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
11-12-2012, 10:34 PM
  #276
Ho Borvat
Registered User
 
Ho Borvat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
How about we remove Franson and Raymond.
I would be fine with this.

If San Jose was willing to move Clowe I would prefer the San Jose proposal.

But I wouldnt be upset at that return.

Ho Borvat is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 10:35 PM
  #277
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,393
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Sounds good to me.
So..Lupul, protected 1st and a 13 4th for Luongo.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 10:38 PM
  #278
WonderTwinsUnite
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: North Delta, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,708
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
How about we remove Franson and Raymond.
No, you definitely NEED Raymond

Jokes aside, I think Franson would be a good fit in VAN next to someone like Edler or Garrison. He's put up solid numbers and is from BC and played his junior here.


Last edited by WonderTwinsUnite: 11-12-2012 at 10:41 PM. Reason: realized Franson played two years with Nashville
WonderTwinsUnite is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 10:38 PM
  #279
Vankiller Whale
Propaganda Minister
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,236
vCash: 900
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
So..Lupul, protected 1st and a 13 4th for Luongo.
Yep.

So now what do we talk about?

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 10:40 PM
  #280
Ho Borvat
Registered User
 
Ho Borvat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kack zassian View Post
I honestly feel like Reimer could be a solid piece in any potential 3 way trades

Maybe about something like

Toronto
Roberto Luongo

Gets their goalie at the cost of Kadri, Reimer and a protected 1st.

Vancouver
Ryane Clowe
Nazem Kadri
Top 10 Protectes 1st (Toronto)

Addresses their need of a top-6 forward, while adding some youth to the organization.


San Jose
Mason Raymond
James Reimer
Vancouver 2nd 2013

Buys low on a winger who can produce similarly to Clowe, as well as a 2nd.

San Jose also gets a very capable backup, or at least another lower end starter to compete with Niemi for a 1a/1B role.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Back in 94 View Post
Don't see any reason why the Sharks do this deal. Raymonds value is at an all time low, Reimer would be a back up in SJ, and a late 2nd for a playmaking PWF?
Keep in mind Clowes on a 1 year deal.

Raymonds value is at an all time low, but he still gives them speed in a 2nd/3rd line role (albeit a downgrade overall from Clowe).

Reimer could very well be the starter (or at the very least give Niemi a run for his money).
Gives San Jose the benefit of having 2 starting goalies (although low end starters) instead of just 1 low end starter.

The 2nd is self explanatory but even at the deadline i dont see Clowe going for significantly more.

Ho Borvat is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 10:44 PM
  #281
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,393
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WonderTwinsUnite View Post
No, you definitely NEED Raymond

Jokes aside, I think Franson would be a good fit in VAN next to someone like Edler or Garrison. He's put up solid numbers and is from BC and played his junior here.
I can see us moving Franson, but i think we could get something we need..which is not Raymond.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 10:53 PM
  #282
kthsn
Registered User
 
kthsn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
Aside from an agreement which I find remarkable I think it's strange how it's a top 10 protected pick.

Lottery protection? Makes sense if Burke wants to avoid another Seguin fiasco.
Conditional based on playoffs? Makes even more sense if they're acquiring Luongo
Top 10? Seems like an arbitrary number to me. No real difference between a 9/10 pick.

kthsn is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 10:57 PM
  #283
WonderTwinsUnite
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: North Delta, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,708
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
Aside from an agreement which I find remarkable I think it's strange how it's a top 10 protected pick.

Lottery protection? Makes sense if Burke wants to avoid another Seguin fiasco.
Conditional based on playoffs? Makes even more sense if they're acquiring Luongo
Top 10? Seems like an arbitrary number to me. No real difference between a 9/10 pick.
Round number.

WonderTwinsUnite is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 10:58 PM
  #284
Ho Borvat
Registered User
 
Ho Borvat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
Aside from an agreement which I find remarkable I think it's strange how it's a top 10 protected pick.

Lottery protection? Makes sense if Burke wants to avoid another Seguin fiasco.
Conditional based on playoffs? Makes even more sense if they're acquiring Luongo
Top 10? Seems like an arbitrary number to me. No real difference between a 9/10 pick.
In 2007 the difference was Logan Couture and Keaton Ellerby

Ho Borvat is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 10:59 PM
  #285
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,393
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
Aside from an agreement which I find remarkable I think it's strange how it's a top 10 protected pick.

