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
12-28-2012, 12:59 PM
  #601
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,333
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zetterberg View Post
And yet he allowed that same number of goals they scored in a single game, got yanked within 10 minutes in another, and many would say he played pretty poorly in a third. He played:
Phenomenal
Great
Horrific
Bad
Phenomenal
Horrific
Decent

Most of his games were on one side of the spectrum or the other. He was inconsistent. Yes, he was great at times, but he was also awful at times. Being pulled from the game twice and getting a shutout twice in a 7 game series is not consistent play by any means.

As I've repeated myself several times, sure, maybe any other goalie couldn't have saved that team. But Luongo got completely embarrassed more than once. As awful as the defense may have been in front of him at times, it has to be acknowledged that Luongo was far from steady, and his level of play varied quite a bit in that single series.

Whether you want to say that he was horrifically inconsistent, or only slightly so, with the team's play making it more perceivable, that's up to you. But I think it's a heck of a stretch to say that it was entirely the team's fault and he was great every game. Even the worst defenses in the league wouldn't allow 15 goals in 112 minutes of play across 3 games if they had an elite, or even just decent goalie performance behind them for the entirety of this time. Luongo was great in parts of this series, but to some degree or another he was well below his talent level for at least 2 games, and not at his best for another.
So, that's 3 wins where he was phenominal/great which can be directly attributed to him. 2 losses (horrific) that can be attributed to him. Why pray tell couldn't his team bail him out of 1 bad game? Or more importantly....show up for the decent 1? If he is to be held accountable for his 2 horrific games, one would think his teammates should be held somewhat accountable for their 7 horrific ones...no?

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 01:40 PM
  #602
kdfsjljklgjfg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Gloversville, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
So, that's 3 wins where he was phenominal/great which can be directly attributed to him. 2 losses (horrific) that can be attributed to him. Why pray tell couldn't his team bail him out of 1 bad game? Or more importantly....show up for the decent 1? If he is to be held accountable for his 2 horrific games, one would think his teammates should be held somewhat accountable for their 7 horrific ones...no?
I'm sick of retyping this:

Quote:
As I've repeated myself several times, sure, maybe any other goalie couldn't have saved that team. But Luongo got completely embarrassed more than once.
This is a Luongo thread. I'm discussing Luongo, not the team, and I have at no point said that he single-handedly cost them the series.

kdfsjljklgjfg is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 01:46 PM
  #603
jayball75
Registered User
 
jayball75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 369
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
So, that's 3 wins where he was phenominal/great which can be directly attributed to him. 2 losses (horrific) that can be attributed to him. Why pray tell couldn't his team bail him out of 1 bad game? Or more importantly....show up for the decent 1? If he is to be held accountable for his 2 horrific games, one would think his teammates should be held somewhat accountable for their 7 horrific ones...no?
We can all agree the team didn't play great either whether it was injuries or breakdowns at times. The intimidation that Boston had over Vancouver was unlike anything I've seen in a scf in a while. They were big bad and tough. Some say that's why vancouver got kassian but who knows why. Boston had that swagger all year and when push came to shove it was more than vancouvers players could handle. Luongo was included in that too. He should've never commented on the way T T plays because that back fired. He went out and did the same thing the next game. I don't blame luongo for everything just weak goals

jayball75 is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 02:07 PM
  #604
Lucbourdon
Kefka cheers for Van
 
Lucbourdon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 39,006
vCash: 50
Chance for a deal!?!?!?! Get the luongo trade talk flowing.

FYI does the 1 non-caphit buyout raise luongo's value?

Lucbourdon is online now  
Old
12-28-2012, 02:13 PM
  #605
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,333
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucbourdon View Post
Chance for a deal!?!?!?! Get the luongo trade talk flowing.

FYI does the 1 non-caphit buyout raise luongo's value?
IMO...no, it has to be prior to the 13-14 season.

Edit: Speaking from my own opinion, i have no interest in aquiring Luongo in a shortened season.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 02:26 PM
  #606
jayball75
Registered User
 
jayball75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 369
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
IMO...no, it has to be prior to the 13-14 season.

