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.

Luongo: The Neverending Story

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-05-2013, 12:29 PM
  #151
marty111
Registered User
 
marty111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,564
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post
Schneider has a 25 team no trade?...I'm confused by the last comment I'm afraid.
Sorry for the confusion. That point makes no sense, sorry wasn't thinking straight.

marty111 is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 12:30 PM
  #152
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,598
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Bingo. I think Schnieder is going to be great, but on such a short sample size i would be leary. Andrew Raycroft...Vesa Toskala...Jonas Gustafsson....all guys that were "supposed" to be good. (here is were Bleach comes in and berates Burke's ability to judge goalies)
I would argue Schneider has a much higher backing to his creditability as a future elite. Even putting aside his play comparable to arguably surpassing Luongo's. He has been remarkably consistent at every stage of his career. I would go so far as to liken his changes of success to Carey Price. Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't the goalies you've mentioned sort of flash in the pan brilliance?

Still, I can understand the concerns. Old nightmares are hard to shake but we need to get something back that can help us now. I personally see Schneider the better option for Toronto's longterm.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 12:32 PM
  #153
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seatoo View Post
Ah but those are not really out-clauses.

1st clause gives Luongo the right to demand a trade in the 2014 summer. Canucks agreed to that but is that a binding agreement which any future team has to respect? CBA doesn't allow those AFAIK ("team must trade the player at his request")

2nd clause hits in 2016 when the team has the option to trade Luongo.

I wouldn't call either of those "out-clauses".

Pepper is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 12:34 PM
  #154
Liferleafer
Golf....again....
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Doable. Do you think Horcoff and Hemsky, who combine for 10.5m in cap-hit, will be on the team when Hemsky has been rumoured in trade for 2 years (mostly linked with DET) and Horcoff is called mega-overpaid by even the most staunch EDM media analyst (Spector comes to mind)? I don't. The cap is just not the death knell you are trying to make it out to be.


Edit: Oh, and RNH and Shultz are at .925k _during_ the 13-14 season. That's the season the cap is 60m. After that season, who knows what it will be? So I'm not sure why their raises are relevant in that year?
Okay...so you feel it will be easy to move 5 million dollar underachieving players to other teams who are also constricted by a lower cap....makes sense.

To your edit, capgeek shows the cap hit at 3,775,000 for each in 13-14. That is were i got my info, sorry if it's incorrect.I was showing the raises going forward as they will need to think of more than 1 year when aquiring Luongo.


Last edited by Liferleafer: 01-05-2013 at 12:40 PM.
Liferleafer is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 12:37 PM
  #155
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by racerjoe View Post
Currently there is no CBA, under what may be the new one who knows, I was trying to show a worst case scenario, in which absolute worst case, 40 mil>10mil. If things stay the same as the last CBA, my case only gets better as 40 mil > 0$.
Sorry, I still don't understand. Current CBA states that players don't get any salary after they retire and there has been absolutely zero indications that would be different in the next CBA.

So where does that 10M come from?

Pepper is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 12:43 PM
  #156
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Okay...so you feel it will be easy to move 5 million dollar underachieving players to other teams who are also constricted by a lower cap....makes sense.


When teams like TOR can give 4.75m to Connolly, yeah, I think there's a market out there for a skilled winger like Hemsky. For instance, David Staples reported that it was DET who was looking at Hemsky, with EDM refusing to trade, not the other way around.


What about the point about RNH and Shultz not needing raises in 13-14 like you are making it sound? Edit: Just saw your edit, nhlnumbers shows them at .925m, they would have to hit their bonuses.


Oh, and there are buyouts at EDM's disposal. Horcoff has been overpaid for a while. If they see a chance to improve, and an "out" from Horcoff's contract, maybe they take it?

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 12:43 PM
  #157
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,598
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Okay...so you feel it will be easy to move 5 million dollar underachieving players to other teams who are also constricted by a lower cap....makes sense.

To your edit, capgeek shows the cap hit at 3,775,000 for each in 13-14. That is were i got my info, sorry if it's incorrect.
I'm mucking around capgeek myself. The bonuses for Yakupov and RNH actually make it manageable if they buyout Horcofff. Granted, they need to replace him and probably will look to resign Whitney, just with low term given his injury history. Personally, I do not feel they would have much interest in Luongo under a sixty million cap though. Dubnyk is good enough for a team that is essentially at their "trial by error" stage of a rebuild. Not to mention they need to see what they have in defense. If those prospects do not live up to expectations, than addressing it serves a much greater priority than goaltending.

