HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
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 new All Purpose Lu Thread (MOD Warning in OP)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-18-2012, 02:54 PM
  #26
ginner classic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Kitsilano
Posts: 6,680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canuckaholic19 View Post
Im starting to fall into the keep luongo move schneider camp. I think most of us who watched the majority or nucks games last year can tell you that both of these guys bailed us out night in night out and luongo played a huge role in our regular season success last year. In other words the guy is still an all star and it only hurts the team if we move an allstar for low value due to contact issues. I have full confidence that luongo will be at a cup contnding level for another few years and that could possibly stretch oht even longer, who knows. But if we move schneider i think we could get a piece that could really put this team over the top and give them the best shot at winning a cup, and at the end of the day thats what its all about.
I never left that camp, but I think ownership and management did. They'd be irresponsible to not determine the trade value of each of them. I think the window to trade schneider was last offseason right after the carter deal (before bryz was signed) for the columbus first rounder, or before phoenix signed smith. Tampa and columbus have since made moves to fill their gaps as well.

ginner classic is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 03:09 PM
  #27
BigMacJokinen
Registered User
 
BigMacJokinen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 336
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canuckaholic19 View Post
Im starting to fall into the keep luongo move schneider camp.
Moving Schneider would actually make more sense. I'd say Luongo is a top10 goalie right now, Schneider isn't but could be one day. Schneider holds some risk being a starter (not that much compared to many others, I'm as confident for Cory as I'm for Tuukka Rask).

Luongo is still the more secure option, he has won gold medal and he can deliver the cup for Canucks. Also Schneider will fetch more in return in a trade. Makes sense for a contending team to keep the more secure, more proven, arguably still better goalie in Luongo.

Also it could favour Vancouver to be bad team instead of being a mediocre team after Sedins decline/retire - giving a more of Edmonton-style new era rather than Calgary (borderline playoffs)... however that might not be very respectful strategy, but it has been succesful for some teams. And I don't know if Schneider would make a difference at that point alone so..

But indeed, the reports that were in the media from Gillis and Luongo it seems management have other thoughts. And I think Vancouver can be succesful with trading Luongo, keeping Schneider too, it is not that big difference but my preference if I'm GMMG, would be trading Schneider, as Luongo is a goalie that suits a contending team better (Vancouver's cup winning window might not be very long anyways, Luongo will be good for that time). Also Schneider would probably have more demand, doesn't have NTC and has a great season behind him so his value is high too.

BigMacJokinen is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 03:15 PM
  #28
marty111
Registered User
 
marty111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,565
vCash: 500
Just to dispel some myths going on in this thread(s). *UPDATED*

Why Roberto Luongo will be traded and within approx one season's time:

#1. Luongo is ready to move on. Plain and simple. While he has politely given Gillis time and an opportunity to trade him by not forcing his hand and “demanding a trade”, it is a given the future is not long for Luongo and the Canucks. http://www.vancouversun.com/life/Can...588/story.html

#2. Lu has no control where he goes. According to CapGeek, Roberto Luongo has a NTC. He can supply a list of 5 teams he is willing to go to, HOWEVER, essentially he can have his say where he wants to go. It seems for now he’s willing to listen to a couple of interested teams, but he ultimately supplies a list of 5 teams of his choosing, putting him in control. For example; he can give 5 teams with realistically only 1 or 2 teams in need of his services or being capable of acquiring him. It’s a short list that puts Luongo in control. He must agree to where he goes. If things boil over between Gillis and Luongo (due to no trade or insufficient return), Luongo can simply tell the media or leak to the media that he “officially demands to be traded!” changing the dynamics and trade market significantly. NOTE: This is a tactic that is really only effective for high profile athletes considering their influence over their team, which Lu is. Again, it’s only likely if Gillis refuses to trade Luongo but it’s a real possibility if things go sour. Look at Dany Heatley, Eric Lindros, Rick Nash, etc.. Refer to point #1. Luongo has far much more control than people suggest.
http://www.capgeek.com/canucks/

[continued]

