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.

The All Purpose Lu Thread (MOD WARNING IN OP)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-11-2012, 11:37 PM
  #101
DougGilmour93
Registered User
 
DougGilmour93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
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.
Agree to disagree I suppose.

Just so you know, I don't mean any disrespect with my posts.

DougGilmour93 is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 11:39 PM
  #102
kthsn
Registered User
 
kthsn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,728
vCash: 500
Gillis' duo @ 9.3M >>>>>>>> Burke's duo @ 2.4M

To add insult Burke is spending almost the entire difference on Komisarek and 2 buyouts.

kthsn is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 11:55 PM
  #103
DougGilmour93
Registered User
 
DougGilmour93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
Gillis' duo @ 9.3M >>>>>>>> Burke's duo @ 2.4M

To add insult Burke is spending almost the entire difference on Komisarek and 2 buyouts.
David Booth 4.25
Keith Ballard 4.2

Ya, money well spent.

DougGilmour93 is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 11:58 PM
  #104
Vankiller Whale
And so it begins
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,716
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
David Booth 4.25
Keith Ballard 4.2

Ya, money well spent.
Except three of our players are producing. Regardless, the point isn't about who the better GM is. The point is that we don't have to trade him for anything that does not make us a noticeably better team.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 12:07 AM
  #105
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
David Booth 4.25
Keith Ballard 4.2

Ya, money well spent.


Ballard is Gillis's most questionable contract. Not doubt about it. What's the inflation on it? 1m? 1.5m? Hardly crippling. Ballard will need to keep building on what he did at the end of last year for Gillis to get his money's worth.



Completely disagree with you on Booth. Great G/60 stats for this player and he is underrated defensively. Works hard all over the ice. No issues with paying a top6 PF that cash.


I really think you are barking up the wrong tree here.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 12:10 AM
  #106
DougGilmour93
Registered User
 
DougGilmour93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Ballard is Gillis's most questionable contract. Not doubt about it. What's the inflation on it? 1m? 1.5m? Hardly crippling. Ballard will need to keep building on what he did at the end of last year for Gillis to get his money's worth.



Completely disagree with you on Booth. Great G/60 stats for this player and he is underrated defensively. Works hard all over the ice. No issues with paying a top6 PF that cash.


I really think you are barking up the wrong tree here.
Booth's play has been that of a 3rd liner. His game has definetly went downhill in years recent. Not the player he used to be.

DougGilmour93 is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 12:16 AM
  #107
Kass Effect
Registered User
 
Kass Effect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Data Corrupted
Posts: 1,253
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
Booth's play has been that of a 3rd liner. His game has definetly went downhill in years recent. Not the player he used to be.
You write him off too early. He was arguably the Canucks best player for a stretch before the knee-on-knee. The whole team struggled to score down the stretch, and he played lots of minutes beside an injured Kesler. A solid 40-50 point season isn't out of the question. Fairly good 2nd line #'s.

Kass Effect is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 12:18 AM
  #108
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
Booth's play has been that of a 3rd liner. His game has definetly went downhill in years recent. Not the player he used to be.


Incorrect. He produces points at a top6 rate. Well within the top 180 forward cut off, league wide. But as a bonus, his G/60 is often among 1st line scoring rates. This with a low shooting percentage -- Meaning, Booth is a _very_ efficient goal scorer.



I don't think you have tracked his numbers at all, so I understand why you are so off in your assessment of him.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 12:27 AM
  #109
Back in 94
In Gillis I trust
 
Back in 94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,479
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
David Booth 4.25
Keith Ballard 4.2

Ya, money well spent.
I don't have a problem with either of those contracts. Ballard played well given the minutes he got, and Booths point production is nothing to laugh at.

Back in 94 is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 12:28 AM
  #110
Numbers
Registered User
 
Numbers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
Booth's play has been that of a 3rd liner. His game has definetly went downhill in years recent. Not the player he used to be.
I'll agree with you that his production has decreased and his game has declined, but this is mostly because of injuries. If you watch his play he definitely fits the role he plays, that being top 6 power forward. He skates hard, checks, and crashes the net. Great kind of player to have in top 6, in my opinion he is a poor mans Taylor Hall. Booth just switched teams mid season, for him and most players it takes time to adjust. I'm not going to say he has lived up to his 4.25 mil contract last year, but close to it. Based on watching how he plays, his attitude, and some time to adjust I think Booth will live up this contract.

Numbers is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 12:46 AM
  #111
kthsn
Registered User
 
kthsn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
David Booth 4.25
Keith Ballard 4.2

Ya, money well spent.
Booth's contract is a good fit on our team. Ballard's is fine considering his role as the #3LD.

If you really think the Canucks have ~14M in bad cap management it's no wonder you have such a poor understanding of how the Canucks are built as a team.

kthsn is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 01:14 AM
  #112
Numbers
Registered User
 
Numbers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
Booth's contract is a good fit on our team. Ballard's is fine considering his role as the #3LD.