Lottery protection? Makes sense if Burke wants to avoid another Seguin fiasco.
Conditional based on playoffs? Makes even more sense if they're acquiring Luongo
Top 10? Seems like an arbitrary number to me. No real difference between a 9/10 pick.
We replace Lupul with JVR and have Luongo*Reimer in goal...i think it's safe to say that we are in the top 15 in the NHL.

Why? Because our biggest problem last season was team defense (Carlyle should help), goaltending (Luongo definately helps) and our PK (Carlyle again as well as McClement).

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 11:04 PM
  #286
Back in 94
In Gillis I trust
 
Back in 94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kack zassian View Post
Keep in mind Clowes on a 1 year deal.

Raymonds value is at an all time low, but he still gives them speed in a 2nd/3rd line role (albeit a downgrade overall from Clowe).

Reimer could very well be the starter (or at the very least give Niemi a run for his money).
Gives San Jose the benefit of having 2 starting goalies (although low end starters) instead of just 1 low end starter.

The 2nd is self explanatory but even at the deadline i dont see Clowe going for significantly more.
Add the fact that the Sharks would be addressing a need to one of their rivals but not doing the same for themselves. Just doesn't make sense.

IMO if they are out of contention come deadline day(they won't) they could easily package off Clowe for at aleast a first rounder from a playoff contending team which I think is more valuable than a package of Raymond, Reimer, and a late 2nd.

Curious as to what Sharks fans think.

Back in 94 is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 11:13 PM
  #287
DougGilmour93
Registered User
 
DougGilmour93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,156
vCash: 500
I'm sorry but, we're not trading our arguably best player (Lupul) this past season in a deal for Luongo. It's just not gonna happen.

DougGilmour93 is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 11:15 PM
  #288
kthsn
Registered User
 
kthsn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kack zassian View Post
In 2007 the difference was Logan Couture and Keaton Ellerby
Still think it'll come down to scouting. Sutter and McDonagh were picked right after.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Why? Because our biggest problem last season was team defense (Carlyle should help), goaltending (Luongo definately helps) and our PK (Carlyle again as well as McClement).
Wilson's system also inflated the offensive stats of a lot of your guys. I don't see Lupul (if he stays) PPG in a Carlyle system.

Then again last time Luongo played in a defense first system he won 48 games.

kthsn is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 11:16 PM
  #289
WonderTwinsUnite
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: North Delta, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,708
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
I'm sorry but, we're not trading our arguably best player (Lupul) this past season in a deal for Luongo. It's just not gonna happen.
JVR then?

WonderTwinsUnite is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 11:23 PM
  #290
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,393
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
I'm sorry but, we're not trading our arguably best player (Lupul) this past season in a deal for Luongo. It's just not gonna happen.
I'm thinking big picture, Lupul is Ufa next season, if we tank again i'm not sure he stays. JVR can take his spot...with Luongo there is a better chance to have a winning season. Then, i can see Burke going hard after guys like Perry/Getzlaf (that does not mean i am saying it will happen). You need to remember Lupul was considered a dump....worked out well, but will it continue? Then...what do you offer him if there is no season this year?

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 11:25 PM
  #291
kthsn
Registered User
 
kthsn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
I'm sorry but, we're not trading our arguably best player (Lupul) this past season in a deal for Luongo. It's just not gonna happen.
Fine then how about your 2nd/3rd/4th best player?

Kessel?
Phaneuf?
Grabo?

How about JVR after he inevitably fails his audition as the #1C?

kthsn is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 11:41 PM
  #292
Ched Brosky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,879
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.
Doesn't matter. Everyone knew he wasn't going to re-sign in Boston which hurts his trade value even if he agrees to a contract with his new team before hand as part of the deal. Look at Ben Bishop there was confusion on if he re-signed with STL and then was traded or signed right ater. Yet he was traded for less than his value because STL was not going to be able to re-sign him and teams knew it. Look at Kovalchuk... everyone knew he wasn't going to sign there after turning down that 100 Million dollar contract. He was also traded at the deadline where teams pay a higher price to improve their team, yet all he returned were a couple B/C level prospects, a 1st and a #4 d-man. Now I know Kovy didn't re-sign right away but just another example of how when its clear a player won't re-sign his value deminishes. JayBo's rights returned Jordan Leopold's rights and a 3rd round pick when he was supposed to be one of if not the top free agent available. He ended up re-signing right away

Also how again is Luongo appearing to be on the decline? Since when is posting a little better than his career average stats this past season a decline exactly?

