HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Notices

The Luongo Thread - "Make it stop, make it stop!"

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-07-2012, 01:49 PM
  #51
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,807
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
That's certainly a very debatable topic. I feel Luongo's importance to this team is somewhat underrated by most.

Luongo
- elite #1A/B with Schneider
- in the future will continue to be a very good #1A/B

Kulemin
- currently is a tweener, he should bolster our 2/3rd line
- in the future he will continue to be a tweener IMO

Kadri
- might crack the roster (IMO will not this year)
- in the future he might end up a solid 1st liner/could potentially bust

1st
- no help in the present
- could be a good pick 3-4 years down the road or could be a bust.

I don't think there is any way to say Kulemin/Kadri/1st help us win more right now but a case could be made for the future. The impact of an elite netminder even as a #1B option is much more than 2 tweeners.
The way I see it, Kulemin adds some physicality and 2-way play now and in the future. Kadri likely puts up around 40 pts, possibly slotting in as a 3C or on Kesler's wing, in the future might end up being a solid 1st liner or a bust. The 1st round pick(in a great draft and in the middle round, so likely joins our roster after 1 year, think Pulock, Lazar, etc type of player) can either be used for ourselves,also making it more palatable to move our 1st in a move for a deadline deal like Perry.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 02:04 PM
  #52
racerjoe
Registered User
 
racerjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,098
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StringerBell View Post
You do realize Luongo can't be traded until after the CBA is settled, right? At this moment you can't trade him for anything, let alone something that can help us now, whatever that may be (more mediators?). The deals being discussed regarding a cap drop to $60 million next season are obviously conditional on that actually taking place, and wouldn't be able to occur before it's an impending reality. No harm in discussing our options if the new CBA includes the financial issues that the players and owners have both said they're okay with in principle.

If you find it tortuous to read fans speculate about the cba negotiations' effect on Luongo's trade value in a negative light, you probably aren't cut out for HFboards.

You missed the point of well that poitn. It was simply to state everyone is speculating, and then saying we need to trade by this date. Who knows, now maybe we get down to 50/50 the way the players suggested, by going 57%, then 54%, then 51% and this keeps the cap at 70 mil, meaning we can afford Lui until whenever.

All I was saying is it is all speculation at this point. There is no drop dead date right now for trading lui, just like we can't actually trade lui.

Quote:
Originally Posted by craigcaulks View Post
You can always be sure that everyone will offer their 2 cents when it comes to analogies not being perfect.

It's pretty simple, it was stated that the team that moves the best player in a deal loses. However, if you get three smaller parts that as a whole do more for your team than say, a BACK UP GOALIE, then you haven't lost. In fact, it is very possible that both teams win. Never mind the fact we'd possibly open up cap space to add pieces at the deadline.
Those three small parts would have to help us more then the goalie tandem that has won us the last two Presidents Trophy's. Two players we have lots of ie Kuli and Bozak are not going to do this... and this coming from someone who thinks if we trade witht he leafs, Bozak is coming this way.

racerjoe is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 02:05 PM
  #53
blendini
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 424
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
So what CC is saying is that we will win the Cup if we trade Luongo, but we won't if we keep him? What happens if we trade Luongo and Schneider gets injured? funny arguments are funny.
So we keep Luongo in case Schneids gets injured one day? That's a pretty expensive insurance policy. We have greater needs on the 2nd and 3rd lines. Schneids career record indicates that he's a durable goaltender. We just need an adequate backup to give him a break. As far as I'm concerned, my preference is to keep Schneids, but they should trade whomever gets the best return. One of them needs to go!

blendini is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 02:33 PM
  #54
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 15,260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blendini View Post
So we keep Luongo in case Schneids gets injured one day? That's a pretty expensive insurance policy. We have greater needs on the 2nd and 3rd lines. Schneids career record indicates that he's a durable goaltender. We just need an adequate backup to give him a break. As far as I'm concerned, my preference is to keep Schneids, but they should trade whomever gets the best return. One of them needs to go!
Yeah, it's ludicrous to suggest we hold onto an elite goaltender to be our backup in case Schneider gets hurt one day.

Even more ludicrous when you think how much whining we've endured about our lack of secondary scoring and Luongo is the teams greatest trade chip to help address it.

I can't believe anyone would question whether or not a goalie will be traded in the near future. As if running with this tandem for 4 more years is a realistic option...

We have 2 elite players in the primes of their careers that both play in goal. There is just no conceivable way these 2 share the crease for the next few years. Never mind the cap implications.

