HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Notices

Luongo Thread - Waiting on the World to Change (Mod Warning in OP)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-06-2012, 06:58 PM
  #951
ddawg1950
Registered User
 
ddawg1950's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,649
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
That's mine as well. Luongo and Schneider will be Canucks when the season starts.


I also think this is the smart move. Get a feeling for what the landscape is like. At the same time, Lu and Schneids put some work in to help this team in the short-term. It also puts pressure on Burke. Every game his team loses, he will be questioned.


Finally, we'll know what Theodore and FLA are doing. Maybe they come back into the mix in a big way... It's prudent to wait.
Agreed. And it is a reflection of the strength of our hand here.

I say this a lot on the politics board "I'd rather be us than them."

ddawg1950 is online now  
Old
11-06-2012, 07:02 PM
  #952
I in the Eye
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country:
Posts: 4,174
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
That's mine as well. Luongo and Schneider will be Canucks when the season starts.


I also think this is the smart move. Get a feeling for what the landscape is like. At the same time, Lu and Schneids put some work in to help this team in the short-term. It also puts pressure on Burke. Every game his team loses, he will be questioned.


Finally, we'll know what Theodore and FLA are doing. Maybe they come back into the mix in a big way... It's prudent to wait.
I agree... my gut feeling is that both start the season as Canucks... My gut is also telling me that if Lu is traded at the start of the season, it will only be to Florida... If Lu is going to another team other than Florida, this thing goes the distance (trade deadline earliest, before training camp starts next year latest) - unless a team provides Gillis with an excellent offer to expidiate the process... The proper trading of Luongo is a process, not an event, IMHO... A process that started last draft... In the meantime, Lu is more than welcome to help contribute to (knock on wood) win a cup! The only thing Lu has to worry about is he'd be playing on Vancouver, or Florida this year... Next offseason, deal with the other possible teams, IMHO... Eliminate the uncertainty, and Lu can stay happy (or happy enough) the entire year, IMHO...

I believe that Luongo is going to Florida... It's just a matter of when, and for what... It might take until next offseason, to get a "great" return (i.e. auction time, flirting and dinner date with other teams, Theodore retiring, etc.)... Or, it might take until the Canucks need cap space, to get a "decent" return... I think that Gillis would settle for a "good" return, if it's dealt with ASAP... Regardless, my gut feeling is the end result is Florida... It's only been Florida... It's just a matter of when, and for what? When this is all said and done, my prediction is that Lu wasn't even presented with the possibility of going to another team, other than Florida, from Gillis...


Last edited by I in the Eye: 11-06-2012 at 07:07 PM.
I in the Eye is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 07:13 PM
  #953
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddawg1950 View Post
Agreed. And it is a reflection of the strength of our hand here.

I say this a lot on the politics board "I'd rather be us than them."

I don't know how anyone could want to be in the position to "want" an asset. I'd rather have it. Gillis has always been in the position of strength. He gets to decide when this deal happens. No other GM can claim that.


I've heard all the arguments:


- VAN must deal Lu. Yes, they eventually do, but "when" is still up for debate.

- Lu will destroy the room. Ok, but weigh that against making a poor trade that will have an effect on this market for the next decade... There's no comparison.

- VAN needs the cap space. For what? They have 2.4m in space heading into this season. Which means they have a whole year to do something before any cap reduction is implemented.

- Lu's value will only go down as a backup. Sure, if you're a GM that has the memory of gnat. GMs take the long view. They see his value.

- That contract is a millstone. Well then no one would want him correct? Clearly these GMs have phoned Gillis to check up on the weather in VAN?



It's counter-argument after counter-argument, all ignoring that Lu is currently a Canuck, Gillis is GM, both goalies are signed, VAN has cap space left over and these two tenders co-existed quite well last year... Terrible situation there.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 08:35 PM
  #954
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 10,032
vCash: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
I think with TO, the best one could expect is value, even if it doesn't address need.


Bozak is the one piece that does address the 3C position directly. I don't know if he'll work in that role, but that's where he fits on this team.


I agree with you on Weise/Frattin. DW has a more polished defensive game, while Frattin looks more to be in the Kassian mold: Capable, but not a shutdown player by any means.