In addition, no one is factoring in the future raises for Schultz, Yakupov and RNH. Low cap or not, you are not getting them under 5-6 million.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 12:51 PM
  #158
Liferleafer
Golf....again....
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
I'm mucking around capgeek myself. The bonuses for Yakupov and RNH actually make it manageable if they buyout Horcofff. Granted, they need to replace him and probably will look to resign Whitney, just with low term given his injury history. Personally, I do not feel they would have much interest in Luongo under a sixty million cap though. Dubnyk is good enough for a team that is essentially at their "trial by error" stage of a rebuild. Not to mention they need to see what they have in defense. If those prospects do not live up to expectations, than addressing it serves a much greater priority than goaltending.

In addition, no one is factoring in the future raises for Schultz, Yakupov and RNH. Low cap or not, you are not getting them under 5-6 million.
In my 1st post i had RNH at 6 mil (equal to Hall/Eberle) and Schultz at 5 mil (low end). Yak will need to show what he has, but if he is close to the other big 3, it will be 6 mil as well.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 12:54 PM
  #159
Liferleafer
Golf....again....
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
When teams like TOR can give 4.75m to Connolly, yeah, I think there's a market out there for a skilled winger like Hemsky. For instance, David Staples reported that it was DET who was looking at Hemsky, with EDM refusing to trade, not the other way around.


What about the point about RNH and Shultz not needing raises in 13-14 like you are making it sound? Edit: Just saw your edit, nhlnumbers shows them at .925m, they would have to hit their bonuses.


Oh, and there are buyouts at EDM's disposal. Horcoff has been overpaid for a while. If they see a chance to improve, and an "out" from Horcoff's contract, maybe they take it?
Burke gave Connolly 4.75 under a 70 mil cap....and conveniantly...it's don this year. And ya, they could buyout Horc...and Hemsky, they still need replacements....oh, and that nagging problem of only having 13 guys signed and having approx 13 mil to fill out a team.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 12:55 PM
  #160
marty111
Registered User
 
marty111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,564
vCash: 500
I think you guys are forgetting Luongo has a No Trade Clause. Gillis has to be careful with what teams he presents to Lu since so far Luongo is keeping more options open then he has to.

I thought it was abundantly clear that Luongo wanted to go to Florida as his preferred destination strictly for the location... family wants to be there?

One of the main reasons why Toronto is added to the list isn't strictly because of need or cap freedom to do so but also since Toronto is very close to Florida and Luongo might be okay with that.

A 5 team list is extremely limiting. Edmonton? Columbus? I don't think there is a chance in hell Luongo agrees to go there, especially since Vancouver is finding even more pressure to move him (cap at 60-64m).

It's all up to Luongo. If he really wants to be in Florida he can make that happen easily. If he's okay with something close by, Toronto might work. All he has to do is let Gillis know what he wants.

I think a lot of you have your head in the clouds that Lu would waive to go to Edmonton or any of the other crazy places you or internet sources can dream up.

marty111 is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 12:57 PM
  #161
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
I'm mucking around capgeek myself. The bonuses for Yakupov and RNH actually make it manageable if they buyout Horcofff. Granted, they need to replace him and probably will look to resign Whitney, just with low term given his injury history. Personally, I do not feel they would have much interest in Luongo under a sixty million cap though. Dubnyk is good enough for a team that is essentially at their "trial by error" stage of a rebuild. Not to mention they need to see what they have in defense. If those prospects do not live up to expectations, than addressing it serves a much greater priority than goaltending.

In addition, no one is factoring in the future raises for Schultz, Yakupov and RNH. Low cap or not, you are not getting them under 5-6 million.


Yakupov and Shultz haven't played a game in the NHL Bourne! They would have to show as well as Eberle and Hall, and to a lesser extent RNH have before getting paid like them. Especially when those others are already pulling down big contracts. Let's just wait and see what they do in the NHL first.



Also, from the looks of it, EDM looks to be a real top heavy team going into the future. Their depth will be thin anyways.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 01:02 PM
  #162
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,598
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by marty111 View Post
I think you guys are forgetting Luongo has a No Trade Clause. Gillis has to be careful with what teams he presents to Lu since so far Luongo is keeping more options open then he has to.

I thought it was abundantly clear that Luongo wanted to go to Florida as his preferred destination strictly for the location... family wants to be there?

