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.

Vancouver - San Jose

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-07-2012, 01:22 AM
  #51
Flair Hay
Registered User
 
Flair Hay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,179
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by kack zassian View Post
You should tell that to Nashville, NYR, Montreal, Carolina, Buffalo, Minnessotta, Calgary and Philly.

They desperately need to shed some cap-space.
Not one of those teams has reached a final except for Philly. And that was before they got the goalie...

Detroit and Chicago both made it with very average goaltending. You can win with the high priced goalie. But it's definitely not a necessity. Let alone having two.

Flair Hay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 01:48 AM
  #52
Ho Borvat
Registered User
 
Ho Borvat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,332
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhay1987 View Post
Not one of those teams has reached a final except for Philly. And that was before they got the goalie...

Detroit and Chicago both made it with very average goaltending. You can win with the high priced goalie. But it's definitely not a necessity. Let alone having two.
So should those other 8 teams be looking to downgrade their goalies for the sake of saving cap space?

Ho Borvat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 03:20 AM
  #53
604
Registered User
 
604's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,071
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhay1987 View Post
Not one of those teams has reached a final except for Philly. And that was before they got the goalie...

Detroit and Chicago both made it with very average goaltending. You can win with the high priced goalie. But it's definitely not a necessity. Let alone having two.
Has Detroit ever actually won with average goaltending? I believe their goaltending has failed them a lot in the playoffs but in the years that they won they had pretty stellar goaltending.

The Chicago team was staked with entry level guys. That was just an awesome team which ultimately was unaffordable when their contracts came up. It's not like they didn't spend on goaltending that year (IIRC).

604 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 03:21 AM
  #54
Honour Over Glory
Registered User
 
Honour Over Glory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: North America
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 13,588
vCash: 500
San Jose gets drastically worse with that trade, yeah...don't see that happening.

Honour Over Glory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 03:34 AM
  #55
Honour Over Glory
Registered User
 
Honour Over Glory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: North America
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 13,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
Has Detroit ever actually won with average goaltending? I believe their goaltending has failed them a lot in the playoffs but in the years that they won they had pretty stellar goaltending.

The Chicago team was staked with entry level guys. That was just an awesome team which ultimately was unaffordable when their contracts came up. It's not like they didn't spend on goaltending that year (IIRC).
Osgood?

Honour Over Glory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 08:10 AM
  #56
CBJenga
Registered User
 
CBJenga's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 1,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Honour Over Glory View Post
Osgood?
Average, not weak... But I guess that only makes the original point stronger.

CBJenga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 08:55 AM
  #57
MardocAgain
Registered User
 
MardocAgain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 639
vCash: 500
VAN fans essentially ran Luongo out of town and then come on here and call him criminally underrated. He's not. It's his forever contract that kills his value. I honestly wouldn't take Quick on that ungodly 10 year contract.

MardocAgain is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 02:11 PM
  #58
604
Registered User
 
604's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,071
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhay1987 View Post
Do the pretend math. 20 games x 25 shots against per = 500 shots. 1% of 500 is 5. $5.33M per to save five goals less all season.
Wouldn't your pretend math be a little more accurate if it were based on real numbers?

The Canucks face 31 shots a game, not 25...no team in the league kept shots against down at 25, not one (I'm pretty sure this shows how biased your "pretend math" is).

Odds are as a first year starter Schneider woulnd't start 62 games (especially since he's never started that many games in a season ever...even in the AHL). You'd likely see a more reasonable range like 50 games. As a result, the backup would likely play 32 games.

For save%, I think its reasonable to assume that a guy like Eddie Lack would be an average NHL backup, so a 0.905 save% (note this would put him between Andrei Pavelec and Corey Crawford...so 0.905 is probably pretty generous - Bobrovsky and Mason were 0.899 and 0.894).

So here's the pretend math: 32 games x 31 shots x (0.920-0.905) = 15 goals. 15 goals over 32 games is a goal every other game. That is huge considering how many games in the NHL are one goal games.

15 goals would have put MTL into a positive goal difference (and no team missed the playoffs with a positive goal difference).

Quote:
Originally Posted by MardocAgain View Post
VAN fans essentially ran Luongo out of town and then come on here and call him criminally underrated. He's not. It's his forever contract that kills his value. I honestly wouldn't take Quick on that ungodly 10 year contract.
I think Quick is one of the best assets in the league on that contract.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Honour Over Glory View Post
Osgood?
Osgood had a 0.930 and 0.926 save% when Detroit made it to the finals in back to back years...that's amazing goaltending. Years where he put up his normal numbers, the team got bounced. Those two playoff performances had people talking about him as a potential, borderline, HHOF guy due to his clutchness (not that I think he is).


