfolio, so I can't imagine him not mentioning it.

Look beyond ice level posturing and Boston might be a trade partner. Rask was only signed to a one year contract and Thomas has gone off to the moral high ground. Boston is used to getting good goaltending and they need it stylistically.

Washington has very young goalies. They might want a mentoring starter.

The other Eastern playoff teams have a guy. Luongo won't be going to a western rival, so there is your market, Ottawa or Washington with Boston as a long shot.

JuniorNelson is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 04:29 AM
  #43
supert
Registered User
 
supert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,402
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
I love hfboards logic - proven NHL star isn't worth more than a prospect.

I gotta take a break from this site.
Good logic yourself

As an Oiler fan this works well . Shawn Horcoff is a proven 3 line centre who can play the Pk , PP and against other teams top lines . We should be able to get a very good prospect .

Serious , Like Horcoff , Lou contract is a negative . Horcoff over paid and for 3 more season . Lou's Cap hit is good but it runs until the end of time , making it a negative .

I know Canucks fan say he will not play until the end of it , But if he goes back to Florida where he is from , who to say he does not keep playing , as he is not away from his family as much .I think it is much more likely he plays longer if he is back home with his family

Also i know Horcoff is not as good as Lou , not even close. I am trying to make a point sometime a prospect is worth more then a proven NHL player . I would love to have Lou on the Oilers , but would not pay a lot for him . I know other Oilers fan will be up in arms over this , saying he is a choker come play offs , But i would counter we need to get their first and Lou would give us a better chance . All is moot , because he will not coming to Edmonton .

supert is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 04:45 AM
  #44
RECsGuy*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JuniorNelson View Post
I think the focus on Florida is misled. Luongo lives there, of course he wants to play at home. That isn't a strong enough reason to back away from a trade request, if he ever made one. What he said, was that he wouldn't block a trade. That's different than saying trade me to Florida.

The market will determine where Luongo goes and it is possible Gillis is letting Luongo and his agent do the phone calls. Gillis has proudly stated he won't ask a player to waive his no trade clause, which makes trading that player quite difficult.

Ottawa has return and is very close to Montreal with Ontario taxation.

If Luongo doesn't want to stay in Canada or go to Ottawa all he has to say is he wants to go to a playoff team, LOL! This will also add millions to his portfolio, so I can't imagine him not mentioning it.

Look beyond ice level posturing and Boston might be a trade partner. Rask was only signed to a one year contract and Thomas has gone off to the moral high ground. Boston is used to getting good goaltending and they need it stylistically.

Washington has very young goalies. They might want a mentoring starter.

The other Eastern playoff teams have a guy. Luongo won't be going to a western rival, so there is your market, Ottawa or Washington with Boston as a long shot.
Oh, look. Another Canucks fan telling other fanbases how flawed their respective goaltending situations, as if he/she follows those teams closer than those teams' own fans do.

Rask only got 1 year because he was an RFA. Boston is tight against the cap. Can't extend him for more dollars/term until Thomas is off the books. And Rask isn't going anywhere.

Washington has been grooming Holtby for a while. Just knocked out Boston and stretched the Rangers to 7. He, too, is going nowhere.

As for Ottawa: Lehner. Bishop. Anderson. Whoops, wrong again.

He'll land in Florida. MG is just waiting until the end of the pre-season to see if DT is less comfortable with his goaltendig than he is now and, thus, gives into Gillis' demands.

Plus, Markstrom (the only organizational threat) won't be a 60+ game starter for at least 3 years, IMO. Needs to destroy the AHL next season, proving his knees are good, serve as an NHL backup the following season and then, maybe, be worked into a 1A/1B split with Luongo when Jacob's about 25 y/o. Earliest.

Most goalies typically don't become fulltime NHL starters until they're in their mid-to-late twenties:

Rask, 25, is only the starter because of Thomas' surprising upcoming season-long hiatus.

Schneider, 26, is only starting because Vancouver management has seemingly lost patience with Luongo.

Ryan Miller didn't start 60+ games until he was 26, like Schneids.

Hiller didn't get 58 starts until he was well past the age of 27, due in large part to Giguere falling off.

Crawford didn't become Chicago's starter until he was just over two months away from his 26th birthday.

Bryzgalov didn't become a No. 1until well past the age of 27, and only because Burke waived the disgruntled Russian.

Howard was well over 25 when he finally pushed Osgood out of the way.

Smith waited until well over his 29th birthday to become a No. 1, and that's only because Phoenix gave him a new lease on life.

Niemi didn't become a No. 1 until joining the Sharks, at age 27.

Kiprusoff didn't see a No. 1 workload until his first full season in Calgary, at just days away from his 29th birthday.

Rinne wasn't Nashville's undisputed No. 1 until just short of his 27th birthday.

Anderson wasn't given a chance as a No. 1 until Colorado gave the then-28-year-old a shot.

The exceptions are:

Brodeur (22 y/o; HHOFer)

Lehtonen (22 y/o; No. 2 pick overall, which, at the time, made him the 2nd highest drafted goalie ever)

Fleury (21 y/o; No. 1 pick overall; 2nd goalie ever taken with the opening selection)

Quick (Smythe, Stanley Cup, 2nd Team All-Star)

Ward (22 y/o; Smythe, Stanley Cup)

Lundqvist (23 y/o; Olympic Gold, Vezina, 1st Team All Star)

Price (23 y/o; only b/c Gainey jettisoned Halak while the Czech's value was sky high)

Pavelec (23 y/o; with Lehtonen gone, the Thrashers, in their final year in Atlanta, had no one else to turn to, seeing as C.Mason couldn't stop a beachball that season)

This is the only area I don't agree with Panthes fan on. Markstrom is going to wait several years, at the earliest, for his turn at No. 1, and since Tallon seems to be the patient type with his youngsters, I'm guessing his interest in Luongo means his view on Markstrom is probably similar to mine.