One of the main reasons why Toronto is added to the list isn't strictly because of need or cap freedom to do so but also since Toronto is very close to Florida and Luongo might be okay with that.

A 5 team list is extremely limiting. Edmonton? Columbus? I don't think there is a chance in hell Luongo agrees to go there, especially since Vancouver is finding even more pressure to move him (cap at 60-64m).

It's all up to Luongo. If he really wants to be in Florida he can make that happen easily. If he's okay with something close by, Toronto might work. All he has to do is let Gillis know what he wants.

I think a lot of you have you head in the clouds that Lu would waive to go to Edmonton or any of the other crazy places you or internet sources can dream up.
Luongo has stated his preference is Florida but he is willing to waive his NTC should Gillis ask. While we cannot be certain that was an endorsement we have carte blanche to ship him where ever we want. There isn't any reason to believe he would veto teams xyz. In fact, he joked about going to Chicago and genuinely seemed okay with it.

You are wrong to say he could easily make that happen. Were Luongo to force Florida on us, we could simply waive him. Sure, we get nothing but that may be better than Florida's buyouts. I doubt Lu makes it by Columbus or Edmonton.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 01:05 PM
  #163
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Burke gave Connolly 4.75 under a 70 mil cap....and conveniantly...it's don this year. And ya, they could buyout Horc...and Hemsky, they still need replacements....oh, and that nagging problem of only having 13 guys signed and having approx 13 mil to fill out a team.

Correction, Burke gave Connolly 4.75m under a 64.3m cap. Summer, 2011.


EDM's replacements are already in house. Oh, and I didn't advocate buying out Hemsky, he's well worth his contract.


Ok, I'm going to question your cap knowledge again. Are you factoring in a bonus cushion (if any) or said bonuses being reached by RNH and Shultz?

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 01:09 PM
  #164
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,724
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by marty111 View Post
I think you guys are forgetting Luongo has a No Trade Clause. Gillis has to be careful with what teams he presents to Lu since so far Luongo is keeping more options open then he has to.

I thought it was abundantly clear that Luongo wanted to go to Florida as his preferred destination strictly for the location... family wants to be there?

One of the main reasons why Toronto is added to the list isn't strictly because of need or cap freedom to do so but also since Toronto is very close to Florida and Luongo might be okay with that.
Sorry Marty, you can't say Edmonton's a crap destination for Luongo, and that he can nix it, and then turn around give then just say Toronto is the best choice. Would I choose Toronto over Edmonton? Probably, but you can't honestly think that Toronto is that much closer to Florida then, say Columbus or Chicago or anywhere else in the central division or eastern conference. Every single NHL city is closer to Florida than Vancouver. It's geography.

This doesn't give Toronto some kind of special standing. You can argue that your team may be closer to competing, or that it has a stronger history, or even better leadership, but saying that Toronto is closer to Florida than Vancouver as a reason to sell your city to him just won't fly. If "closer to Florida" was the only criteria of his, we can find that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by marty111 View Post
A 5 team list is extremely limiting. Edmonton? Columbus? I don't think there is a chance in hell Luongo agrees to go there, especially since Vancouver is finding even more pressure to move him (cap at 60-64m).

It's all up to Luongo. If he really wants to be in Florida he can make that happen easily. If he's okay with something close by, Toronto might work. All he has to do is let Gillis know what he wants.

I think a lot of you have your head in the clouds that Lu would waive to go to Edmonton or any of the other crazy places you or internet sources can dream up.
Again, I don't think either team is that far off one another in terms of development. A top flight goalie and any of the three are all the sudden a playoff team to me. Columbus moved a star player and spare parts for consistant depth throughout their roster, Edmonton added two stellar talents to their roster, and Toronto moved a player at a position of strength, replaced him with a younger model, and filled a need for size in the top six. None are far and away in a better position then the others at this point.

Toronto isn't super high on Luongo's list either, so cut the arrogant "my city is better then all possible destinations" and conviently forget the last 7 years, where the two other options you've listed at least made the playoffs. Chicago is closer and gives a better chance to win. Columbus is closer to Florida then Toronto and is in the same shape. Edmonton...isn't out of the question yet. Sunrise is in the state of Florida. All the other longshots aren't bad destinations either, so Toronto is far from the only choice if we end up moving him.

