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.

Gillis: Potential Return For Luongo May Not Improve Canucks **Mod Warning #86**

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-12-2012, 09:09 PM
  #76
CanuckLuck
Registered User
 
CanuckLuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Kelowna, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackdaddy View Post
I thought Gillis had all the time and leverage in the world?

The Doan factor is a pretty good twist to this story. The 14th could be the day the chips fall for both Doan and Vancouver.

Just like I've stated before, Gillis' best time to trade Luongo was during the off-season. His return would have been the highest then but terrible asset management and lack of foresight has put Gillis into an unfavorable situation. Not so stellar marks for Gillis' first and only true test of mettle.

Now with so many factors playing against Gillis, it appears he is finally releasing some statements that confirm what many said from the get go - there is no market for a 34 year old questionable goaltender with an 11 year contract. He's just greasing up the pipeline for what is going to go down in the next few days. The factors working against him just keep piling up on him the longer he waits. It's comical.

1) Threat of a salary cap reduction with no rollback
2) Commitment from Canucks to Doan on his "fallback contract" and the lack of space to accommodate him
3) Zero interest for Luongo and his contract
4) The sudden need to clear cap space.

Wow. How Gillis managed to turn such a sweetheart situation that any other team could have formulated an action plan over Sunday brunch into a perfect storm nightmare of looming CBA deadlines, free agent contracts, a 2 headed goaltending monster, zero cap space and a partridge in a pear tree is beyond me.

He could still get out of this scott-free if he just traded Luongo already. At least then he might be able to keep his promise to Doan if the Phoenix option doesn't work out for him. But I fully expect Gillis to hold onto Luongo until the lockout ends and the dust settles with a severely reduced cap and a buyers market the likes the NHL has never seen.

The fact that he is beginning to consider the option of a 3-way trade just confirms that he is desperate to get any value for Luongo whatsoever. That would be the only way he could get around the NTC. Even then, all this means is Gillis is going to have to add to Luongo to make up for his negative value.
Canucks have a full roster and are still 2.3M under the CAP. If the new CBA has a rollback that means player salaries will ALSO rollback. Otherwise every team would be over the CAP.

All the quote really says is that Gillis may have to accept an offer for futures. I think you're taking it out of context just a wee bit.

CanuckLuck is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 09:20 PM
  #77
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 17,784
vCash: 50
Bizzare how people can't tell the difference between a what Gillis said (you know the bit in quotes) and what the reporter's opinion is. Absolutely nothing of value was said in that article - all stuff that was already know. Only thing of remote interest is Luongo has re-confirmed he's happy to play in Van again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gillis
"It has to give us an opportunity to be different," Gillis said. "I don't think you replace an all-star goalie and necessarily feel you have to be better -- but you have to be different."
That's what normally happens in a trade. You downgrade areas to increase another. Futures for now. Winger for centres. Defense for attack. Depth for skill.

Quote:
Originally Posted by reporter opinion
The Canucks are expected to take on a big contract to offset the costs that the other team inherits in Luongo's deal.
I wouldn't be surprised, most people expect that to happen in a cap world.T

here is no reason to dump Luongo for scrap and plenty of reasons to keep him
* extra wins for a good back up
* Schneider could bomb
* Schneider could get injured
* Luongo could play lights out and his value goes crazy or we trade Schneider

All reasons I'd rather keep him than deal him for garbage if we can take the cap hit. I assume Gillis feels the same way, he's pretty cold and calculating and hard to panic.


Last edited by me2: 09-12-2012 at 09:35 PM.
me2 is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 09:26 PM
  #78
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,088
vCash: 5555
Would Florida be interested in trading Campbell for Luongo?

Then trade Edler for Perry.

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Booth-Kesler-Perry

Hamhuis-Bieksa
Campbell-Garrison.


Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 09:27 PM
  #79
deckercky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,658
vCash: 500
People are also reading a lot into Gillis saying nothing.

deckercky is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 09:31 PM
  #80
Martini*
Gods Team
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,786
vCash: 500
Hammer for Lu and a first.

I can see Olesz tossed in to even out the money.

I dont think anybody actually thought there was gonna be a huge return for Lu. I wont even mention how there was a Kane for Lu thread or anything.....

Martini* is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 09:32 PM
  #81
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisx101 View Post
No absolutely 0 Hes a pending UFA, his contract is up after this season, if he doesnt play this season hell never play for the team that acquires him (unless re-signed of course).
If MacArthur's value is absolutely zero, then so is every other fairly paid blueliner with a 1 year deal.

seanlinden is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 09:33 PM
  #82
Avs44
Registered User
 
Avs44's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 7,584
vCash: 3319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Would Florida be interested in trading Campbell for Luongo?

Then trade Edler for Perry.

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Booth-Kesler-Perry

Hamhuis-Bieksa
Campbell-Garrison.