Last edited by 604: 09-07-2012 at 02:20 PM.
604 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 07:15 PM
  #59
Flair Hay
Registered User
 
Flair Hay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,179
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by kack zassian View Post
So should those other 8 teams be looking to downgrade their goalies for the sake of saving cap space?
If you have two...yeah.

Flair Hay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 07:17 PM
  #60
kmad
Riot Survivor
 
kmad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 33,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MardocAgain View Post
VAN fans essentially ran Luongo out of town and then come on here and call him criminally underrated.
That's right. All of Vancouver collectively ran Luongo out of town, and now all of Vancouver is calling him criminally underrated. I wish the entire city would get together and make sure that the opinion that everyone in the city shares is consistent.

kmad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 07:25 PM
  #61
Flair Hay
Registered User
 
Flair Hay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,179
vCash: 50
And to DJOpus,

Not sure why your getting defensive on me man I cheer for the Canucks and I still love Luongo.

To defend my point: a) on a phone at work man I laziest out a bit and guessed. B) I'd disagree Schneider is playing less than 60 games if healthy. Canucks are less of a lock for division title than usual this year. A slow start (Kesler out for a bit) they could need Cory to play as much as possible to even think about home ice.

15 goals instead of zero is a pretty big gap to fill with your numbers. But is that cap space better served with Luongo there at his cap hit even if it is 15 goals. Screw goal differential man, these guys success is based on the playoffs. And only one guy can play at once.

Easy on the tone next time.

Flair Hay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 07:41 PM
  #62
Cool Hand Goof*
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Victoria BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,527
vCash: 500
im not saying this trade is good

but whats the deal with everyone undervaluing luongo like crazy

people on HF boards seem to think hes garbage

when in fact hes one of the best in the league

Cool Hand Goof* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 07:47 PM
  #63
mriswith
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 349
vCash: 500
Don't want anything to do with Marleau, and trading Edler is foolish. We have no one like him on the team or in the system coming up.

Also, Luongo has to go out of conference. Gillis isn't stupid enough to trade him to a Western conference contender.

mriswith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 08:12 PM
  #64
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 37,647
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by King goof View Post
im not saying this trade is good

but whats the deal with everyone undervaluing luongo like crazy

people on HF boards seem to think hes garbage

when in fact hes one of the best in the league
Even if he is there are simply not a whole lot of teams that need a goalie and even fewer teams that are willing to take that contract and that plays into his value.

Quote:
Originally Posted by schism View Post
Don't want anything to do with Marleau, and trading Edler is foolish. We have no one like him on the team or in the system coming up.

Also, Luongo has to go out of conference. Gillis isn't stupid enough to trade him to a Western conference contender.
Marleau is one of the best left wingers in the game. Why anyone wouldn't want him is beyond me. As for Luongo, it's not a big deal if he's dealt in or out of conference. Goalies don't make that big of a difference to teams anymore.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 08:24 PM
  #65
CanuckLuck
Registered User
 
CanuckLuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Kelowna, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,455
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Even if he is there are simply not a whole lot of teams that need a goalie and even fewer teams that are willing to take that contract and that plays into his value.



Marleau is one of the best left wingers in the game. Why anyone wouldn't want him is beyond me. As for Luongo, it's not a big deal if he's dealt in or out of conference. Goalies don't make that big of a difference to teams anymore.
I'd actually say the opposite...Did you notice anything similar about the final 4 teams this year?

CanuckLuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 08:26 PM
  #66
Back in 94
In Gillis I trust
 
Back in 94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Even if he is there are simply not a whole lot of teams that need a goalie and even fewer teams that are willing to take that contract and that plays into his value.



Marleau is one of the best left wingers in the game. Why anyone wouldn't want him is beyond me. As for Luongo, it's not a big deal if he's dealt in or out of conference. Goalies don't make that big of a difference to teams anymore.
Not sure I agree, his 64 points in 82 games last year suggests he may be on a decline. Vancouver wouldn't want him because we already have a first line LW in Daniel Sedin. 6.9m would be too much of a cap hit for a player on the second line IMO.

This trade just doesn't work out for either teams.

Back in 94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 08:28 PM
  #67
DuckEatinShark
GET ALL THE PPs!!!!
 
DuckEatinShark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: San Jose
Posts: 5,624
vCash: 500
No way SJ is going to do this. Vancouver shouldn't do it either.

It makes no sense for either team. SJ needs more top 6 wingers. Vancouver's defense is mediocre at best without Edler.