Cogburn is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 01:09 PM
  #165
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,598
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Yakupov and Shultz haven't played a game in the NHL Bourne! They would have to show as well as Eberle and Hall, and to a lesser extent RNH have before getting paid like them. Especially when those others are already pulling down big contracts. Let's just wait and see what they do in the NHL first.



Also, from the looks of it, EDM looks to be a real top heavy team going into the future. Their depth will be thin anyways.
Oh, I know. I'm just pondering from the perspective of Edmonton here. They very much believe Yakupov and Shultz will perform at an exceptional level. Frankly, the fact Shultz is utterly decimating the AHL as a defenseman adds credence to the theory. In that scenario, I cannot see them wanting to obtain Lu's $5.3M when there exists the possibility of them having to shell out substantial raises in the foreseeable future. Better for them to play Dubnyk and see how things pan out. Edmonton has plenty of time to play trial and error.

That does seem to be the case. And this is all conjecture on my part but, I suspect they will go cheap on goaltending and maintain the top heavy ideal. Debatable if that is a sound strategy but it is what I see them doing.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 01:14 PM
  #166
Liferleafer
Golf....again....
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Correction, Burke gave Connolly 4.75m under a 64.3m cap. Summer, 2011.


EDM's replacements are already in house. Oh, and I didn't advocate buying out Hemsky, he's well worth his contract.


Ok, I'm going to question your cap knowledge again. Are you factoring in a bonus cushion (if any) or said bonuses being reached by RNH and Shultz?
I'm on my phone so it's tough to surf multiple sites. As i said earlier, i just pulled the capgeek numbers. I'm not trying to argue, just trying to say that a 60 mil cap will cause issues for many teams ability to move large contracts, not just Luongo's.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 01:15 PM
  #167
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,724
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
Oh, I know. I'm just pondering from the perspective of Edmonton here. They very much believe Yakupov and Shultz will perform at an exceptional level. Frankly, the fact Shultz is utterly decimating the AHL as a defenseman adds credence to the theory. In that scenario, I cannot see them wanting to obtain Lu's $5.3M when there exists the possibility of them having to shell out substantial raises in the foreseeable future. Better for them to play Dubnyk and see how things pan out. Edmonton has plenty of time to play trial and error.

That does seem to be the case. And this is all conjecture on my part but, I suspect they will go cheap on goaltending and maintain the top heavy ideal. Debatable if that is a sound strategy but it is what I see them doing.
Frankly my view on Edmonton is that eventually, two, three or four years down the road, if Dubnyk bottoms out and a suitable replacement isn't found, to alleviate cap pressure, assuming there is a cap, they may move one of the big 4 for a goalie, possibly a defender depending on how the rest of the team develops, and maybe futures.

For now, if they make a move to improve goaltending, it will be more expensive, more experienced, more expendible, roster players, and not their deep pool of prospects.

Cogburn is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 01:15 PM
  #168
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
Oh, I know. I'm just pondering from the perspective of Edmonton here. They very much believe Yakupov and Shultz will perform at an exceptional level. Frankly, the fact Shultz is utterly decimating the AHL as a defenseman adds credence to the theory. In that scenario, I cannot see them wanting to obtain Lu's $5.3M when there exists the possibility of them having to shell out substantial raises in the foreseeable future. Better for them to play Dubnyk and see how things pan out. Edmonton has plenty of time to play trial and error.

That does seem to be the case. And this is all conjecture on my part but, I suspect they will go cheap on goaltending and maintain the top heavy ideal. Debatable if that is a sound strategy but it is what I see them doing.



Yet they still enquired about Lu? Still put in an offer?



Dubnyk will be long gone if Lu is there. So that's another 3.75m off the books. Sure, they'll give him his shot this year, see how it goes. But he is not on Luongo's level.



They may go cheap on the goaltending. They may have to. IMO, I think the only reason they're interested in Luongo is because he can make a weak defense look much better than it is. So while they have the guns up front, they can rest assured that their goaltending will keep them in games long enough for their forward talent to take over. Or at least that's the theory. Right now their D and G are suspect. "Fixing" one of those holes can get them to the playoffs sooner rather than later.



Edit: Cogburn just said it much better than I could have.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 01:18 PM
  #169
Spazmatic Dan
The Circle of Leaf
 
Spazmatic Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chatham, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,757
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post


A goalie of the future could be had from us, but you really wouldn't like the asking price. Luongo is not a perfect fit, granted, but then neither are the pieces that were rumoured to be the key pieces (Bozak and Kadri) for the Canucks. We have the "boom or bust" kind of prospect in Kassian (I say boom, Canucks say boom, everyone else seems to think bust), although his size and defensive acumen could have him in a bottom six role easier the Kadri, and a third line center (here) we could probably fill with Schroeder, if not our plethora of bottom six centers in training.