#3. Mike Gillis can keep both Luongo and Schneider?/New CBA, future cap ceiling, and the Canuck’s cap management going forward. Posted by a different user but looking at the math, especially if the cap drops in one year to 60M, Vancouver will need to move salary in order to fill out their roster to continue competing for the cup. [to make improvements] Luongo is the only real asset that they could use to clear cap space AND still get value for. Other players will likely need to be a cap dump + some value going to another team to absorb that cap hit. The new CBA will determine a lot but there is a possibility that cap dumps in the minors will still count against the cap - still to be determined. Either way it’s a 5-6 million dollar mistake on management or assets out the door to retain the cap to keep Luongo, still keeping in mind point #1 and #2. - nonsensical. It seems the strongest path is to move Luongo with everything considered and take some sort of value rather than the other options.

sedin (6.1) sedin (6.1) burrows (4.5)
booth (4.25) kesler (5.4) xxxxxx
kassian (0.87) xxxxxxx hansen (1.35)
xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx

bieksa (4.6) hamhuis (4.6)
garrison (4.6) xxxxxxx
ballard (4.2) xxxxxxx

schneider (4)
luongo (5.3)

“with the above players signed it is a total of apx. $57.57M committed to the cap with gillis needing to sign 5 forwards and 2 defenseman. assuming that the cap hit is in fact $70 million it would give apx. $12.5 million to sign the remaining 7 players.” Even worse if within a season the cap is graded down to 60M and of course Edler is to be signed.

Common rebuttal:
Goaltending duo's:

Nashville 8.5 mil (Rinne/Mason)
Rangers 8.175 mil (Lundquist/Biron)
Boston 9.375 mil (Thomas/Rask/Khudobin)
New York Islanders 7.25 mil (Depietro/Nabokov)

However, Nashville’s tandem will be expired in one form or another within one season or if the lockout continues, the next regular season game. Ranger’s clock in at 8.175 in two years but appear to have cap room for future moves. Boston’s same as Nashville, and NYI within one year or not at all if Depietro is on the LTIR. Completely different situations, either via length of tandem or the movability of each player.

Again, the lockout and new CBA will determine a lot but it seems completely outside the realm of reason to think Gillis can keep both and he is most surely on a clock to make it happen, valuation aside. I don’t see any reason why anyone would think Gillis has the option to keep Lu around for as long as he wants if he doesn’t get what he wants OR that Gillis has complete control over his asset Luongo. The clock is ticking for Gillis. While there is the possibility that a team gets desperate, the odds are better that they won’t. The longer Gillis waits, the quicker Luongo’s value drops.

And since it seems that these points are mitigated better when an example of Lu's worth [IMO] is thrown out there, here's what I think they could get for Toronto at the most if Toronto cannot sign Lupul to an extension.


Roberto Luongo
1st in 2014


1st in 2014
Lupul [denpending on circumstances]
Colbourne
Lombardi


Last edited by marty111: 11-18-2012 at 04:06 PM. Reason: updating errors
marty111 is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 03:16 PM
  #29
kthsn
Registered User
 
kthsn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,719
vCash: 1785
I'm in the keep both goalies camp for this season.

In a shortened season with lots of back to backs having 2 elite goalies is the best team we can ice. Most of our skaters haven't gone overseas and will be out of shape for a month of so. Gillis can flip a goalie at the TDL in a hockey deal ala Kassian/Hodgson.

kthsn is online now  
Old
11-18-2012, 03:23 PM
  #30
ginner classic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Kitsilano
Posts: 6,680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
I'm in the keep both goalies camp for this season.

In a shortened season with lots of back to backs having 2 elite goalies is the best team we can ice. Most of our skaters haven't gone overseas and will be out of shape for a month of so. Gillis can flip a goalie at the TDL in a hockey deal ala Kassian/Hodgson.
Assuming we have a season and the cap has not been materially changed, I'd agree with this. The spare parts offers are non-sensical in comparison to having the best tandem in the NHL.

Beezer and Richter
Moog and Fuhr
Froese and Hextall
Peters and ?
Froese and Lindbergh
Rask and Thomas
Vernon and Osgood
Osgood and Hasek
Schneider and Lou

Those are all from memory. Can't remember if they are all right.

ginner classic is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 03:28 PM
  #31
kthsn
Registered User
 
kthsn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,719
vCash: 1785
BTW Canucks keeping both goalies is very feasible.

