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.

More Luongo Talk

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-08-2012, 11:16 AM
  #151
BlueBaron
Registered User
 
BlueBaron's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Toronto, On
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,265
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kack zassian View Post
It looked like Leafa fans were pretty 50/50 on the package of
- Kadri
- Bozak
- Finn
- Frattin
All our youth, all players (except maybe Bozak) we plan to build around. Just doesn't make sense.


Last edited by BlueBaron: 12-08-2012 at 11:24 AM.
BlueBaron is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 11:24 AM
  #152
Liferleafer
Golf....again....
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 8,447
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueBaron View Post
All our youth, all players (except maybe Bozak) we plan to build around. Just doesn;t make sense.
Numbers and i kinda tweeked it to Kadri,Bozak,Colborne and Blacker. I'll be honest, i agreed to it just because i'm not overly high on either Kadri or Colborne but was reluctant to move Frattin or Finn.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 11:28 AM
  #153
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 17,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sully1410 View Post
I'm goin to take a wild guess and say that you don't follow the jets vey much. I watch both the Canucks and the Jets, so it's easy for me to see what each team needs.

Ballard is an upgrade on Hainsey, who is a UFA next season, and provided that there is hockey, Hainsey could be dealt at the deadline for some more picks in a deep draft.

While I wouldn't mind keeping Antropov, he gets paid way too
much for the services he provides. If Van wants him, they are more then welcome to the guy.

Pavelec was one of the worst starters in the league last season, and has had his work ethic and dedication called into question, as well as his physical fitness. I'm altogether unsure whether Pavelec is the answer that is going to get us into the playoffs or not. You can call it giving up on a 25 yr old player...but when do you call it? The guy got cut from his team in the Czech Republic, but it's not like you can blame playing style.

This team getting closer and closer to competing, and I don't think Pavelec is going to be that guy. With Luongo between the pipes, this is a playoff team.
Let's address your post... point by point.

Ballard vs. Hainsey -- Not going to comment on who's better, but Ballard is overpaid at $4.2m. If in fact he's better than Hainsey, don't you think you could retain Hainsey for substantially less?

Antropov may get paid too much for the services he provides, but if the focus is on the future in Winnipeg (as it should be), he represents the ability to add an extra pick in this year's draft. There's lots of teams who'd be happy to have him for a portion of this season, if there is one.

If it was as simple as swapping Luongo for Pavelec, then I'd agree with you, it instantly makes Winnipeg a playoff team. But that isn't the case. It's $3.2m that must be taken from somewhere else on the team. Given that, any improvement made by having Luongo in net is going to come at a cost of hurting the quality of the players infront of him. So realistically... Luongo might get them to the playoffs, but how long before they're actually cup contenders? and by that time, how can jets management say with confidence that they'd rather have Roberto Luongo at 35-36 versus Ondrej Pavelec at 27-28.

seanlinden is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 11:29 AM
  #154
TheLeastOfTheBunch
Registered User
 
TheLeastOfTheBunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,050
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by kack zassian View Post
It looked like Leafa fans were pretty 50/50 on the package of
- Kadri
- Bozak
- Finn
- Frattin
50/50? I suspect majority of Leaf fans wouldn't do it. Not that it matters..

TheLeastOfTheBunch is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 12:53 PM
  #155
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 44,679
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueBaron View Post
All our youth, all players (except maybe Bozak) we plan to build around. Just doesn't make sense.
Would rather you guys give us fewer pieces of higher quality than a slew of decent pieces.

__________________
May 17, 2014: The day nightlife changes in Vancouver...ask me how.
y2kcanucks is online now  
Old
12-08-2012, 12:56 PM
  #156
Liferleafer
Golf....again....
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 8,447
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Would rather you guys give us fewer pieces of higher quality than a slew of decent pieces.
Would rather Luongo be 27 and have a 5 year contract.....it is what it is.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 12:57 PM
  #157
RogerRoeper*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 21,694
vCash: 500
This is still going on? Geeze. I have no idea why any Leaf fan would want Luongo. And I'm a big fan of his. It makes no sense for the Leafs though. Keep rebuilding.

RogerRoeper* is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 12:59 PM
  #158
Liferleafer
Golf....again....
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 8,447
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerRoeper View Post
This is still going on? Geeze. I have no idea why any Leaf fan would want Luongo. And I'm a big fan of his. It makes no sense for the Leafs though. Keep rebuilding.
Guess it depends....if you want to tank or win.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 01:02 PM
  #159
RogerRoeper*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 21,694
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Guess it depends....if you want to tank or win.
But will the Leafs win? Florida never saw the playoffs with Luongo. I see him making them good enough to fight for a playoff spot. Is this really the way to build a team? And why not give James Reimer a real chance?