If you really think the Canucks have ~14M in bad cap management it's no wonder you have such a poor understanding of how the Canucks are built as a team.
Well to be fair he does have a point that we have some overpaid players. But as I mentioned in an earlier post every team does. I definitely disagree that a 3LD should be paid 4.2 optimally, but Ballard does give depth at a position where injuries can stack up fast. The depth is really where Ballards true value lies. Many times it is the star players that get paid to big of a proportion of their teams cap and in fact are overpaid. The way the Canucks cap structure works is that the star players are underpaid, while some of the smaller cap players are overpaid. At any rate the players that are overpaid, are overpaid by a relatively small amount.

Numbers is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 02:06 AM
  #113
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,775
vCash: 500
I think the clearest thing from this discussion is that if the Canucks needed to clear salary, Luongo's contract wouldn't be at the top of the list...

So other teams fans (really just Leaf fans) should stop trying to acquire him at a decreased value because the Canucks "need" to dump his cap hit. Trade what you'd trade for a Veizna caliber goalie on a long contract or don't bother making an offer.

Realistically the Canucks should keep Luongo until Schneider can confirm that he is the goalie that many fans and management think he is (i.e. a goalie that consistently keep a save% higher than 0.925 while carrying a starters load). Once that is established, Vancouver should look at moving Luongo. The team is better off ensuring that they have a solid goalie then trying to maximize value on Luongo because betting on goalies who have not fully proven themselves is how contenders miss the playoffs.

DJOpus is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 02:23 AM
  #114
LEAFS FAN 4 EVER
Go Leafs Go
 
LEAFS FAN 4 EVER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,975
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueBaron View Post
You left out another important fact that Canuck fans like to forget because it brings down his value.

HE ASKED FOR A TRADE !
When it comes to it I agree with that. The Canucks fans on here might not like it but when a player asks for a trade, the team trading that player won't get the right value in return. It happened when Ottawa traded Danny Heatly to San Jose and when Columbus traded Rick Nash to New York.

LEAFS FAN 4 EVER is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 02:51 AM
  #115
Bills09
Registered User
 
Bills09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Pickering, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,649
vCash: 500
Bozak+Franson+2nd for Lou will be the deal.

Bills09 is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 02:57 AM
  #116
RECsGuy*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LEAFS FAN 4 EVER View Post
The Canucks fans on here might not like it but when a player asks for a trade
Luongo hasn't asked for a trade, though he has stated that he and Gillis have mutually agreed that it is time for him to "move on," which I'm sure displeased GMMG. In that same interview, he reminisced about his time in Vancouver, as if to say farewell. Expect Roberto to be traded immediately after the next CBA is implemented. I believe the rumors that a deal is already is in place, but it's anyone's guess as to which team that deal is with.

On a related note, Jacob Markstrom is not only ******** the bed with San Antonio, he can't even grab the Rampage's No. 1 job away from minor league journeyman Dov-Grumet Morris.


Last edited by RECsGuy*: 11-12-2012 at 03:05 AM.
RECsGuy* is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 03:07 AM
  #117
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,775
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
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.
Schneider could be a UFA after the lockout if he wasn't signed to a multi-year deal so the Canucks had to pony up the cash.

I think its more like, let's confirm what we have in Schneider, once confirmed we can extend Schneider again and deal Luongo but if Schneider ***** the bed, well, we have Luongo.

The Canucks have two goalies they think can put up elite numbers (higher than 0.925 save%) and shouldn't put themselves in a position to not have at least one in a couple of years.

DJOpus is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 03:38 AM
  #118
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ag925 View Post
Luongo hasn't asked for a trade, though he has stated that he and Gillis have mutually agreed that it is time for him to "move on," which I'm sure displeased GMMG. In that same interview, he reminisced about his time in Vancouver, as if to say farewell. Expect Roberto to be traded immediately after the next CBA is implemented. I believe the rumors that a deal is already is in place, but it's anyone's guess as to which team that deal is with.

On a related note, Jacob Markstrom is not only ******** the bed with San Antonio, he can't even grab the Rampage's No. 1 job away from minor league journeyman Dov-Grumet Morris.


Markstrom looks shaky. How much stock to put into that varies depending on you ask.



As to when Luongo will be moved - I don't think it will happen before the start of the season. Not with the way it's being talked about. Gillis seems to be negotiating through the media, and Luongo + Lupien have yet to give any hints as to a destination. Meaning, it might take 10 to 20 games before Lu is eventually moved.



The most substantial occurrence on this front is John Shannon coming out and saying that Luongo to TO is a "done deal". Matt Sekeres confirmed that Shannon is sticking to his guns on this... But I don't really buy it. I think it TO's perception has been relayed to Shannon, and that's it.