Also with ur point on their age. Burkes been the GM for how long now? You really think the owners are not going to fire him if he misses the playoffs again because he ran with last years team which got them the 5th overall pick?

Can you please tell me what the owners said the team expectations were when they hired Burke? I swear I heard that it was to get out of the lottery and into the playoffs was it not? Was that not the reason why he tried to speed up the re-build with the Kessel trade? So why exactly will Luongo's age matter compared to Kessel's at the time they would be/were aqcuired?

Wouldn't it be better that he's not 22 seeing how they need experience in net if they want to make the playoffs?


Last edited by Ched Brosky: 11-13-2012 at 12:16 AM.
Ched Brosky is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 12:12 AM
  #293
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricky Bobby View Post
Except Gunnarson only makes (1.35) compared to Ballard at 4.2 this season.

Gunnarson also doesn't publicly fued with the management.
I hope you're not implying that Ballard has publicly feuded with management during his time in Vancouver. He has been a consummate professional and a quintessential teammate the last two seasons.

Unless you have a source to back up this fallacious claim...

StringerBell is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 02:27 AM
  #294
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tempest2i View Post
I view these long term BDC's like a loan that you're not paying off, just kicking down the road to deal with another day. That's why I don't see one of those contracts as having tremendous value.

You're basically taking a ticking time bomb off someone's books. If I'm a GM who doesn't plan on keeping my job for more than a few seasons, sure I'll take Luongo on my team. Because I won't have to deal with that contract when it stops looking like a good deal.


If it's a ticking time bomb, no GM should want it. Period. Not even at a discount. In other words, I don't view it at all like that, and judging from the _interest_ from at least 5 teams, other GMs don't either.



That contract isn't about sluffing off the undesirable years on someone else. It's to cheat the system. Meaning, the destination team _also_ gets to cheat the system. It's a great contract that either team benefits from.



Really, the Canucks were set up to operate with Luongo long-term. They would have the benefit of a cheater BDC for the life of his career. In a weird way, it's unfortunate that Schneider did emerge because they can't also sign him to the same deal, and again skirt the system.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 07:33 AM
  #295
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,687
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
The thing is, Macarthur and Lombardi probably have as much or less value to Vancouver as they do to Toronto. Both significantly overpayed and upcoming UFAs, they would simply be salary fillers. Neither Macarthur nor Lombardi are noticeable upgrades over what we have already, and their value to us would be minimal.
Not at all. MacArthur is far from overpaid, and while being an impending UFA limits the positive value for MacArthur, it has a similar effect for Lombardi in the context of limiting any potential negative value, especially in a year that's likely to have an artificially high salary cap.

Significant upgrades? No. Additional depth? Yes, and it doesn't seem that anyone is prepared to give Vancouver a significant upgrade for Luongo, at least, not Toronto.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Sean..there is zero chance Lombardi and a protected 1st gets Luongo. I mean....would you do that if you were Gillis?
No, I wouldn't. But if the insistence is on a first round pick, that's close to how much the Leafs should be prepared to pay. If it's not good enough, that's fine. We'll keep our first and either let Lombardi play out his contract or move him if the salary cap permits. In terms of goaltending, we'll do something very similar to what Vancouver is prepared to do by trading Luongo, trust a young goaltender with ~70 games experience and possibly pursue a veteran backup.

The Leafs DO NOT need to give up core players for Luongo, specifically because because they DO NOT need to trade for Luongo. Furthermore, they ARE NOT going to give up core players for Luongo, they have the league's most stubborn GM who overvalues his own players, undervalues goaltending and is trying to build a young team. Since coming to Toronto, he's traded for 2 players over 30 -- a conditional 6th round pick for Brad May, and Jason Blake for JS Giguere.

Guys like Lupul, JvR, Gardiner, Bozak, Kulemin -- forget it. Either a deal works that allows the Leafs to acquire Luongo without giving up important players, or it doesn't, and Vancouver finds someone else to trade with.


Last edited by seanlinden: 11-13-2012 at 07:50 AM.
seanlinden is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 07:57 AM
  #296
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,393
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
Not at all. MacArthur is far from overpaid, and while being an impending UFA limits the positive value for MacArthur, it has a similar effect for Lombardi in the context of limiting any potential negative value, especially in a year that's likely to have an artificially high salary cap.