RogerRoeper* is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 01:10 PM
  #160
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
Of course not... in this thread you've got a bunch of people coming up with ubsurd prices based on what they "want"... not based on being better than the next best offer.

Of course, there's room for bluffing, but there's also room to call a bluff. If Gillis were to ask for Gardiner, JvR and a 1st, Burke calls that bluff under the simple realization that nobody is going to give up anywhere NEAR that quality for Luongo, and he certainly isn't either. If Gillis asks for Kadri and a 2nd, Burke likely doesn't call that bluff, because chances are some other team is prepared to offer quality in that range, and it's a deal that probably makes sense for his team.

All we're doing in this thread is speculating what real life value might be based on HF fan offers. That doesn't mean the process can't be similar. Furthermore, you suggestion that just because Florida/Chicago/Edmonton fans aren't showing interest, that doesn't mean their GM's don't have interest is absolutely valid. However, it's exactly as valid as suggesting that Brian Burke doesn't have interest despite Leafs fans having interest.

At the end of the day, all we're doing is playing armchair GMs in this thread... which is fine... but doing so should at least follow some sort of similar logic to what an actual GM would do (i.e. offer just enough to beat the 2nd most interested team, and do an evaluation of what other teams would likely be prepared to give up in order to determine your offer price).
I think for the most part you and I are on the same page here, however there are a couple of things I disagree with.

First off, the bolded. I'm not sure if you did the math on this one, but for me the calculus does not come out as 'exactly as valid'. Burke has publicly stated he wants to upgrade the goaltending situation this offseason, has met multiple times with Canucks front office including watching Marlies games together, and there have been multiple reports from knowledgeable hockey guys that Burke is trying to trade for Luongo. I'm not sure anyone with critical thinking ability can reasonably deduct that Burke is not at all interested in Luongo.

On the other hand, there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Tallon, Tambellini etc don't have at least some level of interest in the guy. Therefore I'm not sure how you came up with 'exactly as valid'.

I brought up the concept of bluffing to illustrate the difference between open negotiations, like HF, and closed negotiations, like real life, and how it pertains to potentially outbidding yourself. For example, if Burke has an offer on the table and Gillis comes back and says he's received another offer, a reasonable one, that's better than Burke's, does Burke move closer to his best offer to try and beat the competition, or does he call it as a bluff and potentially miss out on improving his team? Obviously he won't make a deal he thinks hurts his team, but on the other hand would he be willing to risk losing Luongo just because he thinks Gillis might be trying to extort an extra pick/prospect out of him? None of us know the answers to these questions, and frankly neither would surprise me with Burke, but it adds a different flavour to negotiations that isn't realized here in these threads.

StringerBell is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 01:15 PM
  #161
Liferleafer
Golf....again....
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 8,447
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerRoeper View Post
But will the Leafs win? Florida never saw the playoffs with Luongo. I see him making them good enough to fight for a playoff spot. Is this really the way to build a team? And why not give James Reimer a real chance?
We did, he posted a .900 save %. If we had Luongo last season, even in an average year for him, we would have made the playoffs. I assume you believe the way to "build a team" is to continue to lose? What happens in 2 seasons when Kessel and Phaneuf are ufa, you think they stick around? I look at it this way, Luongo legitimises our goaltending for 5 years. The question is, what do the pieces we give up do in the next 5 years that outweigh solid goaltending?

Again, if you feel it's a good thing to lose, then obviously my argument is useless as it is based on winning.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 01:22 PM
  #162
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 17,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StringerBell View Post
I think for the most part you and I are on the same page here, however there are a couple of things I disagree with.

First off, the bolded. I'm not sure if you did the math on this one, but for me the calculus does not come out as 'exactly as valid'. Burke has publicly stated he wants to upgrade the goaltending situation this offseason, has met multiple times with Canucks front office including watching Marlies games together, and there have been multiple reports from knowledgeable hockey guys that Burke is trying to trade for Luongo. I'm not sure anyone with critical thinking ability can reasonably deduct that Burke is not at all interested in Luongo.

On the other hand, there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Tallon, Tambellini etc don't have at least some level of interest in the guy. Therefore I'm not sure how you came up with 'exactly as valid'.

I brought up the concept of bluffing to illustrate the difference between open negotiations, like HF, and closed negotiations, like real life, and how it pertains to potentially outbidding yourself. For example, if Burke has an offer on the table and Gillis comes back and says he's received another offer, a reasonable one, that's better than Burke's, does Burke move closer to his best offer to try and beat the competition, or does he call it as a bluff and potentially miss out on improving his team? Obviously he won't make a deal he thinks hurts his team, but on the other hand would he be willing to risk losing Luongo just because he thinks Gillis might be trying to extort an extra pick/prospect out of him? None of us know the answers to these questions, and frankly neither would surprise me with Burke, but it adds a different flavour to negotiations that isn't realized here in these threads.
Burke has publicly stated he wants to upgrade the goaltending position. He's also publicly stated that James Reimer is his guy. The latter certainly can't be taken at face value because it's in his best interest doing so, however, being interested in upgrading goaltending does not automatically mean he's interested in committing 9 years to a 33-year old Roberto Luongo.