DuckEatinShark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 08:32 PM
  #68
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 37,647
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanuckLuck View Post
I'd actually say the opposite...Did you notice anything similar about the final 4 teams this year?
I would hope that you noticed that only Henrik Lundqvist was considered an elite goalie leading up to this season. Quick was a good but not top ten goalie before this past season. Brodeur was next to retirement and had team issues getting out of the first round. And Mike Smith was a cast-off. Goalies put in the right position can do wonders and it's not because there isn't necessarily anything special about that netminder as it is just finding the right fit and system to play in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Back in 94 View Post
Not sure I agree, his 64 points in 82 games last year suggests he may be on a decline. Vancouver wouldn't want him because we already have a first line LW in Daniel Sedin. 6.9m would be too much of a cap hit for a player on the second line IMO.

This trade just doesn't work out for either teams.
You're not being very thorough if you buy what you're saying about Marleau. The whole league has been on a decline in terms of goal scoring. Marleau has been potting 30+ goals the past four seasons and is one of the better left wingers defensively as well. Compared to Daniel Sedin, he may not be more productive but he's not nearly as sheltered as he often has to play against the best competition nightly or carry a struggling 2nd line.

The trade itself is not really what I care to argue. The reasons against it are obvious for both sides but saying you don't want anything to do with a certain player is something a little bit different.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 08:39 PM
  #69
CanuckLuck
Registered User
 
CanuckLuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Kelowna, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,455
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
I would hope that you noticed that only Henrik Lundqvist was considered an elite goalie leading up to this season. Quick was a good but not top ten goalie before this past season. Brodeur was next to retirement and had team issues getting out of the first round. And Mike Smith was a cast-off. Goalies put in the right position can do wonders and it's not because there isn't necessarily anything special about that netminder as it is just finding the right fit and system to play in.
Lundqvist is the best goaltender in the league and is the primary reason the Rangers finished #2 in the league last year.

Both Quick and Smith had remarkable seasons. In fact, a lot of Kings AND Coyotes fans would agree the only reason their teams made the playoffs was from great goaltending. So when they continued their play in the post-season it wasn't exactly out of nowhere. Both of these teams were driven by solid goaltending.

Brodeur may be the only exception. He is on the decline but is still widely considered one of the most consistent goaltenders of all-time.

And just to add to that, the Canucks only won the Presdent's trophy last year because of remarkable goaltending. Luongo and Schneider bailed the team out often times last year. So my point is-What's your reason for believing goaltenders don't play as big of a part? To me, the difference between good and bad goaltending is the difference between a Stanley Cup winner and a team that misses the playoffs.

CanuckLuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 08:40 PM
  #70
Back in 94
In Gillis I trust
 
Back in 94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
I would hope that you noticed that only Henrik Lundqvist was considered an elite goalie leading up to this season. Quick was a good but not top ten goalie before this past season. Brodeur was next to retirement and had team issues getting out of the first round. And Mike Smith was a cast-off. Goalies put in the right position can do wonders and it's not because there isn't necessarily anything special about that netminder as it is just finding the right fit and system to play in.



You're not being very thorough if you buy what you're saying about Marleau. The whole league has been on a decline in terms of goal scoring. Marleau has been potting 30+ goals the past four seasons and is one of the better left wingers defensively as well. Compared to Daniel Sedin, he may not be more productive but he's not nearly as sheltered as he often has to play against the best competition nightly or carry a struggling 2nd line.

The trade itself is not really what I care to argue. The reasons against it are obvious for both sides but saying you don't want anything to do with a certain player is something a little bit different.
Alright, fair enough I understand what you are getting at. I just think that next year I wouldn't be surprised if Marleaus point production dropped from his 64 points this year. And while he might be better defensively, he still wouldn't take Daniels spot on the first line. Which leaves us with a 6.9m 2nd line LW, and a 4.2m 3rd line LW (assuming Booth drops to the third line).

I would also like to say that I never said I didn't want anything to do with him. However trading for him from a Vancouver POV would make zero sense.

Back in 94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 08:54 PM
  #71
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 37,647
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanuckLuck View Post
Lundqvist is the best goaltender in the league and is the primary reason the Rangers finished #2 in the league last year.

Both Quick and Smith had remarkable seasons. In fact, a lot of Kings AND Coyotes fans would agree the only reason their teams made the playoffs was from great goaltending. So when they continued their play in the post-season it wasn't exactly out of nowhere. Both of these teams were driven by solid goaltending.

Brodeur may be the only exception. He is on the decline but is still widely considered one of the most consistent goaltenders of all-time.