From every speculation about a potential deal, Kadri + 1st seem like the most logical future pieces coming back. These two pieces make so much sense from a value standpoint that I cannot envision a TO deal without them. I know people don't like Kadri, but strictly based on projecting him as an NHLer alone, he brings value.
Even if we end up doing a trade like this purely for the value we get in return, and not need, I'd wonder how easily we could convert those assets into something else down the road, especially Kadri if he doesn't mesh with AV here. At least with the 1st rounder we to pick our own player and Frattin could turn out to be a very useful 3rd liner.

vanuck is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 09:58 PM
  #955
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem View Post
Did he say that Bozak is better than Grabovski?
There is a reason Bozak was on the 1st line. He had much better chemestry with Kessel/Lupul. Grabovski and Connolly were both tried there but Bozak had better success on the first line.

Perhaps while you are all laughing, someone could point out were i stated Bozak was "bettet" than Grabovski. I guess using this logic, your Selke calibre player (Kesler) is nothing more than a 2C as he plays on you second line...right?


Last edited by Liferleafer: 11-06-2012 at 10:07 PM.
Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 10:32 PM
  #956
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
There is a reason Bozak was on the 1st line. He had much better chemestry with Kessel/Lupul. Grabovski and Connolly were both tried there but Bozak had better success on the first line.

Perhaps while you are all laughing, someone could point out were i stated Bozak was "bettet" than Grabovski. I guess using this logic, your Selke calibre player (Kesler) is nothing more than a 2C as he plays on you second line...right?


Kesler is a 1C playing on the 2nd line due to depth. The opposite is true of Bozak. He plays higher on the depth chart in TO than his true talent suggests.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 11:01 PM
  #957
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Kesler is a 1C playing on the 2nd line due to depth. The opposite is true of Bozak. He plays higher on the depth chart in TO than his true talent suggests.
Of course you are right. I was trying to make a point to the folks who said "duh...he done said Bozak is better than Grabovski cause he is on the 1nst line...duh...haha.." That is not at all what i said, just as Kesler isn't a labeled 2C just because that is were he is playing. The same way Luongo can't be labeled a backup.

Oh..and Bleach, Bozak is playing on the first line due to depth reasons. The main reason being we don't have any!!lol

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 11:32 PM
  #958
PG Canuck
Moderator
 
PG Canuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Prince George, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,502
vCash: 1512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Of course you are right. I was trying to make a point to the folks who said "duh...he done said Bozak is better than Grabovski cause he is on the 1nst line...duh...haha.." That is not at all what i said, just as Kesler isn't a labeled 2C just because that is were he is playing. The same way Luongo can't be labeled a backup.

Oh..and Bleach, Bozak is playing on the first line due to depth reasons. The main reason being we don't have any!!lol
Your one post made it seem as if Bozak was the absolute reason Lupul/Kessel are PPG players. I find that quite hard to believe. He may have chemistry, but I think if you put a better C in between Kessel and Lupul, they wouldn't miss Bozak and I'm not suggesting putting Grabovski there because he's better then Bozak.

If Bozak was thee reason Kessel and Lupul are PPG players, then Bozak's value would be much higher then what it is right now. Kessel and Lupul are likely just making Bozak look better then he actually is.

PG Canuck is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 12:01 AM
  #959
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Of course you are right. I was trying to make a point to the folks who said "duh...he done said Bozak is better than Grabovski cause he is on the 1nst line...duh...haha.." That is not at all what i said, just as Kesler isn't a labeled 2C just because that is were he is playing. The same way Luongo can't be labeled a backup.

Please explain that last bit to some other Leafs fans.


Quote:
Oh..and Bleach, Bozak is playing on the first line due to depth reasons. The main reason being we don't have any!!lol

Understood.


Last edited by Bleach Clean: 11-07-2012 at 12:34 AM.
Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 06:00 AM
  #960
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PG Canuck View Post
Your one post made it seem as if Bozak was the absolute reason Lupul/Kessel are PPG players. I find that quite hard to believe. He may have chemistry, but I think if you put a better C in between Kessel and Lupul, they wouldn't miss Bozak and I'm not suggesting putting Grabovski there because he's better then Bozak.