06/07 Nucks spent 16% on G
07/08 Nucks spent 14% on G
09/10 Nucks spent 13% on G

If the cap is 70M - 13% on G
If the cap if 60M in 2014 - 15.5% on G

So really spending so much on goalies is something Vancouver does regularly.

In fact Luongo + Schneider at 9.3M is less than what we used to spend on Luongo when he first came to town.

kthsn is online now  
Old
11-18-2012, 03:31 PM
  #32
BigMacJokinen
Registered User
 
BigMacJokinen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 336
vCash: 500
If Luongo is traded, as a neutral hockey watcher, I'd be interested seeing Luongo in Washington or Edmonton.

Washington fits for several reasons: They are in different conference, they have a risky pairing of Neuvirth and Holtby who might not be able to do the job, they might be but for a contending team Luongo would be a good fit. Some Vancouver fans would be delighted getting Mike Green, however I'm not sure if that would be the case, it's an interesting trade proposal though.

Edmonton I think would be a good fit too, more for Schneider but I think what some people aren't seeing that their young core could be ready in less time than expected. When they start to flourish, it will happen quick and even Stanley Cup Finals could be possible 2 years from now. When things start to happen, they can very well happen rapidly. Here is what happened for Pittsburgh not so long ago

2005-2006 season, Pittsburgh was 15th (last) in East, with 58 points

2006-2007 season, Pittsburgh was 5th in East, 105 points - that's a huge improvement. They had a 1st round exit though in playoffs.

07-08 Pittsburgh won the division, went to SCF but lost to Detroit 2-4. 08-09 they won the cup.

So here is a scenario that could be even be likely for Oilers too, when a team has a very talented, young core, it'll not take long before they are a force. So Luongo is not too old for Oilers.

Also Luongo would (probably/possibly) help the team attract more free agents and help creating a culture of winning.

BigMacJokinen is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 03:32 PM
  #33
Seatoo
Never Stop Poasting
 
Seatoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: The Interior of BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,898
vCash: 500
Marty that is a pathetic return for Luongo, even if you remove the 1st van gives up.

2 pending UFAs, B prospect and a 1st for an elite top 10 goalie locked up long term with a reasonable caphit and multiple escape clauses and an expiring NTC around the time it can reasonably assumed his play would start to decline is a deal that would get Gillis fired. Try again.

Also please stop presenting your opinions, personal speculation and downright untrue statements as fact. You're like the FoxNews of this thread.

Seatoo is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 03:33 PM
  #34
Shawnathon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaffan16 View Post
I'd rather have a top 5 pick again than trade the value you want for a 33 year old, 5.33 cap until he is in his 40s, declining top 10 goalie, that is also inconsistent with ******** the bed in the 1st 20ish games. And a choker. There is my rant, and can you please switch to Forida or Edmonton proposals?
Us Florida fans don't want more proposals. We're Vancouvers last resort if they can't get value out of another team.

Shawnathon is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 03:34 PM
  #35
HamhuisHip
LeggsOverMyHamhuis
 
HamhuisHip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,088
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by marty111 View Post
#1. Luongo is ready to move on.
I think "Luongo is willing to move on" is more accurate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by marty111 View Post
#2. Mike Gillis can keep both Luongo and Schneider? Lu has no control where he goes. According to CapGeek, Roberto Luongo has a NTC. He can supply a list of 5 teams he is willing to go to, HOWEVER, essentially he can have his say where he wants to go. It seems for now he’s willing to listen to a couple of interested teams, but he ultimately supplies a list of 5 teams of his choosing, putting him in control. For example; he can give 5 teams with realistically only 1 or 2 teams in need of his services or being capable of acquiring him. It’s a short list that puts Luongo in control. He must agree to where he goes. If things boil over between Gillis and Luongo (due to no trade or insufficient return), Luongo can simply tell the media or leak to the media that he “officially demands to be traded!” changing the dynamics and trade market significantly. NOTE: This is a tactic that is really only effective for high profile athletes considering their influence over their team, which Lu is. Again, it’s only likely if Gillis refuses to trade Luongo but it’s a real possibility if things go sour. Look at Dany Heatley, Eric Lindros, Rick Nash, etc.. Refer to point #1. Luongo has far much more control than people suggest.
http://www.capgeek.com/canucks/
What does Luongo' NTC have to do with keeping Luongo and Schneider. Both are contractually committed to Vancouver. This point means nothing. Maybe you mean Luongo has control over where he is traded to which is true to an extent. Gillis is mitigating the "list" my not asking for one and only taking a trade to Luongo when one is agreeable. This means any team can negotiate with Gillis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by marty111 View Post
#3. New CBA, future cap ceiling, and the Canuck’s cap management going forward. <snip>