"Reports and Rumors" are just that... nothing factual to base off of.

As for the bluffing point.. if Gillis tells Burke he has a better deal, that doesn't mean Burke automatically moves closer to his best offer. It means he evaluates his deal, and whether or not a team is likely to actually have a better offer on the table.

This thread would be useful for figuring out the approximate breaking point, if more than 1 team's fans were actually interested in Luongo. Instead, you've got fans of both sides coming up with completely arbitrary prices, instead of basing it on what teams are likely to offer. Vancouver is in no position to demand the prices mentioned in these threads, when it doesn't make sense for any of the other 28 teams in the league to offer anywhere near that.

seanlinden is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 01:24 PM
  #163
skywarp75
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,004
vCash: 500
hi, canuck fan here just to point out that the nucks cant take on 3 extra contracts (4 for 1 trade) , as there is still a 50 contract limit, isnt there?

skywarp75 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 01:26 PM
  #164
Liferleafer
Golf....again....
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 8,447
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
Burke has publicly stated he wants to upgrade the goaltending position. He's also publicly stated that James Reimer is his guy. The latter certainly can't be taken at face value because it's in his best interest doing so, however, being interested in upgrading goaltending does not automatically mean he's interested in committing 9 years to a 33-year old Roberto Luongo.

"Reports and Rumors" are just that... nothing factual to base off of.

As for the bluffing point.. if Gillis tells Burke he has a better deal, that doesn't mean Burke automatically moves closer to his best offer. It means he evaluates his deal, and whether or not a team is likely to actually have a better offer on the table.

This thread would be useful for figuring out the approximate breaking point, if more than 1 team's fans were actually interested in Luongo. Instead, you've got fans of both sides coming up with completely arbitrary prices, instead of basing it on what teams are likely to offer. Vancouver is in no position to demand the prices mentioned in these threads, when it doesn't make sense for any of the other 28 teams in the league to offer anywhere near that.
Ok, serious question, do you think Luongo is going to play for 1 million dollars at age 38? Do you think the new CBA is going to state that a player can't retire?

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 01:30 PM
  #165
Vankiller Whale
Win it for AV
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,778
vCash: 5100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Ok, serious question, do you think Luongo is going to play for 1 million dollars at age 38? Do you think the new CBA is going to state that a player can't retire?
Luongo still makes 6.7 at 38, then it sharply decreases to 3.3(debateable if he'd play or not), then 1.6, 1, 1, which virtually scream cap circumvention years.

Luongo will likely retire at 39. If not, trade him to a cap floor team or bury him in the minors.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 01:31 PM
  #166
Kip96
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: West Coast
Country: Canada
Posts: 799
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Guess it depends....if you want to tank or win.
Problem for you guys is they do neither

With Luongo you instantly make the playoffs. Probably a top 5 seed as well

Kip96 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 01:31 PM
  #167
Liferleafer
Golf....again....
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 8,447
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Luongo still makes 6.7 at 38, then it sharply decreases to 3.3(debateable if he'd play or not), then 1.6, 1, 1, which virtually scream cap circumvention years.

Luongo will likely retire at 39. If not, trade him to a cap floor team or bury him in the minors.
Sorry, had the 5 year thing stuck in my head.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 01:32 PM
  #168
Liferleafer
Golf....again....
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 8,447
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kip96 View Post
Problem for you guys is they do neither

With Luongo you instantly make the playoffs. Probably a top 5 seed as well
That was my point, the poster was asking why it made sense to bring in Luongo.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 01:36 PM
  #169
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
Burke has publicly stated he wants to upgrade the goaltending position. He's also publicly stated that James Reimer is his guy. The latter certainly can't be taken at face value because it's in his best interest doing so, however, being interested in upgrading goaltending does not automatically mean he's interested in committing 9 years to a 33-year old Roberto Luongo.

"Reports and Rumors" are just that... nothing factual to base off of.

As for the bluffing point.. if Gillis tells Burke he has a better deal, that doesn't mean Burke automatically moves closer to his best offer. It means he evaluates his deal, and whether or not a team is likely to actually have a better offer on the table.

This thread would be useful for figuring out the approximate breaking point, if more than 1 team's fans were actually interested in Luongo. Instead, you've got fans of both sides coming up with completely arbitrary prices, instead of basing it on what teams are likely to offer. Vancouver is in no position to demand the prices mentioned in these threads, when it doesn't make sense for any of the other 28 teams in the league to offer anywhere near that.
What's your offer again? Just curious now.