And just to add to that, the Canucks only won the Presdent's trophy last year because of remarkable goaltending. Luongo and Schneider bailed the team out often times last year. So my point is-What's your reason for believing goaltenders don't play as big of a part? To me, the difference between good and bad goaltending is the difference between a Stanley Cup winner and a team that misses the playoffs.
Yes, those goalies had remarkable seasons. However, you're missing the point. These guys, with the exception of Lundqvist, were not elite going into the season. They were good goalies, with the exception of Smith who sucked in 2010-11, that played great this season or at the right time. Goalies always look better when the players in front of them are doing their job and have the talent. Goaltending at the NHL level is more about finding the right fit. A goalie is nothing without a very good defense in front of him. As for the Canucks comment, that is very disingenuous. Teams don't win at that kind of clip based off of one thing. You have to have a solid defense, offense, and goaltending to be a top team in this league at the minimum. The Canucks have had solid depth up and down their lineup and one of the best offenses in the league the past few years.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 09:02 PM
  #72
Back in 94
In Gillis I trust
 
Back in 94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Yes, those goalies had remarkable seasons. However, you're missing the point. These guys, with the exception of Lundqvist, were not elite going into the season. They were good goalies, with the exception of Smith who sucked in 2010-11, that played great this season or at the right time. Goalies always look better when the players in front of them are doing their job and have the talent. Goaltending at the NHL level is more about finding the right fit. A goalie is nothing without a very good defense in front of him. As for the Canucks comment, that is very disingenuous. Teams don't win at that kind of clip based off of one thing. You have to have a solid defense, offense, and goaltending to be a top team in this league at the minimum. The Canucks have had solid depth up and down their lineup and one of the best offenses in the league the past few years.
I agree with you here but I think most Canuck fans would agree that our goaltending, especially during the regular season was our strongest asset. The Luongo/Schneider tandem really did bail us out on numerous occasions.

Back in 94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 09:08 PM
  #73
CanuckLuck
Registered User
 
CanuckLuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Kelowna, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,455
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Yes, those goalies had remarkable seasons. However, you're missing the point. These guys, with the exception of Lundqvist, were not elite going into the season. They were good goalies, with the exception of Smith who sucked in 2010-11, that played great this season or at the right time. Goalies always look better when the players in front of them are doing their job and have the talent. Goaltending at the NHL level is more about finding the right fit. A goalie is nothing without a very good defense in front of him. As for the Canucks comment, that is very disingenuous. Teams don't win at that kind of clip based off of one thing. You have to have a solid defense, offense, and goaltending to be a top team in this league at the minimum. The Canucks have had solid depth up and down their lineup and one of the best offenses in the league the past few years.

Just my personal take on it, but it seems that teams are a revolving door around their goal-tending. Mistakes are amplified by 10x and ultimately goaltending comes down to 1 man, not a unit. I agree that team success is reliant on having strength at all positions, that isn't what I was refuting. I simply believe if you have bad goaltending you will suck and if you have good goaltending you will be good. I'm not sure the same can be said about the other positions.

And last year the Canucks looked uninterested most games and goaltending scraped the team by a lot of games. Last year the Canucks would get an A+ in net, a B on offense and a B on defense. Their goaltending was the difference between 5th and 1st place. A good team regardless, but their goaltending stood them apart.

CanuckLuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 09:11 PM
  #74
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 37,647
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Back in 94 View Post
I agree with you here but I think most Canuck fans would agree that our goaltending, especially during the regular season was our strongest asset. The Luongo/Schneider tandem really did bail us out on numerous occasions.
I'm sure they had their fair share of moments but having an offense tied for 4th in the league also helps.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CanuckLuck View Post
Just my personal take on it, but it seems that teams are a revolving door around their goal-tending. Mistakes are amplified by 10x and ultimately goaltending comes down to 1 man, not a unit. I agree that team success is reliant on having strength at all positions, that isn't what I was refuting. I simply believe if you have bad goaltending you will suck and if you have good goaltending you will be good. I'm not sure the same can be said about the other positions.

And last year the Canucks looked uninterested most games and goaltending scraped the team by a lot of games. Last year the Canucks would get an A+ in net, a B on offense and a B on defense. Their goaltending was the difference between 5th and 1st place. A good team regardless, but their goaltending stood them apart.
Michael Leighton and Brian Boucher were goaltenders that made it to the Cup finals. Antti Niemi won the Cup. Roberto Luongo was a good goalie in Florida and that team still sucked.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 09:14 PM
  #75
CanuckLuck
Registered User
 
CanuckLuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Kelowna, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,455
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
I'm sure they had their fair share of moments but having an offense tied for 4th in the league also helps.



Michael Leighton and Brian Boucher were goaltenders that made it to the Cup finals. Antti Niemi won the Cup. Roberto Luongo was a good goalie in Florida and that team still sucked.
Wow, okay that's great of you to use a couple of lame examples. There are exceptions to the rule, I agree; But they don't make the rule.

For every bad goaltender that's won a cup, I can name 15 good ones. And for every great goaltender that hasn't made the playoffs, I can name 10 bad ones that also didn't. So i'm not sure what your point is.

CanuckLuck 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 03:27 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.