Drop the Sopel is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 02:57 PM
  #55
kthsn
Registered User
 
kthsn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,699
vCash: 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
The way I see it, Kulemin adds some physicality and 2-way play now and in the future. Kadri likely puts up around 40 pts, possibly slotting in as a 3C or on Kesler's wing, in the future might end up being a solid 1st liner or a bust. The 1st round pick(in a great draft and in the middle round, so likely joins our roster after 1 year, think Pulock, Lazar, etc type of player) can either be used for ourselves,also making it more palatable to move our 1st in a move for a deadline deal like Perry.
Kulemin - agreed

Kadri - 40 points is reasonable and if he cracks the roster this year it's great value (young player on ELC). I still have doubts about whether AV will allow a rookie with some defensive holes in his game playing time over someone like Raymond/Higgins/Hansen.

1st - I don't think a mid range pick cracks our roster in a year, just not Gillis' style. Hodgson/Schroeder/Tanev all payed their dues in Chicago for a prolonged period.

The package needs something more, another asset like in the Nash trade.

kthsn is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 03:03 PM
  #56
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,807
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
Kulemin - agreed

Kadri - 40 points is reasonable and if he cracks the roster this year it's great value (young player on ELC). I still have doubts about whether AV will allow a rookie with some defensive holes in his game playing time over someone like Raymond/Higgins/Hansen.

1st - I don't think a mid range pick cracks our roster in a year, just not Gillis' style. Hodgson/Schroeder/Tanev all payed their dues in Chicago for a prolonged period.

The package needs something more, another asset like in the Nash trade.
Hodgson had a setback with his back injury, Schroeder was drafted later and was known to be a project player due to his size. Tanev was undrafted. Generally a mid round pick takes 1-2 years before cracking our roster, and in a deep draft like this, I don't think it's unreasonable.

While I would love to get a package like the Nash trade, I highly doubt we'd get that no matter how long we wait.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 04:12 PM
  #57
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
Luongo's opportunity might be in Vancouver.

Her just needs to play better than Schneider consistently.
That shouldn't even be a consideration, Schneider has been outplaying him for two years. Schneider says_and_does the right things and wants to be here, it's time to reward him for that.

Scurr is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 05:48 PM
  #58
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by racerjoe View Post
You missed the point of well that poitn. It was simply to state everyone is speculating, and then saying we need to trade by this date. Who knows, now maybe we get down to 50/50 the way the players suggested, by going 57%, then 54%, then 51% and this keeps the cap at 70 mil, meaning we can afford Lui until whenever.

All I was saying is it is all speculation at this point. There is no drop dead date right now for trading lui, just like we can't actually trade lui.
Sure it's all speculation, but I'm speculating on what seems to be the most probable outcome of the CBA. The owners and players had reportedly agreed in principle on the money, which Bettman said would keep the salary cap at 70 million this year before dropping to 60 million next year.

If you want to do your own speculation, and make claims like 'decertification is just as likely as ratifying a new CBA' then go ahead. I just don't see why you need to have a fit when others speculate based on the scenario that the cap drops to 60 million after this season.

StringerBell is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 06:39 PM
  #59
racerjoe
Registered User
 
racerjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,098
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StringerBell View Post
Sure it's all speculation, but I'm speculating on what seems to be the most probable outcome of the CBA. The owners and players had reportedly agreed in principle on the money, which Bettman said would keep the salary cap at 70 million this year before dropping to 60 million next year.

If you want to do your own speculation, and make claims like 'decertification is just as likely as ratifying a new CBA' then go ahead. I just don't see why you need to have a fit when others speculate based on the scenario that the cap drops to 60 million after this season.
You do know talks broke off terribly right? that the Bettman said it is all coming off the table. There is no deal right now to even speculate on.

Thats the point.

It was also the point for the rest of the post with other things people are speculating on. Truth be told, I am fully aware most likely he will have to be traded. But the facts not just at this moment, but for the foreseeable future say we do not HAVE TO move him. We can keep him. Hell one could make an argument we could keep both for at least 3 years.

racerjoe is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 07:35 PM
  #60
cooker24
Registered User
 
cooker24's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taelin View Post
Rielly.
I doubt Burke would trade the "first overall pick" of the last draft for Luongo.

cooker24 is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 08:01 PM
  #61
momo
Registered User
 
momo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hockey Mecca
Posts: 210
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigcaulks View Post
Except that wasn't the deal when it was made.


Would you give me a $50 bill for 3 $20 bills? Apparently some people wouldn't.
Terrible analogy.

A better one would be:

Would you trade a boat for whats inside a mystery box?



momo is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 09:11 PM
  #62
craigcaulks*
Registered Luser.
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: East Van!
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by racerjoe View Post
Those three small parts would have to help us more then the goalie tandem that has won us the last two Presidents Trophy's. Two players we have lots of ie Kuli and Bozak are not going to do this... and this coming from someone who thinks if we trade witht he leafs, Bozak is coming this way.
I do not care if anyone helps us to win a Pres.

craigcaulks* is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 09:12 PM
  #63
craigcaulks*
Registered Luser.
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: East Van!
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by momo View Post
Terrible analogy.

