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
11-14-2012, 02:59 PM
  #476
JayBeautiful
Nature Boy
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Maple Ridge BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 449
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilin Toronto View Post
It's depressing for me to say this, but I think I've read through endless trade proposals made by Van fans.

I think I've heard it all:
- Luongo's still one of the top goalies in the game...we will not trade him unless it's something substantial.
- Actually, we don't have to trade him...we are willing to play with two number 1 goalies. It's really not a distraction.
-No, his contract is really not that big of an issue. We all know that he's not going to fulfill his 10 year contract.
- He doesn't have a problem sharing the spotlight with Schneider...they're very supportive of one another, and are best friends.

Yes...I've heard it all.
Then what part of it don't you understand

JayBeautiful is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 03:01 PM
  #477
Lucbourdon
Kefka cheers for Van
 
Lucbourdon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 40,709
vCash: 500
Burke said today that he does NOT have a trade for luongo or any canucks player.

Which means of course that we now have basically confirmation that luongo will be a leaf.

Lucbourdon is online now  
Old
11-14-2012, 03:03 PM
  #478
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,290
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucbourdon View Post
Burke said today that he does NOT have a trade for luongo or any canucks player.

Which means of course that we now have basically confirmation that luongo will be a leaf.
Lol...was thinking EXACTLY this, do you remember "Luke Schenn is not being shopped, he won't be traded".

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 03:36 PM
  #479
doorman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Thunder Bay
Country: Canada
Posts: 414
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Lol...was thinking EXACTLY this, do you remember "Luke Schenn is not being shopped, he won't be traded".
He had his fingers crossed it doesn't count

doorman is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 03:39 PM
  #480
racerjoe
Registered User
 
racerjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucbourdon View Post
Burke said today that he does NOT have a trade for luongo or any canucks player.

Which means of course that we now have basically confirmation that luongo will be a leaf.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Lol...was thinking EXACTLY this, do you remember "Luke Schenn is not being shopped, he won't be traded".
I thought it was actually the same speech he used when he was GM in ANA, and he did not have the leafs GM job all but lined up... He was under contract!

racerjoe is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 03:50 PM
  #481
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,290
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by doorman View Post
He had his fingers crossed it doesn't count
Truth...i don't need no truth...i'm Brian bleeping Burke dammit!!

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 03:56 PM
  #482
doorman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Thunder Bay
Country: Canada
Posts: 414
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Truth...i don't need no truth...i'm Brian bleeping Burke dammit!!
Well it could be a partial truth, maybe he wasn't shopping Schenn while he was infront of the mic? It is hard to trade a player during a press conference or interview. So you see from a certain point of view he wasn't lying, lol


Last edited by doorman: 11-14-2012 at 04:15 PM. Reason: spelling
doorman is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 04:52 PM
  #483
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,844
vCash: 500
The last several posts sum up my thoughts about Burke. When he was here, I didn't like him for other reasons on top of his approach, but his blatant, absolute statements being contradicted by his actions prove he hasn't changed.

Cogburn is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 04:57 PM
  #484
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,290
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post
The last several posts sum up my thoughts about Burke. When he was here, I didn't like him for other reasons on top of his approach, but his blatant, absolute statements being contradicted by his actions prove he hasn't changed.
There is no need to worry...unless....does anyone know if his tie was hanging loosely around his neck during the interview??? If so...watch out, **** is about to go down.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 06:24 PM
  #485
Ho Borvat
Registered User
 
Ho Borvat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,882
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucbourdon View Post
Burke said today that he does NOT have a trade for luongo or any canucks player.

Which means of course that we now have basically confirmation that luongo will be a leaf.
Yeah, really when you interpret it literally he obviously doesnt have a deal.

Doesn't mean hes not working on one/negotiating one.


Re: the Luke Schenn isnt being shopped.
What is Burkes definition of "shopped"

Ho Borvat is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 06:31 PM
  #486
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,290
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kack zassian View Post
Yeah, really when you interpret it literally he obviously doesnt have a deal.

Doesn't mean hes not working on one/negotiating one.


Re: the Luke Schenn isnt being shopped.
What is Burkes definition of "shopped"
He said he wasn't offering Schenn, he actually stated "Schenn isn't getting traded".

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 06:34 PM
  #487
Ho Borvat
Registered User
 
Ho Borvat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,882
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
He said he wasn't offering Schenn, he actually stated "Schenn isn't getting traded".
Whats Burkes definition of trading ?

Im sure it was just a translation error on Burkes part.