Edit: Speaking from my own opinion, i have no interest in aquiring Luongo in a shortened season.
It usually takes him the month of October to get on track so I see why. I hope mtl can buy out Gomez.

jayball75 is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 03:45 PM
  #607
jayball75
Registered User
 
jayball75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 369
vCash: 500
With a shortened season it would be better for them to keep him as a back up to Schneider or a 1b and so I don't have to watch him every Saturday night if he ends up in Toronto.

jayball75 is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 05:19 PM
  #608
Mystifo
Lol Doodle.
 
Mystifo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: YYT
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 2,726
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucbourdon View Post
Chance for a deal!?!?!?! Get the luongo trade talk flowing.

FYI does the 1 non-caphit buyout raise luongo's value?
flowing? This faucet has been turned on and the nob has been broken off for the past 8 months. I am surprised we have not drowned yet.

Mystifo is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 05:52 PM
  #609
jayball75
Registered User
 
jayball75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 369
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucbourdon View Post
Chance for a deal!?!?!?! Get the luongo trade talk flowing.

FYI does the 1 non-caphit buyout raise luongo's value?
Only if you're a Vancouver fan trying to convince everyone else it is

jayball75 is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 07:26 PM
  #610
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,109
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zetterberg View Post
I'm sick of retyping this:



This is a Luongo thread. I'm discussing Luongo, not the team, and I have at no point said that he single-handedly cost them the series.
Did Luongo have some bad games? Sure. It doesn't mean he's a bad goalie. Every goalie, from Lundqvist(against NJ 2012) to Thomas(against TB 2011) have bad games. It doesn't mean they're not elite. Luongo's career playoff sv% is something like 20th of all time. Slightly below Lundqvist and above Rinne- both of whom played on far better defensive teams.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 07:42 PM
  #611
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayball75 View Post
Only if you're a Vancouver fan trying to convince everyone else it is
Is there any other real candidate for a compliance buy-out in Vancouver besides Luongo? If not, Luongo has zero value. Ballard?

Pepper is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 07:47 PM
  #612
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,109
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
Is there any other real candidate for a compliance buy-out in Vancouver besides Luongo? If not, Luongo has zero value. Ballard?
Ballard easily over Luongo. Ballard is similar to Luongo in that there's simply no room fo him in Vancouver, with the main difference being Luongo >>>> Ballard.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 07:49 PM
  #613
mstad101
Registered User
 
mstad101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
Is there any other real candidate for a compliance buy-out in Vancouver besides Luongo? If not, Luongo has zero value. Ballard?
Vancouver will only use the buy out on Ballard if it comes to cutting salary to get under the cap.
With multiple years left at over 4 million, Ballard would become a decent piece to add near 1 million since he'll be getting so much more from Van.

A shortened season may benefit both goaltenders, Schneids gets an easier transition and Lu can take his time getting into game shape to play top level

mstad101 is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 08:02 PM
  #614
jayball75
Registered User
 
jayball75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 369
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Ballard easily over Luongo. Ballard is similar to Luongo in that there's simply no room fo him in Vancouver, with the main difference being Luongo >>>> Ballard.
Wasn't Ballard supposed to be a major player for Vancouver? What happened when he got there? Sorry it's not a luongo related question. I was just curious what van fans thought.


Last edited by jayball75: 12-28-2012 at 08:10 PM.
jayball75 is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 08:09 PM
  #615
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,109
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayball75 View Post
Wasn't Ballard supposed to be a major player for Vancouver? What happened when he got there?
Can't play the right side, and isn't better than Hamhuis or Edler on the left. so he's been tried all over the place until he was finally able to find a niche on the third pairing with Tanev, which would be fine if he weren't making 4.2 mil. He deserves a shot on a team in need of defense, and I fully expect him to rebound if given the opportunity. It just won't happen in Vancouver.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 08:14 PM
  #616
jayball75
Registered User
 
jayball75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 369
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Can't play the right side, and isn't better than Hamhuis or Edler on the left. so he's been tried all over the place until he was finally able to find a niche on the third pairing with Tanev, which would be fine if he weren't making 4.2 mil. He deserves a shot on a team in need of defense, and I fully expect him to rebound if given the opportunity. It just won't happen in Vancouver.
Doesn't help his value much the way he's been bounced around. Mtl will give you kaberle. Hahaha

jayball75 is offline  
Old
12-29-2012, 01:40 AM
  #617
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,921
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zetterberg View Post
The assumption is not based solely on a poor save percentage, it's based on the wild variation of his save percentage from game to game in a short period of time.
And it disregards every additional factor that may account for a terrible save percentage. As demonstrated by others, Lundqvist, Rinne and others have poor stats in a specific game or series, which are not attributed to them exclusively.

