HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Toronto Maple Leafs
Notices

Luongo To Toronto?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-18-2012, 08:40 PM
  #76
MoeMoney
Registered User
 
MoeMoney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 664
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lebanese Leaf View Post
No, the Canucks got within one game of it IN SPITE of Luongo. On paper, they were the much better team, Luongo is the reason Vancouver lost the Stanley Cup. Once a team gets in his head, he just breaks down.

See 2011 playoffs against Chicago: Up 3-0 in the series, then proceeds to get pulled in the next 3 games. And I don't think I need to remind anyone of the Cup Final, but I will: Up 2-0 in the series, only to allow 21 GA in the next 5 games, including an 8GA effort, and getting pulled twice.

Never seen a goalie perform as pathetically as Luongo in the playoffs.
The Canucks are a mentally weak team as Boston exposed so and ran over them in the finals last year, to pit the blame entirely on the goalie when his team left him out to dry is not fair IMO, it's not Luongos fault Kesler, Sedins, and their other top players folded when the going got tough. He's always to blame there and AV uses him as a scapegoat too many times to cover his own arse, he's not the reason they're about to be swept, it's AV way of saying hey it's Luongos fault I'm putting in Schnieder... As you saw in the last 3 games they are being out coached by Sutter, Period.

MoeMoney is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 08:42 PM
  #77
Durkin67
Leaf Opinionist
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Canada/Africa
Posts: 2,949
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epictetus View Post
He doesn't. His lack of knowledge on the Luongo situation is really showing here.

1) He has a no trade clause.
2) We are taking on his contract for 8+ years.
3) The Canucks are clearly in a goaltending jam (i.e., their back-up goaltender is out-performing their starting goaltender with whom the team plays worse with, when in net)
4) The Canucks actually think he has value -- and won't just give him up for free.

Why we would not offer-sheet Schneider, who is the better goaltender, while screwing up the Canucks even more (8-9 million total on two goaltenders) and better yet, not have to give up a 1st round pick instead of trading for Luongo is really hurting my brain.

But yeah, if this organization wants to go the Montreal Canadian route a la Scott Gomez, then please, by all means continue to disappoint many fans.
1. If Gillis told him the team was moving in another direction, and that he wouldn't be getting starting goalie duties, Luongo will waive. Besides, the environment will be enough to make him choose to leave.

2. Yeah, long contract. But the last four years, his salary is reduced to 3+ million (2018), then under 2 for the following three years. Cap hit stays at 5+.
3. Don't see how this point supports your position. The fact they are in a jam means they will need to deal him.
4. Of course he has value. But this is not a sellers market. They are handcuffed to an albatross deal which prevents them from moving forward with the Schneider kid. free? absolutely not, but cheaper than you'd think.

Durkin67 is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 08:44 PM
  #78
blasted_Sabre
Global Moderator
Warden of the North
 
blasted_Sabre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Muskoka
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,732
vCash: 500
Not happening.

terrible contract, long term cap circumvention which Burke hates, older, and to top it off an inability to perform when it matters most.

Then you have to factor in the unknown of the new CBA....

blasted_Sabre is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 08:45 PM
  #79
The Podium
Formerly chrisx101
 
The Podium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,020
vCash: 657
If its a light deal then why not? better option then anything else out there and is still among the best goalies in the league.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swervin81 View Post
Lost in all this is how Burke's business morals and ethics would interfere with such a deal from even being discussed.

http://capgeek.com/players/display.php?id=683
Carter and Richards were signed to the exact same deal

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendelstache View Post
Reimer + Phaneuf + Armstrong for Luo + 2nd

thats fair value
You don't trade Reimer....

The Podium is online now  
Old
04-18-2012, 08:45 PM
  #80
Schennanigans
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Schennanigans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Etobicoke, on
Posts: 5,511
vCash: 500
Doesn't he have a no trade clause? Would he want to come here?

Schennanigans is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 08:46 PM
  #81
MoeMoney
Registered User
 
MoeMoney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 664
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeenSchenn2 View Post
He'd be even worse behind our defense IMO.

Just my thoughts anyway.
I don't think so because we have a coach with a defensive style system in here now and I refuse to believe Leafs were that bad defensively last year, they have some quality d-men who were misused and out of place. Keep in mind how many times he stood on his head in Florida as well, he's use to seeing many shots a game anyway, he needs to be busy and active and very engaged in the game at all times. He's that kind of goalie, volume = more success.

MoeMoney is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 08:47 PM
  #82
The Podium
Formerly chrisx101
 
The Podium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,020
vCash: 657
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schennanigans View Post
Doesn't he have a no trade clause? Would he want to come here?
If Vancouver looses tonight there will be a riot outside his door. I think he'd want to be anywhere but there.