StringerBell is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 02:03 PM
  #170
The Saurus
Registered User
 
The Saurus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Country: United Nations
Posts: 8,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Okay...

1. If i can't say his contract is good because we don't know what the new CBA says....you can't say it's bad for the same reason. It's a wash.

2. As far as i know, hockey is a team game. If your team can't score it really doesn't matter if your GA average is 2.00.

3. Wanna talk history do ya? Can you tell me what seat in the Gardens you were sitting in the last time the Leafs won the cup? I can, i also have my fathers 4 cup rings on my mantle. Want to know why we haven't seen the playoffs in eight years?

Reimer .921 and .900
Scrivens .902
Gustavsson .902
Toskala .891 and .904 and .874
Raycroft .894
Gerber .905
J.S Giguere 15 games .916
J.S Aubin .896
Michael Telquist .895
Scott Clemmensen .839
Justin Pogge .844
Curtis Joseph .869

Tell me, do you think Luongo's .913-.931may have helped?
Excellent. You've pulled up a bunch useless goaltending statistics without providing appropriate context.

So you've established that you're old enough to have seen the Leafs win the cup. But apparently, those years haven't given you clarity as to what constitutes winning strategies. The Leafs are a team that has a decent amount, but not a lot, of young talent and are not in any position to trade that young talent for a goaltender that is on the verge of a decline.

That strategy certainly helped the Leafs get to where they are today: A lousy team that needed years upon years to restock the youth cupboard.

But by all means, lets trade away our youth that will flourish elsewhere when Roberto is putting up sub .900 numbers through the twilight of his career at a 5.3m/yr caphit.

The Saurus is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 02:14 PM
  #171
Liferleafer
Golf....again....
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 8,447
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saurus View Post
Excellent. You've pulled up a bunch useless goaltending statistics without providing appropriate context.

So you've established that you're old enough to have seen the Leafs win the cup. But apparently, those years haven't given you clarity as to what constitutes winning strategies. The Leafs are a team that has a decent amount, but not a lot, of young talent and are not in any position to trade that young talent for a goaltender that is on the verge of a decline.

That strategy certainly helped the Leafs get to where they are today: A lousy team that needed years upon years to restock the youth cupboard.

But by all means, lets trade away our youth that will flourish elsewhere when Roberto is putting up sub .900 numbers through the twilight of his career at a 5.3m/yr caphit.
Lol...here's a heads up for ya, Kadri isn't going to "flourish"anywhere. Colborne is soft as butter and won't be anything. Bozak is at best a good 3C to not so good 2C. So i can make a pretty good case that 5 years of Luongo will have a much more positive impact than 5 years of those 3. I get that they are young....but they aren't good.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 02:14 PM
  #172
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 17,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StringerBell View Post
What's your offer again? Just curious now.
That depends on when the CBA is signed, and what it looks like in terms of a 2013-2014 cap.

seanlinden is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 02:15 PM
  #173
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 17,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Ok, serious question, do you think Luongo is going to play for 1 million dollars at age 38? Do you think the new CBA is going to state that a player can't retire?
That will be his decision to make at the time. Until then, he's under contract.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Luongo still makes 6.7 at 38, then it sharply decreases to 3.3(debateable if he'd play or not), then 1.6, 1, 1, which virtually scream cap circumvention years.

Luongo will likely retire at 39. If not, trade him to a cap floor team or bury him in the minors.
Can you tell me what next week's winning lottery numbers likely be as well?

seanlinden is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 02:20 PM
  #174
The Saurus
Registered User
 
The Saurus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Country: United Nations
Posts: 8,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Lol...here's a heads up for ya, Kadri isn't going to "flourish"anywhere. Colborne is soft as butter and won't be anything. Bozak is at best a good 3C to not so good 2C.
I'm glad you aren't making decisions for the Leafs because you'd make JFJ look competent. Terrible talent analysis that has no grounds in reality.

The Saurus is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 02:22 PM
  #175
Vankiller Whale
Win it for AV
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,778
vCash: 5100
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
Can you tell me what next week's winning lottery numbers likely be as well?
I simply stated possiblities about what happens when Luongo is 39 if his play starts declining.

All of those are possible avenues to get out of his contract. There's no guesswork involved.

Facts:
-Luongo does not have a NMC, and can be forced to play in the minors
-Luongo's salary dramatically drops off after he's 38, making it less appealing for him to play then instead of retiring.
-Cap floor teams like Florida would love to have a high cap hit with a low salary to take them to the cap floor, and it's very likely they'd be interested in bringing in Luongo as a veteran backup to save the owners money.

Vankiller Whale 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 08:48 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.