Quote:
So what made the difference from Game 5 to Game 6 then, if the defense was so awful and injured? Again, it's the case of one player wildly varying versus several. Did Ballard and friends discover some magical one-game hockey equipment to become MVP-worthy players for Game 5, then lose the power for Game 6? You're not blaming the goalie when things go bad, but you're giving him all of the praise when things go well. You either have to say that Luongo was inconsistent, that everyone around him was simultaneously inconsistent, or that everyone on Boston was simultaneously inconsistent. Whether you directly blame Luongo for the numbers or not, a GAA line of 2-0-8-5.8-0-21-3 is wildly inconsistent on SOMEBODY's behalf, and I'm inclined to believe that it's much more likely that one person was so than several all at the exact same times.
Adjustments, home ice and frankly, luck. Previously, Hamhuis had been our stalwart defense whilst paired with Bieska. The former's injury left arguably the best pairing that playoff run, gone and it quite obviously effected the team negatively. Home ice is a factor of sorts for us due to a preference Vancouver has in giving near every offense start to the Sedins. We were temporarily able to free them from Boston's straggle hold approach. Other than that though, luck. With how god awful the team played, Boston should have done away with us in six. And if you read through my posts, it would be most apparent I acknowledged Luongo as inconsistent during the series.

Quote:
Maybe the horribly decimated defense you speak of was much less decimated at the time, plus versus far weaker teams, in much more low-pressure situations? Also, he was bad at least twice in the Chicago, then you could say once in Nashville. It wasn't just once.
He was bad once against Chicago, although shaken in the subsequent game. We played abysmal in both games four and five of that series. To fault Lu entirely is disingenuous. You could say, but you'd be wrong. We shredded Nashville and San Jose, whilst Luongo played solid to phenomenal through until Boston game three.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
12-29-2012, 04:15 AM
  #618
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayball75 View Post
Wasn't Ballard supposed to be a major player for Vancouver? What happened when he got there? Sorry it's not a luongo related question. I was just curious what van fans thought.
Ballard is not good on the right and is stuck behind Hamhuis and Edler on the left. Ballard was injured a lot in his first year and somehow neither Hamhus or Edler was injured last year so Ballard didn't get top 4 minutes.

Prior to Vancouver he was a top pairing guy in both Florida and Phoenix but even in those roles he was neither better than Hamhuis or Edler. I don't think his play has gone down so much as he's simply behind two better LD than him. He's in a similar boat to Luongo.

DJOpus is offline  
Old
12-29-2012, 06:31 AM
  #619
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,405
vCash: 500
The moment CBA is agreed, it's going to be the wildest week in the history of NHL with GMs trying to make their team ready for new CBA rules.

Vancouver is probably the biggest hotspot for action. They get bigger cap advantage by buying out Luongo (vs. Ballard) but it costs them more in terms of actual dollars, don't know how much the ownership cares about actual dollars though.

If they buy-out Ballard, Gillis must have a strong belief in being able to trade Luongo without taking too much cap space in return, I don't know if that's possible. If they buy out Ballard, it must be assumed that Gillis has already a deal in place for Luongo. Apart from Toronto, are there any teams who can take on Luongo's contract (cap space + actual salary) AND needs a goalie badly? So if Burke doesn't want to trade for Luongo, what options are there?

I'm already excited and I have a feeling that the boards will explode when Gillis makes his moves, whatever they are.

Pepper is offline  
Old
12-29-2012, 07:15 AM
  #620
rypper
Registered User
 
rypper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,782
vCash: 500
Vancouver acquired Ballard prior to signing Dan Hamhuis.

I imagine he was a back up plan or was the plan until Hamhuis signed and he just isn't as good as Dan is.

rypper is offline  
Old
12-29-2012, 07:31 AM
  #621
Falconator
Registered User
 
Falconator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucbourdon View Post
Chance for a deal!?!?!?! Get the luongo trade talk flowing.