Why would Anaheim even consider that

Avs44 is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 09:34 PM
  #83
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,088
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martini View Post
Hammer for Lu and a first.

I can see Olesz tossed in to even out the money.

I dont think anybody actually thought there was gonna be a huge return for Lu. I wont even mention how there was a Kane for Lu thread or anything.....
Wow that sounds so tempting I wouldn't do it, just because I'd feel guilty ripping Chicago off like that.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 09:35 PM
  #84
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,088
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs44 View Post
Why would Anaheim even consider that
If they can't get Perry re-signed, we could do it as a deadline deal. Maybe we throw in a pick.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 09:36 PM
  #85
BCShark
Registered User
 
BCShark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,661
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammer79 View Post
I think they will split duties. There's no reason to staple of goalie of Luongo's caliber to the bench. They will want Luongo to get his share of starts in so he doesn't go cold before they move him. If he isn't moved by the trade deadline, they will go with whoever is hot in the playoffs.
this

BCShark is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 09:37 PM
  #86
ColePens
Global Moderator
Your Savior
 
ColePens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 32,298
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to ColePens
Folks.. we know this topic has been quite frustrating in the past. We aren't going to do any warnings. If you flame/troll/bait/etc... you will be removed from this board for up to 6 months. No warnings from here on out.

ColePens is online now  
Old
09-12-2012, 09:37 PM
  #87
The Podium
Formerly chrisx101
 
The Podium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,300
vCash: 657
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
If MacArthur's value is absolutely zero, then so is every other fairly paid blueliner with a 1 year deal.
At this point, any pending UFA short of an All-Star is essentially worthless unless it is guaranteed that the season will be played.

The Podium is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 09:37 PM
  #88
Reverend Mayhem
Freeway's closed man
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,035
vCash: 940
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
Yeah, seems like the demand was pretty low.

Reverend Mayhem is online now  
Old
09-12-2012, 09:40 PM
  #89
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
If that weren't a problem, then why did this whole situation come up in the first place? What happens in three years when Schneider is a UFA and Vancouver still has Luongo because no one will touch that contract after the salary rollbacks and Schneider walks because he wants more playing time? I'd say there's a problem.
3 years isn't the issue -- the issue is what they're going to do to Luongo's value by keeping him. For all the knocks on his playoff performances, this is a goaltender who is basically 3 games removed from being the #1 guy in Vancouver. He played 55 regular season games and put up a very good .919 sv%. He's 1 year removed from 60 games, a gold medal, a .928 sv%, and Stanley Cup Finals appearance. He's been an undisputed #1 goaltender in the NHL for 10 years. Of course, it's one heck of a resume, and that establishes his value (whatever it may specifically be) today.

Falling to the role of backup / #1b goalie to a guy like Schneider (as seems to be the intention for Gillis) is going to put a substantial blemish on that resume... and it's not like burning off years makes his contract any more appealing. The deal carries him well into his 40s, if he had a 2 or 3 year deal, you could make the case that the Canucks are best served by keeping him in a reduced role, simply because burning off years of the contract will make him less of a risk to another team... but with 10 years left, that really isn't the case.

The result -- is that there's no way Gillis can reasonably expect to get a better deal for Luongo than this offseason.

"Buying low" and "selling high" is something that gets horrendously misused on this board because posters make the mistake of benchmarking to past value. If you're Gillis, this is an actual case of selling high, because you know that your plans for this year are going to decrease Luongo's value.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisx101 View Post
At this point, any pending UFA short of an All-Star is essentially worthless unless it is guaranteed that the season will be played.
If that were the case, the Leafs would be able to get the defenceman they need for absolutely nothing. Again, you're talking about value, but not in relation to anything. You trade player for player that are both on 1 year deals, and the risk/benefit of the season being played is equally burdened on each team. If we were talking about moving MacArthur for picks, prospects, or guys specifically with multi-year deals, that would be a different story.


Last edited by seanlinden: 09-12-2012 at 09:47 PM.
seanlinden is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 09:40 PM
  #90
Beezeral
Registered User
 
Beezeral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 2,010
vCash: 500
So does this mean gillis has lowered his asking price?

Beezeral is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 09:42 PM
  #91
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,088
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beezeral View Post
So does this mean gillis has lowered his asking price?
It means whatever you want it to mean. It could mean he's lowered his asking price, or that he isn't asking for immediate assets and would be willing to accept a futures package, or that he'd be better off waiting until the market heats up. Who knows?