Again, the lockout and new CBA will determine a lot but it seems completely outside the realm of reason to think Gillis can keep both and he is most surely on a clock to make it happen, valuation aside. I don’t see any reason why anyone would think Gillis has the option to keep Lu around for as long as he wants if he doesn’t get what he wants OR that Gillis has complete control over his asset Luongo.
Although not ideal, other moves could be make to keep both goalies under the new cap set by the yet to be finalized CBA. Throw in how the "make whole" provision will effect current contracts and it becomes even more difficult to know to what extent the new cap will have on the moves Gillis will have to make.

Quote:
Originally Posted by marty111 View Post
The clock is ticking for Gillis. While there is the possibility that a team gets desperate, the odds are better that they won’t. The longer Gillis waits, the quicker Luongo’s value drops.[/B]
Your opinion/speculation. No one knows what the future holds for Luongo's market.

HamhuisHip is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 03:46 PM
  #36
ginner classic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Kitsilano
Posts: 6,680
vCash: 500
Beezer and Richter (President's Trophy)
Moog and Fuhr (Three Stanley Cups, 2PTs )
Rask and Thomas (Stanley Cup)
Vernon and Osgood (Stanley Cup, PT)
Osgood and Hasek (Stanley Cup, PT)
Schneider and Lou (2 PTs)

ginner classic is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 03:50 PM
  #37
LEAFANFORLIFE23
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,656
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuck This View Post
Luongo for Reilly
this a joke?

LEAFANFORLIFE23 is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 03:58 PM
  #38
marty111
Registered User
 
marty111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,565
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seatoo View Post
Marty that is a pathetic return for..
Not every word is a FACT. However my points are supported by facts and the speculation that follows is valid based on those facts. I have even cited examples to further support my points.

If you are going to take the stance that "no one knows anything about what's going to happen so it's ALL speculation" then that's your choice, HOWEVER, your opinion is validated by nothing. If you have anything to validate your opinion than it would carry weight in a real conversation.

And Lupul would/could be under contract. I never said either way and I could understand if Lupul resigning would be a MUST for Vancouver. I accept that.

However, considering some other feedback I have got, that's a reasonable return to some.

marty111 is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 03:58 PM
  #39
BigMacJokinen
Registered User
 
BigMacJokinen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 336
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by marty111 View Post
Why Roberto Luongo will be traded and within approx one season's time:

#1. Luongo is ready to move on. Plain and simple. While he has politely given Gillis time and an opportunity to trade him by not forcing his hand and “demanding a trade”, it is a given the future is not long for Luongo and the Canucks. http://www.vancouversun.com/life/Can...588/story.html
I agree Luongo is open for a trade. He is fine if he is traded to different team, preferably Florida but what I disagree is that the situation would be so fierce that Luongo don't want to stay in Vancouver. So "It's a given the future is not long for Luongo and the Canucks" it's just your assumption and view of this, definetly not a fact.

I feel that (this is not a fact, just speculation from my part) it would be number one option for Luongo and Gillis that there would be a nice deal with Florida (or whatever is Luongo's preferred team), but this is not the only option. From what I read and think about this, as a neutral hockey fan, I feel that Luongo would be open for many things: Traded to some teams as a starter (not solely Florida), or staying in current place but getting the starter position, or even just forming a tandem with Schneider for at least some time (1-2 seasons).

Quote:
#2. Mike Gillis can keep both Luongo and Schneider?/ Lu has no control where he goes. According to CapGeek, Roberto Luongo has a NTC.... Luongo has far much more control than people suggest.
http://www.capgeek.com/canucks/
Luongo has a NTC, this is a fact. But there is no evidence, and I think not much to think that Luongo would fiercely use his control. I don't think he has burned down any bridges or anything, he would still be content staying in Vancouver too - after all he wants to win Stanley Cup and Vancouver offers a great shot for that.