Ho Borvat is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 06:36 PM
  #488
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,668
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
Not to offend you or seanlinden, but it seems it is absolute worst time to trade any players with any sort of value. The excuse is either you need to rebuild more for the future or the players value is at all time low. But consider that you are trading a for a very good starting goalie, should this not excite you? I mean come on you are asking for a player who will become the best on your team, but at the same time are sweating about players who are 2nd/3rd line players. It just does not make sense unless you believe that your team is entitled to trade to get players for nothing. I know the franson deal worked out like this, but it just is not reasonable to carry these expectations over to the next.
No excuses... simply the reason why it doesn't make sense to trade certain players for others. When building with a long term outlook, it doesn't make sense to trade Kulemin for Luongo, the former has more long term value to the Leafs.

It has absolutely nothing to do with entitlement. We're not suggesting that Vancouver should accept guys like MacArthur / Lombardi / Kadri for Luongo because that's what Toronto is prepared to offer. We're simply saying that Toronto is prepared to offer those guys, but not players like Kulemin / Bozak. If the best deal the Canucks can get is from Toronto, they should trade him there. If not, they shouldn't, simple as that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Ok, so a few more questions and comments. If you are worried that Luongo is to regress in 2-3 years (36-38 years old), how is Kipper a good option as he is now 36?

Backstrom is 34.....his BEST year is .919%....Luongo had that last year, he makes 6.mil with a 6mil cap hit. Do you honestly think he's gonna take a big pay cut? He will want the same money on a 5 year deal which puts you the same as Luongo's out years.

Cam Ward won't be moved, you don't load up like the Canes did and move your starter.

Tim Thomas is a nutjob. There is also his age.....
Kipper doesn't come with a long term deal, and neither does Backstrom. That's a good thing. The Leafs aren't looking for a goaltender with many years left on his deal (unless of course we're talking a young guy like Carey Price / Jonathan Quick / Cam Ward / etc.). So while Luongo may be a better goaltender than those guys, many would be more valuable to the Leafs than Luongo because of that contract.

seanlinden is online now  
Old
11-14-2012, 06:54 PM
  #489
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,290
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
No excuses... simply the reason why it doesn't make sense to trade certain players for others. When building with a long term outlook, it doesn't make sense to trade Kulemin for Luongo, the former has more long term value to the Leafs.

It has absolutely nothing to do with entitlement. We're not suggesting that Vancouver should accept guys like MacArthur / Lombardi / Kadri for Luongo because that's what Toronto is prepared to offer. We're simply saying that Toronto is prepared to offer those guys, but not players like Kulemin / Bozak. If the best deal the Canucks can get is from Toronto, they should trade him there. If not, they shouldn't, simple as that.



Kipper doesn't come with a long term deal, and neither does Backstrom. That's a good thing. The Leafs aren't looking for a goaltender with many years left on his deal (unless of course we're talking a young guy like Carey Price / Jonathan Quick / Cam Ward / etc.). So while Luongo may be a better goaltender than those guys, many would be more valuable to the Leafs than Luongo because of that contract.
Sean my friend...lets assume Minny wants to let their starter go, do you think he will sign here for less than 5 years? Do you think he is going to take a big paycut? It makes zero sense to say that Luongo is a better goalie but is less valuable to TO. You can keep going on about his contract, but the fact is, you are really only on the hook for 5 years. There are multiple ways to get out of it. So; if my choice is 5 years of Backstrom or 5 years of Luongo...Luongo it is. I get Backstrom will only cost money, but i am more interested in putting the best player i can in the position.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 06:55 PM
  #490
Ho Borvat
Registered User
 
Ho Borvat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,882
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
No excuses... simply the reason why it doesn't make sense to trade certain players for others. When building with a long term outlook, it doesn't make sense to trade Kulemin for Luongo, the former has more long term value to the Leafs.

It has absolutely nothing to do with entitlement. We're not suggesting that Vancouver should accept guys like MacArthur / Lombardi / Kadri for Luongo because that's what Toronto is prepared to offer. We're simply saying that Toronto is prepared to offer those guys, but not players like Kulemin / Bozak. If the best deal the Canucks can get is from Toronto, they should trade him there. If not, they shouldn't, simple as that.



Kipper doesn't come with a long term deal, and neither does Backstrom. That's a good thing. The Leafs aren't looking for a goaltender with many years left on his deal (unless of course we're talking a young guy like Carey Price / Jonathan Quick / Cam Ward / etc.). So while Luongo may be a better goaltender than those guys, many would be more valuable to the Leafs than Luongo because of that contract.
So Luongo on his current deal,

Or Kipper at 4-5 years at 6 million per? (just spitballin figures).

Also you mention that Kulemin/Bozak have bigger roles in the future... But do you think those guys will be around in 5 years or will guys like Frattin/Colborne take their spot sooner than then?