Last edited by RECsGuy*: 07-31-2012 at 05:45 AM.
RECsGuy* is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 05:08 AM
  #45
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanthersHockey1 View Post
the Panthers are so weak up the middle why would we trade the first legitimate potential 1C this organization has ever had? I'd much rather give you guys howden and more than to take bjugstad.




The key word in bold. As is common practice with this site, the prospect is viewed as a finished product. As a result, their "on-line value" reflects their realized potential and not their inability to realize that potential. Essentially, Bjugstad for Lu is viewed as 1C for elite tender... That is faulty logic. Bjugstad is a _prospect_. Markstrom is a _prospect_. Until that changes, the established NHL asset should tend to have more value, as arsmaster alluded to.



That doesn't mean you trade every prospect for NHL talent. It means each GM has to weigh the benefit consistency provides at the NHL level vs. the probability a prospect realizes his ceiling.



If the discussion is already at Bjugstad, then that means Tallon has already protected Huberdeau and Gudbranson. He's locked away his organization's prime assets. Some teams don't have even that luxury. But because FLA's prospect pool is so strong, Tallon can be this heavy-handed. Up to a point... When you get to the #4 piece, the #5 piece etc... and still Tallon doesn't budge, you end up in a stalemate. Probably what we have now. You get one GM wanting to give up nothing of value to the other. Which is fine... if they don't actually want Lu. But "want" is a funny thing...



FLA doesn't need Lu. From a roster standpoint, they have the position filled. But this isn't how GMs think... Otherwise, you wouldn't see deals like the Nash deal happen. Sather didn't _need_ Nash. He had a roster that just went to the ECF. Finished 2nd in the league, and is littered with young talent. Yet he still _wanted to improve his club. That's any GMs MO: make the team better than it was. And that's exactly what Lu would do to FLA. Because for better or worse, Bjugstad is still in college and still not an established NHL player. He's a prospect. He doesn't make FLA better right now. Lu does.



So in the end Tallon will have to weigh it. Does he want to get better right now and rely on the rest of his stellar prospect pool? Or is he assured Markstrom is the answer? To me, if he was assured of the latter, he wouldn't be interested in Lu...

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 05:12 AM
  #46
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ag925 View Post
Plus, Markstrom (the only organizational threat) won't be a 60+ game starter for 3 years, IMO. Needs to destroy the AHL next season, prove his knees are good and then serve as backup for 2 seasons, before being worked into a 1A/1B split with Luongo when Jacob's about 26 y/o.

Most goalies typically don't become fulltime NHL starters until they're in their mid-twenties, at the earliest:


I agree with your projection of JM. If his knees hold up and he does well in the AHL moving forward, then 26 is about when I could see a tandem happening. That's of course with things going well...


It may have been discussed in the previous threads, but has any FLA fan shed light on the severity of both knee injuries? Was it one or both? Ligaments damaged/torn? Any insight would be appreciated. I just know he's had surgery twice.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 05:39 AM
  #47
Liferleafer
Golf....again....
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,235
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverback91 View Post
We could possibly get that
For NHL 13 GM connected (HF boards league) I started with Toronto, their GM offered me MacArthur Kulemin Colborne and a 2nd but once Chicago's GM offered me Hossa for Lou, he upped his offer to JVR Gardiner Colborne for Luongo and Ballard and then CHicago upped theres to Hossa + Bolland for Luongo and Malhotra and Raymond. Toronto's final offer was JVR Grabovski Gardiner Colborne for Luongo Raymond Ballard Tochkin. Went with Chicago with the uncertainty of the Toronto GM staying in the league.

So just like that we only need 2 teams to drive up the price for Luongo
Lol...if that were reality, the TO gm keeping his job would be the least of his worries....keeping his life might be more important....(again,lol)

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 06:14 AM
  #48
SufferingCatFan
Registered User
 
SufferingCatFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: fort lauderdale
Country: United States
Posts: 1,790
vCash: 500
As a Panther fan, it is a hard truth but a truth nonetheless-- we are a marginal playoff team with or without Luongo. We are realistically 3 seasons away from being serious contenders assuming our rebuild goes as planned. At which point, Luongo will be 37 and presumably in decline.

For us, Roberto is not the missing piece as opposed say to the Blackhawks. Consequently, we are not willing to trade top prospects or draft choices or otherwise mortgage our future. If the Nucks need to dump him to an out-of-conference team then we are interested, but not otherwise.

This is just a reflection of relative value. Although Roberto may be a star today, given his age and contract his relative value to the Panthers is not that great.

SufferingCatFan is online now  
Old
07-31-2012, 06:18 AM
  #49
Liferleafer
Golf....again....
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,235
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SufferingCatFan View Post
As a Panther fan, it is a hard truth but a truth nonetheless-- we are a marginal playoff team with or without Luongo. We are realistically 3 seasons away from being serious contenders assuming our rebuild goes as planned. At which point, Luongo will be 37 and presumably in decline.

For us, Roberto is not the missing piece as opposed say to the Blackhawks. Consequently, we are not willing to trade top prospects or draft choices or otherwise mortgage our future. If the Nucks need to dump him to an out-of-conference team then we are interested, but not otherwise.

This is just a reflection of relative value. Although Roberto may be a star today, given his age and contract his relative value to the Panthers is not that great.
The same holds true for Toronto, although i feel the need is actually greater here, we are a long way from true contention. He would probably get us in the playoffs, but that would be about it.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 06:31 AM
  #50
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post
I'm not objecting to that.

Howden+ instead of Bjustad?

Let's hear the +.
Florida takes the contract off of VAN.

RangerBoy is offline  
Closed Thread

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 03:53 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.