If Bozak was thee reason Kessel and Lupul are PPG players, then Bozak's value would be much higher then what it is right now. Kessel and Lupul are likely just making Bozak look better then he actually is.
Actually, what i said was if we didn't have Bozak, Kessel/Lupul MAY not have had PPG seasons. The reason for this is because Bozak had the greatest success amongst OUR centers. Kessle/Lupul had much lower production when any other center was used. Of course they would produce with a better center.....we don't have one...so we roll what works within our roster.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 08:27 AM
  #961
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,383
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Actually, what i said was if we didn't have Bozak, Kessel/Lupul MAY not have had PPG seasons. The reason for this is because Bozak had the greatest success amongst OUR centers. Kessle/Lupul had much lower production when any other center was used. Of course they would produce with a better center.....we don't have one...so we roll what works within our roster.
Ok give us Grabovski instead of Bozak then (waits for Grabovski to now become as valuable as Getzlaf because he's the only Leafs center who's last name starts with a G).

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 08:57 AM
  #962
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Ok give us Grabovski instead of Bozak then (waits for Grabovski to now become as valuable as Getzlaf because he's the only Leafs center who's last name starts with a G).
Grabovski's value is highest to the Leafs. Again, we have NEGATIVE depth in the center department. If we move Grabo, we are left with Bozak/McClement/Connolly/Steckel...does that look feasable to you?

You can drop the drama, nowhere have i said Bozak is a NHL #1C. Nowhere have i EVER compared Grabo to Getzlaf. All i have ever stated is their value to the LEAFS. I get Bozak is 3C to you, but within the Leafs roster...he is our 1. Sad, but true. Furthermore, even if i said "i'll give Grabo", you'd come back and say "add a 1st,Gardiner and Kadri because Luongo is the shizny!!"


Last edited by Liferleafer: 11-07-2012 at 09:03 AM.
Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 09:14 AM
  #963
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,383
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Grabovski's value is highest to the Leafs. Again, we have NEGATIVE depth in the center department. If we move Grabo, we are left with Bozak/McClement/Connolly/Steckel...does that look feasable to you?

You can drop the drama, nowhere have i said Bozak is a NHL #1C. Nowhere have i EVER compared Grabo to Getzlaf. All i have ever stated is their value to the LEAFS. I get Bozak is 3C to you, but within the Leafs roster...he is our 1. Sad, but true. Furthermore, even if i said "i'll give Grabo", you'd come back and say "add a 1st,Gardiner and Kadri because Luongo is the shizny!!"
And if you don't acquire Luongo your goalie depth will be Reimer/Scrivens/Rynnas/Owuya. You have NEGATIVE depth in net. Does this seem feasible to you....?

I'm tired of the crap quantity for our quality goalie proposals. Either the Leafs give us a valuable piece or you don't get Luongo and you can stick with your goalie depth that's far worse than your center depth. It's hilarious how Leaf fans try to sell us on useless prospects like Colborne, yet those players apparently aren't good enough to crack the Leafs roster despite the Leafs having "negative" depth at that position. One would think if a prospect were any good at all, in a situation like this, he would seize the opportunity. Oh well.

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 09:27 AM
  #964
Nuck This
Registered User
 
Nuck This's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,022
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
And if you don't acquire Luongo your goalie depth will be Reimer/Scrivens/Rynnas/Owuya. You have NEGATIVE depth in net. Does this seem feasible to you....?

I'm tired of the crap quantity for our quality goalie proposals. Either the Leafs give us a valuable piece or you don't get Luongo and you can stick with your goalie depth that's far worse than your center depth. It's hilarious how Leaf fans try to sell us on useless prospects like Colborne, yet those players apparently aren't good enough to crack the Leafs roster despite the Leafs having "negative" depth at that position. One would think if a prospect were any good at all, in a situation like this, he would seize the opportunity. Oh well.
Leafs fans don't seem to realize that they have the worst defense and goaltending in the Eastern Conference. There offense isn't the greatest either......As it stands now they're in the bottom two in the conference. With Luongo they have a playoff shot.

Nuck This is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 09:32 AM
  #965
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
And if you don't acquire Luongo your goalie depth will be Reimer/Scrivens/Rynnas/Owuya. You have NEGATIVE depth in net. Does this seem feasible to you....?