A better one would be:

Would you trade a boat for whats inside a mystery box?
Is my boat of any use to me or is it just an anchor that floats?

craigcaulks* is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 10:31 PM
  #64
JuniorNelson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: E.Vancouver
Country: Australia-Aboriginal
Posts: 4,592
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by racerjoe View Post
You do know talks broke off terribly right? that the Bettman said it is all coming off the table. There is no deal right now to even speculate on.

Thats the point.

It was also the point for the rest of the post with other things people are speculating on. Truth be told, I am fully aware most likely he will have to be traded. But the facts not just at this moment, but for the foreseeable future say we do not HAVE TO move him. We can keep him. Hell one could make an argument we could keep both for at least 3 years.
I agree with your points. The deal seems distant. We might as well be talking about next year or the year after. At that time I do not think Luongo will be as mobile an asset as he was last summer or at the last deadline.

In the immediate, Schnieder is an unproven starter. Luongo is proven and a leader. Who knows how much of Schnieder's success is due to having ready back-up? Also, and I mention this only in this context, is Schnieder physically robust? We have seen Luongo get run and laugh it off. Can Schnieder? I am old enough to recall a campaign where the team lost the starter at the beginning of the year. Without Luongo, who plays if Schnieder is out?

Since there doesn't appear to be any immediacy, I'd say the odds of a Luongo trade grow longer if the season is lost. Edler will be gone (or not, but not available for trade), so a blockbuster package with him won't be an option. Luongo will be thirty-four and eighteen months removed from hockey. If Burke is still in the league Toronto will always need a goalie, I guess but there will be less demand.

I am thinking, based on Schnieder not recieving a NTC that he is the actual trade candidate. Perhaps this was a better idea before we saw Lack's form in the AHL this season. If Lack recovers (he will) his game he can emerge as a credible back-up at least, next year. At that time a mentoring starter might be useful.

I am also thinking that the rebuild might begin sooner than later. Perhaps it is already on! Kassian isn't an NHL player, but we traded for potential. Teams in "win-now" mode do not trade for potential. If the build is on, do we need Schnieder in his prime or should that asset be converted to picks and prospects? Kassian is twenty-two, his prime is years away.

JuniorNelson is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 10:46 PM
  #65
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by racerjoe View Post
You do know talks broke off terribly right? that the Bettman said it is all coming off the table. There is no deal right now to even speculate on.

Thats the point.

It was also the point for the rest of the post with other things people are speculating on. Truth be told, I am fully aware most likely he will have to be traded. But the facts not just at this moment, but for the foreseeable future say we do not HAVE TO move him. We can keep him. Hell one could make an argument we could keep both for at least 3 years.
Yeah, talks broke off terribly, but I doubt when they start up again the owners are going to be conceding a bunch of money to the players. I think it's most likely we see a cap drop next CBA. Therefore any speculation I make on a Luongo trade takes that into consideration. Obviously you're free to see it differently, I just find it amusing you think reading my opinion and the like is 'torturous'.

StringerBell is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 12:45 AM
  #66
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,732
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
Yeah, it's ludicrous to suggest we hold onto an elite goaltender to be our backup in case Schneider gets hurt one day.

Even more ludicrous when you think how much whining we've endured about our lack of secondary scoring and Luongo is the teams greatest trade chip to help address it.
Is it also ludicrous to suggest that we keep Luongo in case Schneider can't maintain his form when he becomes a full time starter? Or is Schneider a guarantee in your mind?

Also, our team with all its scoring problems is still top 5 in goals in the regular season. Complaining that our personnel isn't good enough doesn't really solve why the Sedins get owned in most playoff series. That is the scoring issue we should be trying to solve.

DJOpus is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 01:08 AM
  #67
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 15,260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
Is it also ludicrous to suggest that we keep Luongo in case Schneider can't maintain his form when he becomes a full time starter? Or is Schneider a guarantee in your mind?

Also, our team with all its scoring problems is still top 5 in goals in the regular season. Complaining that our personnel isn't good enough doesn't really solve why the Sedins get owned in most playoff series. That is the scoring issue we should be trying to solve.
I am completely sold on Cory Schneider. More confident in him than I am Ryan Kesler - though Kesler's biggest question mark is always his health.

The Sedins have been the only forwards on the team to score with any frequency come playoff time. They have certainly had their poor moments but the 2nd, 3rd and 4th lines all need to start carrying more of the offensive burden, especially as the Sedins start to move out of their physical primes.

Drop the Sopel is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 02:16 AM
  #68
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,732
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
I am completely sold on Cory Schneider. More confident in him than I am Ryan Kesler - though Kesler's biggest question mark is always his health.