FYI does the 1 non-caphit buyout raise luongo's value?
No, it lowers it if anything!

Falconator is offline  
Old
12-29-2012, 07:35 AM
  #622
Falconator
Registered User
 
Falconator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
The moment CBA is agreed, it's going to be the wildest week in the history of NHL with GMs trying to make their team ready for new CBA rules.

Vancouver is probably the biggest hotspot for action. They get bigger cap advantage by buying out Luongo (vs. Ballard) but it costs them more in terms of actual dollars, don't know how much the ownership cares about actual dollars though.

If they buy-out Ballard, Gillis must have a strong belief in being able to trade Luongo without taking too much cap space in return, I don't know if that's possible. If they buy out Ballard, it must be assumed that Gillis has already a deal in place for Luongo. Apart from Toronto, are there any teams who can take on Luongo's contract (cap space + actual salary) AND needs a goalie badly? So if Burke doesn't want to trade for Luongo, what options are there?

I'm already excited and I have a feeling that the boards will explode when Gillis makes his moves, whatever they are.
Not a chance they buy out Lu with $40.57 million left on his contract from 2013/14 onward.

Falconator is offline  
Old
12-29-2012, 11:54 AM
  #623
racerjoe
Registered User
 
racerjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,098
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
The moment CBA is agreed, it's going to be the wildest week in the history of NHL with GMs trying to make their team ready for new CBA rules.

Vancouver is probably the biggest hotspot for action. They get bigger cap advantage by buying out Luongo (vs. Ballard) but it costs them more in terms of actual dollars, don't know how much the ownership cares about actual dollars though.

If they buy-out Ballard, Gillis must have a strong belief in being able to trade Luongo without taking too much cap space in return, I don't know if that's possible. If they buy out Ballard, it must be assumed that Gillis has already a deal in place for Luongo. Apart from Toronto, are there any teams who can take on Luongo's contract (cap space + actual salary) AND needs a goalie badly? So if Burke doesn't want to trade for Luongo, what options are there?

I'm already excited and I have a feeling that the boards will explode when Gillis makes his moves, whatever they are.
There is so much wrong with this I don't know where to start. You do know the Cap is not going down this season right? Teams have until the 2013-2014 season. This season, the 48 game one will be played at a 70 mil cap.

Second, there is pretty much a zero chance gillis waives Lui. Even next year we can afford to carry both Lui and Cory. Look it up on Cap Geek, we are no where near the worst in the league when it comes to cap problems.

I actually doubt we waive Ballard, I think it is more likely we sell low. trade him for what we can, there are teams that have kept money aside just so they can do this.

racerjoe is offline  
Old
12-29-2012, 12:10 PM
  #624
blankall
Registered User
 
blankall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucbourdon View Post
Chance for a deal!?!?!?! Get the luongo trade talk flowing.

FYI does the 1 non-caphit buyout raise luongo's value?
Yes, but indirectly. Luongo is a big contract. Anything that provides teams with cap flexibility increases the market for Luongo. If the cap decreases, that will have a greater negative effect though.

blankall is offline  
Old
12-29-2012, 03:07 PM
  #625
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by racerjoe View Post
There is so much wrong with this I don't know where to start. You do know the Cap is not going down this season right? Teams have until the 2013-2014 season. This season, the 48 game one will be played at a 70 mil cap.
Oh I know, thanks for asking. Teams will start preparing for next season the moment new CBA is agreed to. There will be moves.

But you're right, maybe the most explosive part comes near draft and before july 1st.

Quote:
Originally Posted by racerjoe View Post
Second, there is pretty much a zero chance gillis waives Lui. Even next year we can afford to carry both Lui and Cory. Look it up on Cap Geek, we are no where near the worst in the league when it comes to cap problems.
You can afford to carry both, yes. The question is how much Canucks can IMPROVE the team with both them on board.

The fact that there are teams with more problems with the cap doesn't mean Canucks have no problems.

Quote:
Originally Posted by racerjoe View Post
I actually doubt we waive Ballard, I think it is more likely we sell low. trade him for what we can, there are teams that have kept money aside just so they can do this.
Which teams have 1) cap space & actual dollars for Ballard and 2) actually want him?

Pepper is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:54 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.