Significant upgrades? No. Additional depth? Yes, and it doesn't seem that anyone is prepared to give Vancouver a significant upgrade for Luongo, at least, not Toronto.



No, I wouldn't. But if the insistence is on a first round pick, that's close to how much the Leafs should be prepared to pay. If it's not good enough, that's fine. We'll keep our first and either let Lombardi play out his contract or move him if the salary cap permits. In terms of goaltending, we'll do something very similar to what Vancouver is prepared to do by trading Luongo, trust a young goaltender with ~70 games experience and possibly pursue a veteran backup.

The Leafs DO NOT need to give up core players for Luongo, specifically because because they DO NOT need to trade for Luongo. Furthermore, they ARE NOT going to give up core players for Luongo, they have the league's most stubborn GM who overvalues his own players, undervalues goaltending and is trying to build a young team. Since coming to Toronto, he's traded for 2 players over 30 -- a conditional 6th round pick for Brad May, and Jason Blake for JS Giguere.

Guys like Lupul, JvR, Gardiner, Bozak, Kulemin -- forget it. Either a deal works that allows the Leafs to acquire Luongo without giving up important players, or it doesn't, and Vancouver finds someone else to trade with.
Not looking to argue...while i guess i can't say the Leafs "need" to trade for Luongo specifically, the Leafs NEED to upgrade in goal. To say we don't need to trade core pieces...ok...but looking past the fact that it's the Canucks and using just Luongo's carreer stats...would you not consider him s core piece?

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 08:13 AM
  #297
doorman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Thunder Bay
Country: Canada
Posts: 414
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
We get a 1st line playmaking forward and a very good shot at a solid prospect.

Lupul may not be the best defensively, but he'll be playing with Kesler and Booth who can cover for him. Plus there's always the chance he can improve himself defensively under Vigneault.

For Leafs fans, how's Lupul's work ethic?
Ok, two things to this, first Lupul has a great work ethic that his teamates and fans love. Second to all those talking how bad Lupul is defensively realize that he has had only on season one the wrong side of the +/- rating since 2006, right? Ya a few of his first years were rough, but he was a young player on young teams.

doorman is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 08:28 AM
  #298
doorman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Thunder Bay
Country: Canada
Posts: 414
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
FLA isn't the only option, but a great deal depends on them. Gillis will keep trying FLA first. If they say they are out, then the door opens to multiple teams, not just TO. CLB will be brought to the table, as will EDM and any other team that is losing games based on shaky goaltending.



Then it's up to Lu. If he understands FLA is shut down as an option, then he must be open to all other options or this will carry on for a while. So the market is really hinged on FLA first, then all others if/when they are out.



But at that point it won't matter what TO's need is comparative to other teams. If Lu just wants to start anywhere, I can see teams like CLB and even EDM having much better pieces to offer. IMO, the "market" will be set by these teams and not TO.
But that's just it the "door" isn't open to all other teams, not with his contract clauses. He has said he would be open to other markets yes, but prefers a hockey market. I am in noway bashing Clb. here, but do you see Lou going there? I don't. however unless the list grows to where he is willing to go, the return will reflect that, is all I am saying. I never, said the market would be set by BUrke. I said it will be affectted as to how many teams are on his list.


Last edited by doorman: 11-13-2012 at 08:30 AM. Reason: missed something
doorman is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 08:40 AM
  #299
WonderTwinsUnite
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: North Delta, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,708
vCash: 500
Kulemin is too important to trade away, really? That's both sad and funny.

WonderTwinsUnite is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 08:54 AM
  #300
doorman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Thunder Bay
Country: Canada
Posts: 414
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcjonny View Post
Tanking for draft picks seems to be suggested here by some...

So when do you decide to flip the switch and stop being a loser organization? There is always another big dman or forward coming down the pipe.

*** I want to clarify I called no specific team a loser organization. ***

I also want to commend Lifeleafer for his integrity and balanced outlook.
See not all of us who don't want lou, wanna tank. Tanking implies not trying and I want them to work. At some point though you need to find out if the kids you have can play in this league. And, it never hurts to have higher end talent. I mean unless you are prepared to tell me that the recent cuop winner like the Pens and Hawks would have won there cups withiout Crosby/Malkin/Fleury or Toews/Kane? And, last time I checked yopur dynamic duo cam from the very top end of the draft too, right?

doorman 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 02:04 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.