The Sedins have been the only forwards on the team to score with any frequency come playoff time. They have certainly had their poor moments but the 2nd, 3rd and 4th lines all need to start carrying more of the offensive burden, especially as the Sedins start to move out of their physical primes.
In the last 5 playoff series we've played, I'd say the Sedins have been outplayed in 4 of them. A lot of it is the result of injury but it still happens.

Honestly though, our lineup is good enough to win a Cup, it just hasn't happened. Realistically Pittsburgh has had the best roster for 4 years now and has 1 Cup to show for it, the best team on paper doesn't always win. I do think we could use more people close to the team that have been through the wars multiple times, we need some veteran winners or coaches.

Also, based on the Luongo thread, I think the approximate value of: Kadri + Ashton + 1st + 2nd = Luongo with different pieces being swapped around all the time, making the package slightly worse and rarely better.

DJOpus is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 02:41 AM
  #69
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,227
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
I am completely sold on Cory Schneider. More confident in him than I am Ryan Kesler - though Kesler's biggest question mark is always his health.

The Sedins have been the only forwards on the team to score with any frequency come playoff time. They have certainly had their poor moments but the 2nd, 3rd and 4th lines all need to start carrying more of the offensive burden, especially as the Sedins start to move out of their physical primes.
As long as we play San Jose every round I'm confident they will lead is to the championship! Go Sedins wooo!!! If we play other teams we might be a little ****ed, but go Sedins and lets hope we play San Jose every round.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 03:35 AM
  #70
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
As long as we play San Jose every round I'm confident they will lead is to the championship! Go Sedins wooo!!! If we play other teams we might be a little ****ed, but go Sedins and lets hope we play San Jose every round.


I thought the call was for secondary scoring? That's not the Sedins.


Opendoor did an analysis a while back breaking down the Canucks players PPG in the playoffs compared to other players around the league. The 4 players that stack up in the top 6? Burrows, Henrik, Daniel and Kesler. The rest haven't pulled their weight accordingly. This was before the addition of Booth.


So if Booth joins the group, and one of Kassian/Higgins/Hansen/Raymond/Schroeder can join the fold, this team will be on par. And we're still waiting on what the team adds in a Luongo deal...

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 11:18 AM
  #71
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 15,260
vCash: 500
Paajarvi has 2 goals in 20 AHL games on an offensive juggernaut. Anyone still want to trade Luongo for this guy?

Drop the Sopel is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 12:18 PM
  #72
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Opendoor did an analysis a while back breaking down the Canucks players PPG in the playoffs compared to other players around the league. The 4 players that stack up in the top 6? Burrows, Henrik, Daniel and Kesler. The rest haven't pulled their weight accordingly. This was before the addition of Booth.
We've also been outscored by a wide margin in the bottom 6. This isn't a problem that is going to be solved by adding one player or having one line pick it up, we need better play throughout the lineup.

Scurr is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 12:28 PM
  #73
craigcaulks*
Registered Luser.
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: East Van!
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
Paajarvi has 2 goals in 20 AHL games on an offensive juggernaut. Anyone still want to trade Luongo for this guy?
The Edmonton Oilers sent their team to the AHL and by the end of the weekend they could be out of the top 8. Maybe they think there is a draft lottery in the AHL?

craigcaulks* is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 01:34 PM
  #74
blendini
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 424
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigcaulks View Post
The Edmonton Oilers sent their team to the AHL and by the end of the weekend they could be out of the top 8. Maybe they think there is a draft lottery in the AHL?
That was a good one, man!

blendini is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 04:07 PM
  #75
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,534
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
You'll end up the better team if you trade Luongo or Schneider per that logic, but that still doesn't address asset value.



Schneider could have been dealt last deadline. The team could have been better off for it as they would have upgraded at forward. Gillis didn't do it. The reason: asset value out does not equal asset value in. IMO, that's why he held onto Schneider. Not team need, but asset value.


Loosing a deal is about assets in vs. assets out, not about the overall team dynamic. As soon as you send the best player out in the deal, you are likely never going to see an equivalent impact player coming back. Even if there are prospects involved. Odds are stacked against you.


I continue to agree with Canucker and Tiranis on this point, as I've seen it too many times in the NHL not to put stock into it.
Schneider retained less value on the open market, having only played one season as a backup a year prior. While Gillis may have received offers it is not unfathomable to believe they were significantly less than his expectations for Schneider, thus a trade at that juncture would be less profitable than to wait. Likewise, we had just challenged for the cup and one could reasonable assume our chance of repeating were highly probable, allowing Gillis leeway to maximize Schneider's value.

Perhaps, although personally I believe this perspective a bit too black and white myself. If Luongo brought us Lupul+, the only thing preventing that from being a solid trade is Lupul regressing, otherwise both teams benefit.

Bourne Endeavor 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 10:57 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.