Quote:
#3. New CBA, future cap ceiling, and the Canuck’s cap management going forward.
I agree with this one.

If cap goes down, I'd say Vancouver should trade one of their goalies for sure. They could fit under the cap doing multiple other moves so this (trading Luongo or Schneider) wouldn't be forced but a probable scenario anyway.

Basically more down the cap will go (without taking rollbacks in discussion), more pressured/inclined Canucks will be trading one of their goalies (probably Luongo)

Marty, I think you are simplifying too much things. Some good points though and I agree that Luongo wouldn't fetch much at this goalie market. I feel that Kulemin+Colbourne+1st or Petrovic+something+1st could be had but there is no way any of these players would become as good players Luongo is. But probably even a better market, goalies don't fetch a star forward.

I appreciate your contribution to the thread though Marty, mostly you are doing great rational thinking but I disagree with some assumptions you made.

BigMacJokinen is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 04:00 PM
  #40
pahlsson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,342
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by LEAFANFORLIFE23 View Post
this a joke?
yeah, he obviously means luongo for reilly + 1st

pahlsson is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 04:04 PM
  #41
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,725
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by marty111 View Post
[I][SIZE="2"]
Roberto Luongo
1st in 2014


1st in 2014
Lupul [denpending on circumstances]
Colbourne
Lombardi
I said it before, and I'll say it again:

I don't hate this.

I'd like a top six D back, even at added expense to the Canucks or if Colborne would like the be retained by the Leafs, if it's someone like Gunnarsson, and then we can deep six Alberts to the 8th Dman.

Bury Lombardi if he isn't up to snuff after Kesler's ready to play.

Add a second from Vancouver, and make it Connolly if that helps the Leafs instead of Lombardi, and have it as Luongo, Van's 1st, Van's 2nd for Lupul, Gunnar (adding the second)/Franson, Colborne, Lombardi/Connolly and Toronto's first.

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Lupul-Kesler-Booth (based on Booth playing right wing last year)
Higgins-Lapierre/Colborne-Hansen
Kassian-Malhotra/Lapierre-Weise/Malhotra
Ebbett, Weise?

Hamhuis-Bieksa
Edler-Garrison
Ballard-Gunnar/Franson/Tanev
Gunnar/Franson/Tanev, Alberts

Schneider
Lack

I'd watch the line up. I'd watch that line up all year long.

Cogburn is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 04:05 PM
  #42
marty111
Registered User
 
marty111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,565
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HamhuisHip View Post
I think "Luongo is willing to move on" is more accurate.
Me too. I apologize if before it was over the top. I also feel that took away from the conversation as others focused on it and not much else - hence the change.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HamhuisHip View Post
What does Luongo' NTC have to do with keeping Luongo and Schneider. Both are contractually committed to Vancouver. This point means nothing. Maybe you mean Luongo has control over where he is traded to which is true to an extent. Gillis is mitigating the "list" my not asking for one and only taking a trade to Luongo when one is agreeable. This means any team can negotiate with Gillis.
You're right. Point 2 is meant to illuminate that Luongo has more control than most people here are proposing. Point 3 deals with Vancouver not being able to keep both. I'll have to re-edit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HamhuisHip View Post
Although not ideal, other moves could be make to keep both goalies under the new cap set by the yet to be finalized CBA. Throw in how the "make whole" provision will effect current contracts and it becomes even more difficult to know to what extent the new cap will have on the moves Gillis will have to make.
I would be interested in a proposal under the "current" cap that outlines that Vancouver can IMPROVE it's roster within it's current cap space, which is my point. Future challenges can only be speculated about, however they can be substantiated with educated guesses from everything we expect to happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HamhuisHip View Post
Your opinion/speculation. No one knows what the future holds for Luongo's market.
Again, I have stated facts and supported valid speculation with those facts using various sources and examples. My opinion currently is valid and I challenge other posters [if they disagree] to support their opinion with something other than "anything can happen".