Ho Borvat is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 07:15 PM
  #491
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,668
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Sean my friend...lets assume Minny wants to let their starter go, do you think he will sign here for less than 5 years? Do you think he is going to take a big paycut? It makes zero sense to say that Luongo is a better goalie but is less valuable to TO. You can keep going on about his contract, but the fact is, you are really only on the hook for 5 years. There are multiple ways to get out of it. So; if my choice is 5 years of Backstrom or 5 years of Luongo...Luongo it is. I get Backstrom will only cost money, but i am more interested in putting the best player i can in the position.
He doesn't need to sign for 5 years. At this point, a 1or2-year stop gap to see just what the Leafs have in James Reimer is the ideal scenario.

Right now, there's no way to get out of Luongo's contract, as there's no CBA.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kack zassian View Post
So Luongo on his current deal,

Or Kipper at 4-5 years at 6 million per? (just spitballin figures).

Also you mention that Kulemin/Bozak have bigger roles in the future... But do you think those guys will be around in 5 years or will guys like Frattin/Colborne take their spot sooner than then?
Kipper has 1 year remaining after this one... at $5.8m. Where are you getting 4-5 years from?? Spitballing? no need. His current contract is what we want.

Colborne / Frattin have a long way to go before replacing those 2... and even within the next 5 years they do get replaced, you're talking about moving guys in their prime with contracts that we'd control the length of.... not on the tail end of their careers with lots of contract left.

seanlinden is online now  
Old
11-14-2012, 07:30 PM
  #492
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,290
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
He doesn't need to sign for 5 years. At this point, a 1or2-year stop gap to see just what the Leafs have in James Reimer is the ideal scenario.

Right now, there's no way to get out of Luongo's contract, as there's no CBA.



Kipper has 1 year remaining after this one... at $5.8m. Where are you getting 4-5 years from?? Spitballing? no need. His current contract is what we want.

Colborne / Frattin have a long way to go before replacing those 2... and even within the next 5 years they do get replaced, you're talking about moving guys in their prime with contracts that we'd control the length of.... not on the tail end of their careers with lots of contract left.
Okay...just because 2 years works better in your scenario does not mean Backstrom will sign for 2 He will demand 4-5 because of his age, gives him security. And i am sorry, but Luongo"s impact on this team trumps that of Kuli or Bozak. If Bozak is still our #1C in 5 years we are more screwed than i can imagine. And there is a reason i haven't mentioned Kipper...Calgary will not trade him. It is easy to say "i would only pay big for guys like Price or Quick.." let me know when they are available. I just can't get your " i'll settle for less" attitude just so you can keep a carreet best 40 point center and a winger who has 1 good year. Bozak and Kuli are not players you build around...they are perimiter pieces.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 07:32 PM
  #493
Vankiller Whale
Propaganda Minister
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,219
vCash: 900
Why would Backstrom/Kipper come to Toronto? Teams like Chicago or San Jose have a much better shot at landing them, unless Toronto vastly overpays size/term of their contract.

As per the last CBA, Luongo's contract is a cake walk for rich teams, as they can bury him in the minors at their leisure. Although no one knows what will happen with the current one, there still seems to be lots of possibilities on what to do with Luongo. If he retires, his cap hit might come back to Vancouver. He could be traded to a cap floor team for the last 3-4 years of his contract when his salary is only a fraction of his cap hit, etc. Besides the fact that we can't get anywhere discussing Luongo's value based on the fact the CBA might try to do everything in their power to lower Luongo's value. Especially when there are thoughts that teams can pay part of the salary of traded players, making it more feasible for cap floor teams.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 07:51 PM
  #494
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,668
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Okay...just because 2 years works better in your scenario does not mean Backstrom will sign for 2 He will demand 4-5 because of his age, gives him security. And i am sorry, but Luongo"s impact on this team trumps that of Kuli or Bozak. If Bozak is still our #1C in 5 years we are more screwed than i can imagine. And there is a reason i haven't mentioned Kipper...Calgary will not trade him. It is easy to say "i would only pay big for guys like Price or Quick.." let me know when they are available. I just can't get your " i'll settle for less" attitude just so you can keep a carreet best 40 point center and a winger who has 1 good year. Bozak and Kuli are not players you build around...they are perimiter pieces.
Like I said, he doesn't need to. He's got the entirety of this year, and while it would be nice to have another additional year, it's not a deal breaker.

Bozak and Kulemin may not be players you build the top of your lineup around, but they're valuable players to have with a long term outlook. Luongo isn't. He's on the backside of his career with a huge contract.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Why would Backstrom/Kipper come to Toronto? Teams like Chicago or San Jose have a much better shot at landing them, unless Toronto vastly overpays size/term of their contract.