I'm tired of the crap quantity for our quality goalie proposals. Either the Leafs give us a valuable piece or you don't get Luongo and you can stick with your goalie depth that's far worse than your center depth. It's hilarious how Leaf fans try to sell us on useless prospects like Colborne, yet those players apparently aren't good enough to crack the Leafs roster despite the Leafs having "negative" depth at that position. One would think if a prospect were any good at all, in a situation like this, he would seize the opportunity. Oh well.
And....we won't be getting Luongo. I find it funny, you seem to be able to forcast the doom and gloom of the Leafs, yet you feel running with the same Canucks team (+Garrison) is a lock. I'm sure you know the Van situation much better than i do, but i find it REALLY hard to believe that Gillis is A-OK with Luongo staying. I'm curious, tell me how you think a bottom 5 team is going to give you a top quality roster player. It's not like we are the Rangers and have a plethora of expendable top 6 players. The problem you are facing is that the rumoured teams of interest can only do a (what you call) soft deals. A question, if both teams (Canucks and Leafs) finish the exact same, who is happier? You win the regular season but get bounced 1st round and draft very late 1st round, we pick top 5 again.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 09:33 AM
  #966
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,383
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuck This View Post
Leafs fans don't seem to realize that they have the worst defense and goaltending in the Eastern Conference. There offense isn't the greatest either......As it stands now they're in the bottom two in the conference. With Luongo they have a playoff shot.
A part of me thinks they do realize this, but they are just praying and hoping that Gillis is as dumb as Sutter was and gives them a star player for a slew of their garbage. If we do, I can certainly see the Canucks taking a Flames like dive within the next 2-3 years. But I'm having faith that Gillis is smarter than this.

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 09:33 AM
  #967
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuck This View Post
Leafs fans don't seem to realize that they have the worst defense and goaltending in the Eastern Conference. There offense isn't the greatest either......As it stands now they're in the bottom two in the conference. With Luongo they have a playoff shot.
So...we suck at defense...we suck at offense...but Luongo gets us in? Maybe a bit of a stretch...no?

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 09:35 AM
  #968
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,927
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vancouver_2010 View Post
We don't need draft picks or prospects from the leafs, we need players that could contribute now.
Actually, we do. Eventually the Sedin/Kesler era will end and I would rather us not become Calgary for the foreseeable future. Frankly though, this is why I would trade Schneider. If we could get a real impact prospect or someone better (Lupul or thereabouts) then keeping Lu is the better option.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 09:39 AM
  #969
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,383
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
And....we won't be getting Luongo. I find it funny, you seem to be able to forcast the doom and gloom of the Leafs, yet you feel running with the same Canucks team (+Garrison) is a lock. I'm sure you know the Van situation much better than i do, but i find it REALLY hard to believe that Gillis is A-OK with Luongo staying. I'm curious, tell me how you think a bottom 5 team is going to give you a top quality roster player. It's not like we are the Rangers and have a plethora of expendable top 6 players. The problem you are facing is that the rumoured teams of interest can only do a (what you call) soft deals. A question, if both teams (Canucks and Leafs) finish the exact same, who is happier? You win the regular season but get bounced 1st round and draft very late 1st round, we pick top 5 again.
I'd rather get to the playoffs than suffer a year long season of failure. I also think the Canucks will go far in the playoffs if the Sedins and Kesler show up offensively consistently, although we do need another top 6 winger.

Answer this: if the Canucks dump the reason we got as far as we did in the 2011 playoffs and don't address the areas of why we got bounced by the Bruins and Kings, how does that make us any better? How does it do us any good to dump Luongo for a bunch of crap from the Leafs?? It doesn't! The Leafs need to either buck up or bow out.

And for the record, I think Gillis would rather keep Luongo than dump him for the garbage you're offering. I also think there are teams like Edmonton who could offer us more useful assets than the Leafs. And yes, it actually does make more sense to deal Luongo to Edmonton if the Oilers are offering us a better deal.

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 09:39 AM
  #970
Alflives
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,528
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PG Canuck View Post
Your one post made it seem as if Bozak was the absolute reason Lupul/Kessel are PPG players. I find that quite hard to believe. He may have chemistry, but I think if you put a better C in between Kessel and Lupul, they wouldn't miss Bozak and I'm not suggesting putting Grabovski there because he's better then Bozak.

