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.
Why would he walk? He just had his best season. Top line minutes are his to burn. He seems to like the limelight in TO as well.
He's not getting any younger, and might want to win a cup, and as HF likes to say, "He isn't getting any younger". Especially with his injuries maybe affecting his longevity.
He's not getting any younger, and might want to win a cup, and as HF likes to say, "He isn't getting any younger". Especially with his injuries maybe affecting his longevity.
He's 29, not 39. I hate to say it, but thats a weak arguement.
Umm you clearly are forgetting all the pertinent facts when it comes to Lu and his current status.
1) Contract til 43
2) Lost job due to inconsistent play
3) NTC which limits GM MG's ability to deal him.
You guys keep forgetting those very real facts.
Yes, and there are also pertinent facts that apply to the proposed package, namely:
1) Lupul and Bozak are both upcoming UFAs
2) Lupul is injury prone
3) Both Lupul and Bozak are fairly weak defensively
4) We'd be buying high on both those players
5) The pick is guaranteed not to be a high one
And also, Luongo didn't lose his job due to his play. He sat out for three games in an attempt by the coach to change around the team to find some new momentum. And if he's willing to waive his NTC to Toronto, then there's virtually no other teams he wouldn't want to waive for, except maybe Columbus.
Opinion, not fact. I have yet to hear AV or Gillis say Luongo would be back as the Back-up. Unless you can find a quote...
Let's just say if he isn't coming back as a back-up (or traded) and he still has the #1 spot, than GM Mike Gillis should be fired for paying his back-up goalie $4 Million.
Sure.
Out of curiosity, what is it you think you're getting in Colborne that you're not in Kadri? The only thing he has on him IMO is size, but even then he really doesn't use it like he should. And you have to understand why Leafs fans are so hesitant to trade 1st round picks, even if the team is drastically improved. It's seldom that a day goes by here on hf without seeing somebody rag on the Leafs for 'giving up' Seguin and Hamilton. I really would not be comfortable with the Leafs giving up the 2013 1st in such a deep draft.
And another problem with this speculation is there really isn't that much precedent. It's not as simple as just saying he's an all-star, he's also a goalie which already makes it really difficult to gauge value, but on top of that there are some questions about how his contract affects his value.
Ya I understand that the last couple of 1sts given up haunt you guys, but then again Kessel is your best player. Let me ask you this, what would you expect in a trade for Kessel or Phaneuf? Would you be asking for a 1st to be part of a package? Because the thing is that Luongo is the same calibre of player as these guys and arguably better. Paul Gaustad deliverd a 1st last year! To answer your question about Kadri, yes it would be nice to have but we had Hodgson who is a another smallish skilled player and Gillis traded him away. Colbourne is not perfect by any measure but he has solid upside, size and fits the mould that Gillis is building out team for the future. I'll tell you what in the trade I suggested instead of giving us a 1st, you gave us Kadri then I would call it a day. But Colbourne I think is the prospect Canucks will ask for if there is a trade with Toronto.
Let's just say if he isn't coming back as a back-up (or traded) and he still has the #1 spot, than GM Mike Gillis should be fired for paying his back-up goalie $4 Million.
Even if it means another Pres trophy? Having 2 great goalies is a nice "problem" to have. Not having an effective starter is a real "problem".
Ya I understand that the last couple of 1sts given up haunt you guys, but then again Kessel is your best player. Let me ask you this, what would you expect in a trade for Kessel or Phaneuf? Would you be asking for a 1st to be part of a package? Because the thing is that Luongo is the same calibre of player as these guys and arguably better. Paul Gaustad deliverd a 1st last year! To answer your question about Kadri, yes it would be nice to have but we had Hodgson who is a another smallish skilled player and Gillis traded him away. Colbourne is not perfect by any measure but he has solid upside, size and fits the mould that Gillis is building out team for the future. I'll tell you what in the trade I suggested instead of giving us a 1st, you gave us Kadri then I would call it a day. But Colbourne I think is the prospect Canucks will ask for if there is a trade with Toronto.
Let's just say if he isn't coming back as a back-up (or traded) and he still has the #1 spot, than GM Mike Gillis should be fired for paying his back-up goalie $4 Million.
I question your hockey knowledge if this is your belief..
Even if it means another Pres trophy? Having 2 great goalies is a nice "problem" to have. Not having an effective starter is a real "problem".
Oh come on....no one pays their back-up $4 million, especially not when there was uncertainty over the new CBA. LOL That's just hilarious. Tell me you can't seriously believe that. If so, WOW.
Remember this would only be one piece of the package. Colbourne is a prospect who plays a position that we do not have depth on. Yes we have Schroeder, but very little after him. We need to be realistic, because if we do get a prospect he is our best bet from the Leafs.
So, a centre who is very good defensively, a very good prospect in Nazem Kadri, another good prospect in Jesse Blacker, and a second round pick for Roberto Luongo?
Not happening. Take out Tyler Bozak and Nazem Kadri, and that's as much as I can see Brian Burke willing to part with for Roberto.
Luongo is not the answer to the Leafs' problems.
Ok that is great, you are entitled to your opinion. You do not want Luongo. You do not want Luongo, should I say it a third time? Why waste your time in a Luongo thread? To address your proposal Blacker and a 2nd is absurd for Luongo. But you already know this.