I hear you loud and clear though, he's not in the age bracket Toronto wants to pay top dollar for. And again, asking here, not trying to presume anything, or come off as being a troll, but let's say Reimer doesn't stack up well this year, what would be your preferred non-Luongo course of action? I'm sincerely curious. Bernier? Hope for Backstrom in free agency? Thomas? I mean there are other choices for sure, but most aren't terribly younger then Lu either (well....ok, Bernier). Again, absolute sincerity, I want to make it clear I'm not trying to provoke someone due to a sarcastic tone or something.

If I may be candid and honest as well, your D is fine with or with out Luongo, even without Schenn. For all the crap Phaneuf gets, he's a solid top pairing guy, and Gardiner, Liles, Gunnar and the usual clusterbomb of bottom pairing/spares in Komisarek and Franson, plus others, aren't something to hold your breath waiting to improve through trade. That's solid. If that's what you think the problem with the Leafs is, we are watching two very different sets of games.

A solid playmaker (surprise), possibly as a top six center, and I think the offence would be solved, together or as separate elements, fixes the offence, should someone that fits the bill become available. Top six forwards are easier to find then elite goalies, and "elite" forwards might go a further way to solving Toronto's problems, but I don't see anyone in that mold that is available, Luongo could be.

As for the forwards, success will make free agency easier, and will make Toronto a destination. I'm not saying Luongo strictly here, but resigning the Kessels, and even the MacArthurs and Kulemins, and heaven forbid, even higher name free agents (eventually) become cheaper and easier with success prior to their arrival. We didn't just get the Hamhuis', Garrisons, Sundins, Demitras, Samuelssons, Malhotras and resigning players like Kesler, the Sedins, Schneider, Luongo, Bieksa, Higgins, Lapierre and Burrows (proven the first time, pending the second) because their all locals who wanted to play here win or lose, success brings further success, and whether or not you trade Lu, it becomes a lot more simple to keep and add players you want and need to the roster without paying through the nose.

Finally, if Lupul is a core player, what would you be expecting of Luongo? I'm not trying to sabotage you and hit you with a bag of doorknobs here, but the poster above me cited his age as 4 years younger then Luongo, and yet he has found a role mentoring players, while still contributing. Luongo has been more then part of our core, he has been our MVP in the time since we traded for him, and anyone else, Sedins, Kesler or anyone, is, at best a distant second. Not trying to force the Lupul issue, just saying Luongo would instantly become part of the core in a big way, with leadership, play and even the way he's handling our jerk faces when our media's selling us on moving him after ever game the Canucks lose 1-0. Food for thought I guess.

My turn to apologize about being longwinded.
I agree that the Leafs' defense looks solid for the future (its the one area of the team I'm confident is well on its way to being rebuilt), but for the present its questionable. By my assessment it lacks experience and it has too much puck moving and not enough actual defense, but that will come with time. The defense is on the late rebuild stage.

The forward group is in a state of flux and I'm not sure where it will end up. As you mentioned, a young top end playmaking center and all of a sudden things look a lot better (which is why Leaf fans are desperately hoping for a top pick this summer) but at the moment its shaky and without a whole lot in the pipeline to reinforce it, its a major question mark. This is precisely why moving Lupul is an issue.

Now if by some ridiculous miracle Burke manages to sign Perry or something comparable, then Luongo starts making more sense and Lupul for Luongo becomes a lot more viable and makes a lot more sense. If we smoke a little more on that pipe and say a top winger AND a top six center, then heck yes to Luongo. At that point the Leafs would be ready to make a splash.

But right now, it would just seem out of place. I'm not against a Luongo trade and he'd arguably be our best player, but I am against trading what you have proposed for him. It would be like punching a bigger hole into a leaking side of a boat to repair the other side.

Man I really have to shorten these responses. I started out with good intentions...really I did.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
As Cogburn eluded, Schneider is an option some of us would explore. Unfortunately, the asking price increases notably given his age, contract and ceiling. Gardiner+ is what I'd demand, or a substantial addition to Lupul; possibly those two and we add. Frankly, that may be the better alternative given the players we want may not be amongst your core once Toronto is legitimately competing on a consistent basis.