As per the last CBA, Luongo's contract is a cake walk for rich teams, as they can bury him in the minors at their leisure. Although no one knows what will happen with the current one, there still seems to be lots of possibilities on what to do with Luongo. If he retires, his cap hit might come back to Vancouver. He could be traded to a cap floor team for the last 3-4 years of his contract when his salary is only a fraction of his cap hit, etc. Besides the fact that we can't get anywhere discussing Luongo's value based on the fact the CBA might try to do everything in their power to lower Luongo's value. Especially when there are thoughts that teams can pay part of the salary of traded players, making it more feasible for cap floor teams.
If they end up in Chicago/San Jose, that'll make guys like Niemi/Crawford/Emery available. You've gotta remember, the market for players is fluid, Luongo isn't the only guy out there, and when goalies move, it makes others available. Furthermore, we're talking about trading for them, not as UFAs. However, even as a UFA, give me Backstrom for cash and years over Luongo for cash, years, and important young players any day of the week.

Not sure what the point of discussing the last CBA is... it's expired and one side has shown no interest in renewing it.

seanlinden is online now  
Old
11-14-2012, 08:03 PM
  #495
Vankiller Whale
Propaganda Minister
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,219
vCash: 900
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
If they end up in Chicago/San Jose, that'll make guys like Niemi/Crawford/Emery available. You've gotta remember, the market for players is fluid, Luongo isn't the only guy out there, and when goalies move, it makes others available. Furthermore, we're talking about trading for them, not as UFAs. However, even as a UFA, give me Backstrom for cash and years over Luongo for cash, years, and important young players any day of the week.
If you think Crawford or whoever would be suitable, then go ahead. Although it would be rather strange relying on Calgary to tank right after acquiring Hudler/Wideman/Cervenka to solve you're goalie problems, and if there's really only Backstrom who might be available, between, the Leafs, Chicago, and San Jose(or even a wild card team like Philly-see Vokoun), my guess is he would want to play for a contender. So maybe that will open options like Crawford or Bryzgalov. Although somehow I doubt that's the kind of solution Burke is looking for.

Quote:
Not sure what the point of discussing the last CBA is... it's expired and one side has shown no interest in renewing it.
Well saying Luongo's value is reduced by his contract when there is no evidence whatsoever to support that based on the previous CBA or discussions for the next seems like a reach in terms of trying to lower Luongo's value.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 08:06 PM
  #496
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,668
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
If you think Crawford or whoever would be suitable, then go ahead. Although it would be rather strange relying on Calgary to tank right after acquiring Hudler/Wideman/Cervenka to solve you're goalie problems, and if there's really only Backstrom who might be available, between, the Leafs, Chicago, and San Jose(or even a wild card team like Philly-see Vokoun), my guess is he would want to play for a contender. So maybe that will open options like Crawford or Bryzgalov. Although somehow I doubt that's the kind of solution Burke is looking for.



Well saying Luongo's value is reduced by his contract when there is no evidence whatsoever to support that based on the previous CBA or discussions for the next seems like a reach in terms of trying to lower Luongo's value.
We'd be relying on James Reimer just like Vancouver would be relying on Cory Schneider. If that doesn't work, we'll deal with that when it comes.

seanlinden is online now  
Old
11-14-2012, 08:10 PM
  #497
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,290
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
Like I said, he doesn't need to. He's got the entirety of this year, and while it would be nice to have another additional year, it's not a deal breaker.

Bozak and Kulemin may not be players you build the top of your lineup around, but they're valuable players to have with a long term outlook. Luongo isn't. He's on the backside of his career with a huge contract.



If they end up in Chicago/San Jose, that'll make guys like Niemi/Crawford/Emery available. You've gotta remember, the market for players is fluid, Luongo isn't the only guy out there, and when goalies move, it makes others available. Furthermore, we're talking about trading for them, not as UFAs. However, even as a UFA, give me Backstrom for cash and years over Luongo for cash, years, and important young players any day of the week.

Not sure what the point of discussing the last CBA is... it's expired and one side has shown no interest in renewing it.
Okay...wow, Niemi? Crawford? Emery?!?! Do you even care about winning?!?

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 08:12 PM
  #498
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,668
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Okay...wow, Niemi? Crawford? Emery?!?! Do you even care about winning?!?
Ya I do... and trading valuable and important young players for a goaltender on the downside of his career doesn't fit with that.

seanlinden is online now  
Old
11-14-2012, 08:20 PM
  #499
Vankiller Whale
Propaganda Minister
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,219
vCash: 900
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
Ya I do... and trading valuable and important young players for a goaltender on the downside of his career doesn't fit with that.
So what about someone like Lupul? 29 years old, 1 year left on his deal, if he doesn't feel like sticking around in Toronto waiting for "valuable and important young players" to actually start winning games, Burke would be wise to sell high on him.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 08:29 PM
  #500
LPH
[hello] :)
 
LPH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Granduland
Country: United States
Posts: 44,511
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
We'd be relying on James Reimer just like Vancouver would be relying on Cory Schneider. If that doesn't work, we'll deal with that when it comes.
there is a reason why we are shopping Luongo, and Burke is (at the very least) kicking the tires on Luongo.

Says something about Reimer and Schnieder

LPH is online now  
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 04:48 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.