If Bozak was thee reason Kessel and Lupul are PPG players, then Bozak's value would be much higher then what it is right now. Kessel and Lupul are likely just making Bozak look better then he actually is.
Is there a Canuck who appears to be a lot better than he really is, because of his line-mates? Might I suggest Burrows? Is Burrows, therefore, only a second or third-line player? This argument that Bozak is made to look a lot better player than he really is, because he's playing with really good players can be continued throughout the league. If Bozak plays number 1 minutes, regardless of his line-mates, he's a number 1 center.

Alflives is online now  
Old
11-07-2012, 09:39 AM
  #971
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,383
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
So...we suck at defense...we suck at offense...but Luongo gets us in? Maybe a bit of a stretch...no?
See Vancouver version 2006-07. The sucky team that Nonis built.

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 09:46 AM
  #972
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
I'd rather get to the playoffs than suffer a year long season of failure. I also think the Canucks will go far in the playoffs if the Sedins and Kesler show up offensively consistently, although we do need another top 6 winger.

Answer this: if the Canucks dump the reason we got as far as we did in the 2011 playoffs and don't address the areas of why we got bounced by the Bruins and Kings, how does that make us any better? How does it do us any good to dump Luongo for a bunch of crap from the Leafs?? It doesn't! The Leafs need to either buck up or bow out.

And for the record, I think Gillis would rather keep Luongo than dump him for the garbage you're offering. I also think there are teams like Edmonton who could offer us more useful assets than the Leafs. And yes, it actually does make more sense to deal Luongo to Edmonton if the Oilers are offering us a better deal.
And for some reason you have a love affair with Gagner and Hemsky. If those guys are your big target, by all means, deal him to EDM. However, i don't think Gagner is available (same reason as Leafs, no depth at center). Hemsky...maybe, but i thought the goal was to get tougher.

i guess i'll close with...i find it a little unbelievable that you'd consider a potential high pick in this years draft garbage, but what do i know.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 09:48 AM
  #973
Alflives
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,528
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
I'd rather get to the playoffs than suffer a year long season of failure. I also think the Canucks will go far in the playoffs if the Sedins and Kesler show up offensively consistently, although we do need another top 6 winger.

And for the record, I think Gillis would rather keep Luongo than dump him for the garbage you're offering. I also think there are teams like Edmonton who could offer us more useful assets than the Leafs. And yes, it actually does make more sense to deal Luongo to Edmonton if the Oilers are offering us a better deal.
Luongo is not going to return what the Canucks need to overcome their playoff troubles. The Canucks lost to the Bruins and the Kings, because the Canucks top goal scorers do not play tough, and their goals dried up. Who on Toronto could help with this circumstance? Who on Edmonton? Florida? The Canucks need a tough foward who can play in the top six (Kassian??) They also need a really tough d-man who can play 25 to 30 minutes. Could Luongo return Phaneuf? Would Toronto consider such a trade? Consequently, Luongo's return will be extra parts.

Alflives is online now  
Old
11-07-2012, 09:49 AM
  #974
crazycanuck
Registered User
 
crazycanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,191
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
So...we suck at defense...we suck at offense...but Luongo gets us in? Maybe a bit of a stretch...no?
Actually the Leafs defense personel wise is decent. Wilson just didn't have them play a system that played to their strengths. Offensively the Leafs are pretty solid Kessel,JVR,Lupul isn't the best top 3 but it's not the worst and they have enough depth to be competitive if they play the right system and have a good goaltender.

The Leafs playing a physical more defensively responsible system with Luongo in net will be a very tough team to play against and beat.

crazycanuck is online now  
Old
11-07-2012, 09:54 AM
  #975
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
See Vancouver version 2006-07. The sucky team that Nonis built.
Ummm....that team had both Sedins, Markus Naslund, Trevor Linden,Ryan Kesler,Bieksa,Edler,Morrison....Hell, Pyatt scored 23 that year. You finished #1 overall with 105 points...sucky team?? Am i missing a joke?

Liferleafer 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 12:39 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.