Nevertheless, I can appreciate Toronto being hesitant to pull the trigger on core aspects being shifted out, whether for Luongo or Schneider however, we simply cannot afford to settle. The Sedin era has a maximum of a best case scenario and whichever goalie is dealt may be the biggest trade the organization has ever made, at least in terms of hopeful payoff. Suffice it to say we do not want to wait another seventeen years to repeat. If Schneider is appealing enough to open discussion with a better return, then I'd prefer that route than selling Luongo for even good assets that simply will not help us immediately.
I can't speak for Leaf Nation, but I would entertain a Gardiner for Schneider trade. To me Schneider represents a much better fit for Toronto in its current state than Luongo, even if he's not quite on Luongo's level (yet). That said, I'd be willing to give up Gardiner plus something decent, but not overboard. I'm pretty high on Gards and I think Leaf management is as well but with Rielly coming up and quite a few decent defensive prospects you have to consider trading him to fill other holes (goaltending, center).

Not trying to offend or anything and I'm sure I've asked this before but is trading Schneider and keeping Luongo even a possibility? I mean I know he said he'd do what was best for the team but it seemed like there was a bit of bad blood in the playoffs there and he requested a trade. Or was that the typical media overblownedness?

Spazmatic Dan is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 01:18 PM
  #170
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,724
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Yet they still enquired about Lu? Still put in an offer?

Dubnyk will be long gone if Lu is there. So that's another 3.75m off the books. Sure, they'll give him his shot this year, see how it goes. But he is not on Luongo's level.

They may go cheap on the goaltending. They may have to. IMO, I think the only reason they're interested in Luongo is because he can make a weak defense look much better than it is. So while they have the guns up front, they can rest assured that their goaltending will keep them in games long enough for their forward talent to take over. Or at least that's the theory. Right now their D and G are suspect. "Fixing" one of those holes can get them to the playoffs sooner rather than later.



Edit: Cogburn just said it much better than I could have.
You didn't do a bad job either, but again, my theory doesn't pertain to Lu specifically, because even in the best case scenario for me (keeping him and Schneider until a solid offer is made), I can't imagine one of 29 teams doesn't get desperate in 2-4 years time.

Edmonton is in no hurry, but if they want the upgrade, Tambellini has our number (he was on our side of it for long enough after all).

Cogburn is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 01:20 PM
  #171
Flowzak
I saw, I conquered.
 
Flowzak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,308
vCash: 500
I thought there was a consensus that we'd be sending over players like Kadri, Kulemin, Finn, or a protected 1st in a combination of said pieces..

Why is this still going on?

Flowzak is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 01:22 PM
  #172
marty111
Registered User
 
marty111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,564
vCash: 500


Toronto is extremely close to Florida compared to Edmonton or Columbus. I never said it was a superior team so I would appreciate some of you cutting back on the personal attacks. If you guys want to ignore that Luongo has control over where he goes and location is a big part of that, then fine keep the blinders on.

And Luongo isn't getting waived, .

marty111 is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 01:23 PM
  #173
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
I'm on my phone so it's tough to surf multiple sites. As i said earlier, i just pulled the capgeek numbers. I'm not trying to argue, just trying to say that a 60 mil cap will cause issues for many teams ability to move large contracts, not just Luongo's.


It will come down to the quality of the player attached to said contract. Not too different than what it is now. A large contract on a marginal player is harder to justify than one that is on a high end player. For example, is Rick Nash on a 6.7m per contract in a 60m cap good or bad? If cap is the major factor, and not term, would his contract not be shunned (11% of the cap)? But I suspect NYR still makes that deal. So really, it's down to the player, and everything else is academic.



Then there are the other CBA factors like the ability to eat money in deals, as well as the current buyouts, that will have their say.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 01:26 PM
  #174
capitalsrock
Registered User
 
capitalsrock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,841
vCash: 500
San Jose shouldn't be included in these trade talks. Anyways...

Luongo for Kulemin, Bozak, and Finn

capitalsrock is offline  
Old
01-05-2013, 01:26 PM
  #175
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CeeLoBlue View Post
I thought there was a consensus that we'd be sending over players like Kadri, Kulemin, Finn, or a protected 1st in a combination of said pieces..

Why is this still going on?


The combinations are under debate. Oh, and the recent CBA has some TO fans "compress" their offers even more. That's why this is still going on. "Fair value" left this thread a long time ago.

Bleach Clean 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 02:10 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.