marty111 is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 04:09 PM
  #43
kthsn
Registered User
 
kthsn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,719
vCash: 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post
I'd like a top six D back, even at added expense to the Canucks or if Colborne would like the be retained by the Leafs, if it's someone like Gunnarsson, and then we can deep six Alberts to the 8th Dman.
Gunnar plays LD just like Ballard. Acquiring another LD is redundant

Leafs RD are very weak - Phaneuf (prefers LD), Komisarek (no thanks), Holzer (rookie) and Franson (#6/7)

kthsn is online now  
Old
11-18-2012, 04:12 PM
  #44
marty111
Registered User
 
marty111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,565
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacJokinen View Post
I appreciate your contribution to the thread though Marty, mostly you are doing great rational thinking but I disagree with some assumptions you made.
Fair enough, I appreciate a concise and rational response. However I still feel that the "rub" between my points is that Lu or Schneider won't want to play 1-B or #2 for very long, hence why I feel a lot of my speculation makes sense.

marty111 is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 04:15 PM
  #45
HamhuisHip
LeggsOverMyHamhuis
 
HamhuisHip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,088
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by marty111 View Post
I would be interested in a proposal under the "current" cap that outlines that Vancouver can IMPROVE it's roster within it's current cap space, which is my point. Future challenges can only be speculated about, however they can be substantiated with educated guesses from everything we expect to happen.
If the cap drop has as big of effect on the Canucks as you think it will then other teams will be in the same position. I would not expect any of the top teams (who are also high payroll teams) to improve. Status quo or improvement from within will be those teams motto.

Quote:
Originally Posted by marty111 View Post
Again, I have stated facts and supported valid speculation with those facts using various sources and examples. My opinion currently is valid and I challenge other posters [if they disagree] to support their opinion with something other than "anything can happen".
Of course "your speculation" is valid from your perspective. It just isn't one I subscribe to.

HamhuisHip is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 04:23 PM
  #46
jumptheshark
Give the dog a bone
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 52,292
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by marty111 View Post
[I][SIZE="2"]

Roberto Luongo
1st in 2014


1st in 2014
Lupul [denpending on circumstances]
Colbourne
Lombardi
deleted the other parts becuase it was a lot of conjecture and opinon and guessing.

Why swap draft picks? With Luongo on the leafs the picks could be just 10 spots a part and I do not see the canucks adding a pick to get a pick. For me the picks are nearly a wash.

Lupul and Lambardi are UFA after this year

So for me--the trade is Colbourne for Luongo--do you do that deal?
I was voted the biggest anti-canuck fan on this site and I would have to say that the Canucks get bent over in the deal. 2 players soon to be ufa, swap of first rounders and one unproven center for a goalie who we will argue till the end of the earth on how good or bad he is? In this case, I can see nucks fans getting frustrated at that offer

__________________
trying to fend off exwife number 2
45000/010113
GO SHARKS GO
jumptheshark is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 04:36 PM
  #47
LEAFANFORLIFE23
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,656
vCash: 500
i gotta wonder how the UFA goalie market will inpact lou's value? if the season gets wiped out TT, jimmy Howard, mike simth, backstrom and others are set to be UFA supply could outweigh demand

LEAFANFORLIFE23 is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 04:50 PM
  #48
WonderTwinsUnite
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: North Delta, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,522
vCash: 500
Lombardi and Connolly are not good pieces. Made of glass, concussion problems, high salaried, mediocre production. Plus the Canucks have Sedin, Kesler, Malhotra, Lapierre, Ebbett and Schroeder at center.

Lupul is the ideal return.

WonderTwinsUnite is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 04:53 PM
  #49
DougGilmour93
Registered User
 
DougGilmour93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,137
vCash: 500
Lombardi
Kadri/Colborne
Percy/Franson
1st in 2014

for

Raymond
Luongo

DougGilmour93 is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 04:55 PM
  #50
DougGilmour93
Registered User
 
DougGilmour93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,137
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WonderTwinsUnite View Post
Lombardi and Connolly are not good pieces. Made of glass, concussion problems, high salaried, mediocre production. Plus the Canucks have Sedin, Kesler, Malhotra, Lapierre, Ebbett and Schroeder at center.

Lupul is the ideal return.
We'll keep our 2nd best player from the past season who has developed great chemistry with Kessel.

DougGilmour93 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 10:01 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.