Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.
Not sure if it's been mentioned already, but Pavelski for Sharp? You get your elite 2-way #2C...of course it probably wouldn't be a 1 for 1 swap, but that would be the core part of the deal. Thoughts?
Not sure if it's been mentioned already, but Pavelski for Sharp? You get your elite 2-way #2C...of course it probably wouldn't be a 1 for 1 swap, but that would be the core part of the deal. Thoughts?
Trading Sharp for a 2C seems kind of silly since we might as well just use him as 2C in that case. The Hawks are looking to add a 2C without giving up any of the big 4 forwards, so they shouldn't really be targeting the elite 2Cs in the first place.
Even as a steal, it still lowers the market value of goalies as a whole.
That's how markets work. You look at comparable situations and what their value was, and base the value you offer off of that. That's why everyone in the neighborhood gets pissed when someone sells their house for way less than perceived market value, because it lowers the value of every comparable house in the neighborhood.
Even if you want to dismiss those, what about Giguere? Seems like a similar situation.
Older veteran (with serious playoff credibility, unlike Lu) announces he doesn't want to backup a younger starter. What does he get? Vesa Toskala and Jason Blake. That is, a nothing between the pipes and a 2nd/3rd line tweener.
Luongo is better than Giguere for sure, but I don't think his record or his talent are so much better as to offset that value to the point of being worth a surefire 1st line RW (who's undoubtedly one of the best in the NHL today).
Jason Blake was a solid player, putting up 50-60 points, not unlike Franzen at the time of the trade. As you said, Luongo is better than Giguere, so Franzen + late 1st should seem reasonable to you.
Quote:
I'm not. But they aren't any more likely to either, which is what you seem to be saying.
Okay. I personally believe it to be true, but as I can't really prove it to you we can just call them equally likely to decline.(and that's being lenient, as Hossa is just coming off a concussion)
Quote:
Hossa as a third line forward still has him on the ice contributing in every game.
Luongo playing 25-40 games and spending the rest on the bench does not.
If Luongo had played backup instead of Emery last year for the Hawks, he would have stopped an extra 15 goals, which sounds about right for the production of a third liner.
Jason Blake was a solid player, putting up 50-60 points, not unlike Franzen at the time of the trade. As you said, Luongo is better than Giguere, so Franzen + late 1st should seem reasonable to you.
Wings fans can talk about Franzen. I've been talking about Hossa.
Quote:
Okay. I personally believe it to be true, but as I can't really prove it to you we can just call them equally likely to decline.(and that's being lenient, as Hossa is just coming off a concussion)
It's something you've been stating as a given, when it's at best speculation.
Speculation that I obviously don't agree with, so it's not really swaying me towards accepting your assertion that Luongo and Hossa have similar value.
Quote:
If Luongo had played backup instead of Emery last year for the Hawks, he would have stopped an extra 15 goals, which sounds about right for the production of a third liner.
Luongo would've been the starter for the Hawks last year without a doubt.
Of course, we're talking about Luongo in 5ish years with the assumption that his play has already declined far enough for him to become a backup, so projections that rely on him maintaining the same level of play as last year are asinine.
Of course, we're talking about Luongo in 5ish years with the assumption that his play has already declined far enough for him to become a backup, so projections that rely on him maintaining the same level of play as last year are asinine.
Why?
All goalies, that I can think of, who have played at Luongo's level since the lockout have played well into their late 30s early 40s:
-Thomas' play hasn't dropped at all and he's hit 38;
-Brodeur's level of play at 40 earned him an extension at $4.5M a year until he's 42.
-Kipper is also going strong at 36 and will likely have no problems getting a big money deal into his 40s when his contract expires.
-Hasek, who is on another level, played well until he was 41 which is when his play started declining and he still got contracts until he was 43.
-Joseph played as a starter until he was 40 and still got contracts until he was 42.
-Belfour was a starter until he was 42 and retired never having been relegated to a backup role.
We can't really talk about Lundqvist or Rinne since they are still too young.
I can't really think of anyone who started playing in the 90s that was successful enough to be nominated for multiple Veiznas who didn't play well into their late 30s early 40s.
All goalies, that I can think of, who have played at Luongo's level since the lockout have played well into their late 30s early 40s:
-Thomas' play hasn't dropped at all and he's hit 38;
-Brodeur's level of play at 40 earned him an extension at $4.5M a year until he's 42.
-Kipper is also going strong at 36 and will likely have no problems getting a big money deal into his 40s when his contract expires.
-Hasek, who is on another level, played well until he was 41 which is when his play started declining and he still got contracts until he was 43.
-Joseph played as a starter until he was 40 and still got contracts until he was 42.
-Belfour was a starter until he was 42 and retired never having been relegated to a backup role.
We can't really talk about Lundqvist or Rinne since they are still too young.
I can't really think of anyone who started playing in the 90s that was successful enough to be nominated for multiple Veiznas who didn't play well into their late 30s early 40s.
It could just as easily end up that in the specific case of Luongo, his play drops off to the point where he must become a backup.
Unless you know the future, you can't say for certain that Luongo will still be playing at his current level from now until either his contract ends or he retires, whichever comes first. That's why you have to consider the scenario where his play drops to a point where he gets relegated to a backup role.
Of course, we're talking about Luongo in 5ish years with the assumption that his play has already declined far enough for him to become a backup, so projections that rely on him maintaining the same level of play as last year are asinine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston
It could just as easily end up that in the specific case of Luongo, his play drops off to the point where he must become a backup.
Unless you know the future, you can't say for certain that Luongo will still be playing at his current level from now until either his contract ends or he retires, whichever comes first.
Your 2nd quote is certainly a step back from your first quote where you imply that it's "asinine" to assume that his level of play will be as good as it was last year five years from now.
I'd say its likely that Luongo is still a good to elite NHL starter beyond the age of 38 based on his commitment to fitness and the history of goalies who play at his level in the most recent decades.
In the context of this thread, my first quote specifically addressed a situation Vankiller Whale and I had been discussing where Luongo's play did fall off to the point where he had to become a backup. It was the counter-situation to one where Hossa's play fell off to the point where he became a third liner.
In that situation, you've already made the assumption that he won't play at the same level as he did at any time in the past, so making projections using his numbers from any time in the past is asinine.
Even if it's likely Luongo can keep it up, it's still possible that he can't. If you're trading for him, you'd be foolish not to consider the latter situation.
In the context of this thread, my first quote specifically addressed a situation Vankiller Whale and I had been discussing where Luongo's play did fall off to the point where he had to become a backup. It was the counter-situation to one where Hossa's play fell off to the point where he became a third liner.
In that situation, you've already made the assumption that he won't play at the same level as he did at any time in the past, so making projections using his numbers from any time in the past is asinine.
Even if it's likely Luongo can keep it up, it's still possible that he can't. If you're trading for him, you'd be foolish not to consider the latter situation.
This fact is already represented in all player contracts. I don't think it's a stretch to say that if Luongo was a UFA this offseason that there would be several teams willing to give him a six year deal at a salary over $7m.