Gillis will do everything in his power to first exhaust FLA as an option. After that, TO factors in... Not before.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 03:54 AM
  #119
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,775
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Gillis will do everything in his power to first exhaust FLA as an option. After that, TO factors in... Not before.
I hope so...IMO, TO with Luongo is a playoff team, FLA with Luongo is a bottom 10 team in the league and I assume either way a 1st is coming.

DJOpus is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 04:01 AM
  #120
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
I hope so...IMO, TO with Luongo is a playoff team, FLA with Luongo is a bottom 10 team in the league and I assume either way a 1st is coming.


Bottom 10 team _with_ Luongo? I don't know about that, considering they made the playoffs with Theodore?

I like their chances far more than TO right now, let alone with Luongo backstopping them. Perhaps you underrate FLA.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 04:23 AM
  #121
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,775
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Bottom 10 team _with_ Luongo? I don't know about that, considering they made the playoffs with Theodore?

I like their chances far more than TO right now, let alone with Luongo backstopping them. Perhaps you underrate FLA.
I make my decision based more on the goal difference and how much their division has improved more than anything else.

I'd put money on Florida missing if you were interested (I think we're both in Van)...you know...if there is a season.

DJOpus is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 05:15 AM
  #122
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
I make my decision based more on the goal difference and how much their division has improved more than anything else.

I'd put money on Florida missing if you were interested (I think we're both in Van)...you know...if there is a season.


I'm not interested in a wager. (You are correct, I am in VAN).


They very well could miss, and I don't care enough about it to wager either way. That said, FLA has one edge against the SE - Defense. Their schemes are GA based. So while goal differential is important, their ability to be the "left hook" vs. the SE has served them well. It's their edge vs. their division.


All told, even last year I felt WPG should have made it in over FLA. Their underlying numbers were better.


It would just be hard to picture FLA not being in the hunt with better goaltending to influence their already division best GA. Luongo makes for a great fit there, just based on playstyle alone.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 06:00 AM
  #123
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,261
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverback91 View Post
he also is the guy who gave up 2 1sts and a 2nd for an un-signed Kessel (who at the time was having major contract signing issues and was known to be on the block for it) when his team was in much worse shape (playoff contention wise) than it is now.

So based on his history since your going off one example that has been said to be half un-true as he never got the chance to accept or decline it, I'm guessing it should be pretty easy getting a 1st in return for Lou
Kessel was practically signed (he agreed to a contract with the Leafs basically right after the trade was done, and they could've been negotiating the whole time.

Furthermore, when he's trying to build a young team, Do you not see a difference in trading for a 22 year old player coming off a 36 goal season and a 33 year old who appears to be on the decline?

I'm sure Vancouver could get a first from Toronto for Luongo. As I mentioned, Burke tends to overvalue a lot of his players so shooting for picks may be a way to get better value out of Toronto. However, asking for a first would mean no Kadri, no Colborne, and certainly no Kulemin/Bozak/Lupul, as the latter 3 wouldn't be available to begin with.

If it means Toronto doesn't get him, that's fine. Burke's shown that he's prepared to not act on a deal if it requires core pieces. If Mike Richards couldn't make Brian Burke do it, there's no chance that Roberto Luongo is going to be able to.

seanlinden is online now  
Old
11-12-2012, 06:14 AM
  #124
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
Kessel was practically signed (he agreed to a contract with the Leafs basically right after the trade was done, and they could've been negotiating the whole time.

Furthermore, when he's trying to build a young team, Do you not see a difference in trading for a 22 year old player coming off a 36 goal season and a 33 year old who appears to be on the decline?

I'm sure Vancouver could get a first from Toronto for Luongo. As I mentioned, Burke tends to overvalue a lot of his players so shooting for picks may be a way to get better value out of Toronto. However, asking for a first would mean no Kadri, no Colborne, and certainly no Kulemin/Bozak/Lupul, as the latter 3 wouldn't be available to begin with.

If it means Toronto doesn't get him, that's fine. Burke's shown that he's prepared to not act on a deal if it requires core pieces. If Mike Richards couldn't make Brian Burke do it, there's no chance that Roberto Luongo is going to be able to.


Burke has also shown he undervalues goaltending in addition to what you posted about overvaluing his own players. Therefore, it doesn't look like a deal is likely...


I still can't believe Burke refused Kadri + Kulemin for Richards. Just outside the realm of reason there.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 06:22 AM
  #125
The Saurus
Registered User
 
The Saurus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Country: United Nations
Posts: 8,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Burke has also shown he undervalues goaltending in addition to what you posted about overvaluing his own players. Therefore, it doesn't look like a deal is likely...
Indeed. As I've been saying all summer until now, a deal between Vancouver and Toronto for Roberto is not going to happen unless Mike Gillis has no other trading options and is willing to take a deal centered around a cap dump like Mike Komisarek or Tim Connolly.

The Saurus 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 11:27 AM.

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.