The Podium is online now  
Old
04-18-2012, 08:49 PM
  #83
Eb
TML
 
Eb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,200
vCash: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by blasted_Sabre View Post
Not happening.

terrible contract, long term cap circumvention which Burke hates, older, and to top it off an inability to perform when it matters most.

Then you have to factor in the unknown of the new CBA....
Luongo wasn't the reason they lost to Boston IMO.

Eb is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 08:49 PM
  #84
080
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Guelph
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,433
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyrophorus View Post
It not a knock, its a fact. One, outside shot of two of LACK would have to go to
make room.
Luongo would become the new 'L' in LACK.

080 is online now  
Old
04-18-2012, 08:55 PM
  #85
The Podium
Formerly chrisx101
 
The Podium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,020
vCash: 657
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eb View Post
Luongo wasn't the reason they lost to Boston IMO.
At least that one is arguable. He has been their best player thus far in this years playoff. Why the decide to blame him is beyond me.

The Podium is online now  
Old
04-18-2012, 08:57 PM
  #86
blasted_Sabre
Global Moderator
Warden of the North
 
blasted_Sabre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Muskoka
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,732
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisx101 View Post
If its a light deal then why not? better option then anything else out there and is still among the best goalies in the league.



Carter and Richards were signed to the exact same deal



You don't trade Reimer....
Carter and Richards can reasonably be expected to play until the end of their deals. Luongo is signed til age 43. That is the exact sort of cap circumvention deal which Burke detests.

blasted_Sabre is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 08:57 PM
  #87
thinkinfeller
Registered User
 
thinkinfeller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,066
vCash: 500
Luongo is a vastly superior to anyone in our system right now and comes with a wealth of both post season and international experience. Goaltenders are still in their prime at 33 and anyone who believes Loo will play through the term of his contract and retire in his mid-forties, doesn't know the first thing about cap circumvention.

I don't believe Burke could afford not to make this deal if Luongo were available at a reasonable price - principals or not.

I'd offer either of:

1 - Komisarek + MacArthur + 2012 2nd - or,

2 - Armstrong + MacArthur + 2012 4th

thinkinfeller is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 08:58 PM
  #88
LeafsNation92
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 284
vCash: 500
I'd rather do Kadri, reimer and mikus or holzer for Miller, even though i still believe in kadri and reimer

LeafsNation92 is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 09:01 PM
  #89
The Podium
Formerly chrisx101
 
The Podium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,020
vCash: 657
Quote:
Originally Posted by blasted_Sabre View Post
Carter and Richards can reasonably be expected to play until the end of their deals. Luongo is signed til age 43. That is the exact sort of cap circumvention deal which Burke detests.
Burke also detests anything longer then a 5 year deal. He is stubborn but not to that degree, at least i don't think so.

The Podium is online now  
Old
04-18-2012, 09:01 PM
  #90
mydnyte
Registered User
 
mydnyte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Country: Italy
Posts: 9,590
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erdinger View Post
Hopefully he stands by them again and doesn't trade for Luongo.
he said he wouldn't sign a player to circumvent the cap, not that he wouldn't trade for one.

mydnyte is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 09:03 PM
  #91
blasted_Sabre
Global Moderator
Warden of the North
 
blasted_Sabre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Muskoka
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,732
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkinfeller View Post
Luongo is a vastly superior to anyone in our system right now and comes with a wealth of both post season and international experience. Goaltenders are still in their prime at 33 and anyone who believes Loo will play through the term of his contract and retire in his mid-forties, doesn't know the first thing about cap circumvention.

I don't believe Burke could afford not to make this deal if Luongo were available at a reasonable price - principals or not.

I'd offer either of:

1 - Komisarek + MacArthur + 2012 2nd - or,

2 - Armstrong + MacArthur + 2012 4th
Who was the last healthy player who retired leaving 3-4m on the table?

blasted_Sabre is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 09:03 PM
  #92
Rare Jewel
Patience
 
Rare Jewel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Leaf Land
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schennanigans View Post
Doesn't he have a no trade clause? Would he want to come here?
He's probably at the point where getting out of Vancouver sounds pretty damn good now.


For me at least a 1st round pick('13) needs to be coming back with Luongo, And Komisarek goes to other way.

Other components would be included going to Van, But that's the frame work I'd need to feel comfortable.

Rare Jewel is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 09:09 PM
  #93
thinkinfeller
Registered User
 
thinkinfeller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,066
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blasted_Sabre View Post
Who was the last healthy player who retired leaving 3-4m on the table?
Luongo's last 3 years pay him:

1.6 million
1 million
1 million

It's entirely possible that by 2020 that is below the league's minimum salary, and if he wants to stay on in a back-up capacity - awesome.