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 09:50 PM
  #92
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 17,784
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beezeral View Post
So does this mean gillis has lowered his asking price?
Gillis didn't say anything at all about anything. People are just seeking hints where there are none, seeing what they want to see.

me2 is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 09:56 PM
  #93
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,320
vCash: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
A lot can happen in 3 years. May as well hold on to him until the market gets hot.
The market won't get hot, and Luongo will only get older and decline. Trading him now is the best plan for the Canucks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyLager View Post
It sounds like what you're saying is that there will be a problem in the future, not that there's one right now.
If you can avoid the problem later by solving it now, you do it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
3 years isn't the issue -- the issue is what they're going to do to Luongo's value by keeping him. For all the knocks on his playoff performances, this is a goaltender who is basically 3 games removed from being the #1 guy in Vancouver. He played 55 regular season games and put up a very good .919 sv%. He's 1 year removed from 60 games, a gold medal, a .928 sv%, and Stanley Cup Finals appearance. He's been an undisputed #1 goaltender in the NHL for 10 years. Of course, it's one heck of a resume, and that establishes his value (whatever it may specifically be) today.

Falling to the role of backup / #1b goalie to a guy like Schneider (as seems to be the intention for Gillis) is going to put a substantial blemish on that resume... and it's not like burning off years makes his contract any more appealing. The deal carries him well into his 40s, if he had a 2 or 3 year deal, you could make the case that the Canucks are best served by keeping him in a reduced role, simply because burning off years of the contract will make him less of a risk to another team... but with 10 years left, that really isn't the case.

The result -- is that there's no way Gillis can reasonably expect to get a better deal for Luongo than this offseason.

"Buying low" and "selling high" is something that gets horrendously misused on this board because posters make the mistake of benchmarking to past value. If you're Gillis, this is an actual case of selling high, because you know that your plans for this year are going to decrease Luongo's value.
The bolded are my two points precisely.

TheJuxtaposer is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 10:03 PM
  #94
Taelin
Moderator
Resident Hipster
 
Taelin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,970
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martini View Post
Hammer for Lu and a first.

I can see Olesz tossed in to even out the money.

I dont think anybody actually thought there was gonna be a huge return for Lu. I wont even mention how there was a Kane for Lu thread or anything.....
Not sure if serious.

If I had faith in the human race, I would assume you're kidding.

Taelin is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 10:05 PM
  #95
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
If you can avoid the problem later by solving it now, you do it.
By that logic we should have traded Schneider a couple years ago.

StringerBell is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 10:10 PM
  #96
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,320
vCash: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyLager View Post
By that logic we should have traded Schneider a couple years ago.
You know what I mean.

TheJuxtaposer is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 10:13 PM
  #97
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
You know what I mean.
I know what you mean, I just don't agree with it. You don't trade a player if you predict a future problem unless the right deal is on the table. Obviously everyone has a different idea of what the "right deal" is in this Luongo situation, but if Gillis thinks that waiting until the CBA is resolved will help facilitate a better deal then he has every reason to wait.


Just to be clear, I still haven't been able to formulate a solid opinion of whether or not waiting for a new CBA would help increase Lu's value. I think that's the most interesting discussion point in this thread.

StringerBell is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 10:23 PM
  #98
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,088
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
The market won't get hot, and Luongo will only get older and decline. Trading him now is the best plan for the Canucks.
How do you know the market won't get hot? Some team could easily find itself struggling at some point in the season and be more willing to give up assets for Luongo. A couple of months of age is hardly going to precipitate a decline. At the end of the season, when Burrows and Edler's contracts are renewed, then I could see us letting him go for cheap. But until then? May as well wait.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 10:24 PM
  #99
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
The result -- is that there's no way Gillis can reasonably expect to get a better deal for Luongo than this offseason.

"Buying low" and "selling high" is something that gets horrendously misused on this board because posters make the mistake of benchmarking to past value. If you're Gillis, this is an actual case of selling high, because you know that your plans for this year are going to decrease Luongo's value..
This is highly debatable. You're only considering the factor that will bring his value down, the 'backup factor'. For all we know this could be offset and then some by a new CBA if, for instance, the owners get a favourable deal that makes his contract more palatable. Market fluctuations will also play a BIG role in Luongo's future value, and we can't exactly be predicting how the market will fluctuate in the next few months. Not to mention Luongo's actual play next season.

We all like to pretend we're authorities here on HF, but any predictions into Luongo's future value are going to be half-baked at best. All we can really do are pinpoint the factors that will contribute to his value.


EDIT: A good example of this is Jeff Carter in Columbus. Everyone knew he was going to be dealt but Howsen waited until the market was right and could get a good before pulling the trigger. Who honestly thought Howson would be able to get JJ and a 1st for Carter at Christmas?

StringerBell is offline  
Old
09-12-2012, 10:25 PM
  #100
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,281
vCash: 500
So Lu comes out and says that he's willing to return, being professional, and this has somehow increased the need to deal him before the season starts? Hmmm.


Gillis essentially says that the team will not be better by dealing a legit #1 goalie off of it. Is that not correct?


The only real bit of "news" here is that Lu is willing to return, at least for part of the season, that's it. Where as some thought that this was next to impossible. Clearly, that's not the case.

Bleach Clean 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 07:23 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.