Oh come on....no one pays their back-up $4 million, especially not when there was uncertainty over the new CBA. LOL That's just hilarious. Tell me you can't seriously believe that. If so, WOW.
If as the season drags on and the market hasn't picked up and the goalies' play is similar, I could see us simply trading Schneider if his return would be significantly higher.
Oh come on....no one pays their back-up $4 million, especially not when there was uncertainty over the new CBA. LOL That's just hilarious. Tell me you can't seriously believe that. If so, WOW.
And know one pays there 6/7 defenceman 4.5 million. But hey sometimes things like this happens. Vancouver has Ballard at 4.2 and he is the #5. Every team has a couple of overpaid players, or is overspending at a certain position. The teams that turn these problems around win the cup. The situation dictates that Vancouver does not need to trade, because there is other player we are targeting that will use the space. This can also be referred to as opportunity cost in business terms. Right now Vancouvers opportunity cost is zero since there is no one to fill the cap space. If there is a trade for Luongo then Vancouver can fill this cap space with pieces coming back in the trade.
Umm you clearly are forgetting all the pertinent facts when it comes to Lu and his current status.
1) Contract til 43
2) Lost job due to inconsistent play
3) NTC which limits GM MG's ability to deal him.
You guys keep forgetting those very real facts.
Only fact their is the contract going until age 43.
NTC does nothing to lower his value. You either want him and negotiate a price of you don't.
I would imagine lots of teams kick the tires, the only time it will get to Roberto is if Gillis gets an offer he likes...doesn't effect the value.
You keep saying he lost his job due to inconsistent play...its easy to tell how much you follow the Canucks...east coasters like you probably are are probably snug as a bug in your bed by the time Canuck games are halfway done.
Why do I continue to bite the baited hook? Damn you lockout.
And know one pays there 6/7 defenceman 4.5 million. But hey sometimes things like this happens. Vancouver has Ballard at 4.2 and he is the #5. Every team has a couple of overpaid players, or is overspending at a certain position. The teams that turn these problems around win the cup. The situation dictates that Vancouver does not need to trade, because there is other player we are targeting that will use the space. This can also be referred to as opportunity cost in business terms. Right now Vancouvers opportunity cost is zero since there is no one to fill the cap space. If there is a trade for Luongo then Vancouver can fill this cap space with pieces coming back in the trade.
^
All I'm gonna say, that would be terrible team asset management if that was your business model.
Komi was a mistake, but not when we bought him. He played his way off the team. Komi was "suppose" to play better when we signed him. Heck I was super excited when we signed him. None of us saw his slide in play coming.
Oh come on....no one pays their back-up $4 million, especially not when there was uncertainty over the new CBA. LOL That's just hilarious. Tell me you can't seriously believe that. If so, WOW.
So you think the GM with two excellent goalies should be fired, but the one who has never been able get one ever and is rolling with Reimer and Scrivens is a hero?
So you think the GM with two excellent goalies should be fired, but the one who has never been able get one ever and is rolling with Reimer and Scrivens is a hero?
Wow.
My point was, that with the sunstantial raise he gave Schneider meant the writing was on the wall for "one" of those goalies. My money was on that it was their intent to deal LU.
I know you know that, and you're just playing dumb. You're only fooling yourself.
^
All I'm gonna say, that would be terrible team asset management if that was your business model.
Komi was a mistake, but not when we bought him. He played his way off the team. Komi was "suppose" to play better when we signed him. Heck I was super excited when we signed him. None of us saw his slide in play coming.
It's only terrible asset management when you need the money to be spent elsewhere. Hence the term opportunity cost. At some point a goalie will need to be moved. This is not the moment. The proposals you offer are assuming this is the moment and this is where your miscalculation is my friend.
My point was, that with the sunstantial raise he gave Schneider meant the writing was on the wall for "one" of those goalies. My money was on that it was their intent to deal LU.
I know you know that, and you're just playing dumb. You're only fooling yourself.
And he'll trade Luongo, because the offers he gets will make the team better. If no one was interested in giving up something that would help us, then he would have traded Schneider instead. By locking both up long-term he gave himself all the time in the world to see what is the best possible return he can get.
My point was, that with the sunstantial raise he gave Schneider meant the writing was on the wall for "one" of those goalies. My money was on that it was their intent to deal LU.
I know you know that, and you're just playing dumb. You're only fooling yourself.
Fooling myself about what it's better to have good players than bad ones?
Obviously the intent isn't to have both of the goalies for the next 10 years. I and all Canuck fans admit that.
I think most non-Canuck fans feel or believe there is a lot more pressure on Gillis to make a rushed deal, just to make it.
I disagree.
Team with two good pieces has leverage on teams with none.
Canucks have cap space to roll both for at least the next season...where is the pressure?
When cap space is required, urgency to make a deal will ratchet up, but until then Gillis holds ALL the cards....a team acquiring Luongo won't be doing it to do Vancouver a favour...they'll be doing it to upgrade their goaltending.
Let's just say if he isn't coming back as a back-up (or traded) and he still has the #1 spot, than GM Mike Gillis should be fired for paying his back-up goalie $4 Million.
Hahaha fired for paying his "back-up" 4m? You cannot be serious... This comment is just astounding considering the Canucks win record during Gillis's tenure (best in the league), the two PTs, the 2.4m in existing cap space he _currently_ has and the fact that the same tandem played in net for VAN last year.
I would worry about the guy with _no_ legit starter than the guy with 2.