Edit - forgot to include my opinion that in 10 years a 5 million dollar hit against the cap will likely mean alot less than it does now.

thinkinfeller is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 09:15 PM
  #94
Epictetus
Global Moderator
Create yourself.
 
Epictetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,290
vCash: 653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durkin67 View Post
1. If Gillis told him the team was moving in another direction, and that he wouldn't be getting starting goalie duties, Luongo will waive. Besides, the environment will be enough to make him choose to leave.

2. Yeah, long contract. But the last four years, his salary is reduced to 3+ million (2018), then under 2 for the following three years. Cap hit stays at 5+.
3. Don't see how this point supports your position. The fact they are in a jam means they will need to deal him.
4. Of course he has value. But this is not a sellers market. They are handcuffed to an albatross deal which prevents them from moving forward with the Schneider kid. free? absolutely not, but cheaper than you'd think.
1) Thinking that Luongo will waive to come to Toronto (and even tougher market than Vancouver) because he wants to be a starting goaltender is not a strong argument.

2) His cap-hit is the main point of emphasis on that contract, not his salary. And it is disgusting.

3) Because people are interested in the lesser of the two goods. Additionally, it's not Luongo or bust. That's not how the goaltending market works.

4) Really? Because the Vancouver fans will tell you something completely different. The only ones that are saying his value is low are the people who want him. And also, define 'cheaper than you think'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LC View Post
1) Already know he hast a NTC, you guys are dreaming of a young #1 goalie with no NTC. Plan to get him: Hope and pray.
2) He will retire at 40.
3 & 4) Thats the whole point, you get a #1 goaltender who would otherwise not be available because a team has a logjam.

And finally you tell us your plan to get a number 1 goaltender for almost nothing and at no risk. By hoping somehow we offer-sheet Schneider to around 3 million and the Canucks don't match it. Good plan genius!!
Wait, so you already know he has a 'NTC' but ignore the fact that he would have to waive it to come to an even bigger market with more media? "A young #1 goalie with no NTC"? I wonder which of that criteria Luongo has...

So you know when he'll retire as well?! And leave 3 years on his deal? Seems like a contract that Burke would love.

I would rather have the goaltender that is out-performing the one you want, and also who seems capable of enjoying to play in pressure situations.

My plan? Well it's quite simple actually; I want to avoid doing what this organization has done over and over, which is consistently relying on outside talent from other organizations at a premium price to solve the inadequate performances of General Managers. Luongo will fit this, just like Toskala did, and Raycroft before him. So my point here is that I am "not putting all my eggs in one basket"; I make an attempt with an offer-sheet, and if Vancouver is stupid enough to reject it and pay that much to their goaltenders, then good for them. I would move on to other goaltenders, notably a veteran. It's not Luongo or bust, nor will it ever be. A proper defensive strategy that limits giveaways and has a signficant strategy towards solid positional play will vastly improve the team. I mean, it's not like other organizations have done this to make up for mediocre goaltending.

Epictetus is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 09:18 PM
  #95
blasted_Sabre
Global Moderator
Warden of the North
 
blasted_Sabre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Muskoka
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,732
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkinfeller View Post
Luongo's last 3 years pay him:

1.6 million
1 million
1 million

It's entirely possible that by 2020 that is below the league's minimum salary, and if he wants to stay on in a back-up capacity - awesome.

Edit - forgot to include my opinion that in 10 years a 5 million dollar hit against the cap will likely mean alot less than it does now.
A lot of assumptions in there. I dont see the salary cap rising that much in the next decade. A lot of teams are struggling now to meet the floor and require revenue sharing to compete. Although I suppose the floor could be lowered in the new CBA.

blasted_Sabre is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 09:19 PM
  #96
binop7
Registered User
 
binop7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,971
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lebanese Leaf View Post
No, the Canucks got within one game of it IN SPITE of Luongo. On paper, they were the much better team, Luongo is the reason Vancouver lost the Stanley Cup. Once a team gets in his head, he just breaks down.

See 2011 playoffs against Chicago: Up 3-0 in the series, then proceeds to get pulled in the next 3 games. And I don't think I need to remind anyone of the Cup Final, but I will: Up 2-0 in the series, only to allow 21 GA in the next 5 games, including an 8GA effort, and getting pulled twice.

Never seen a goalie perform as pathetically as Luongo in the playoffs.
Yep, did in spite of his 2 shut outs. Vancouver couldn't score on an open net vs the B's that was their problem not Luongo

binop7 is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 09:19 PM
  #97
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 54,557
vCash: 500
Kadri and Komisarek for Luongo

or

Phaneuf for Luongo

__________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Keon

He was the Leafs' leading scorer in the 196364, 196667 and 196970 seasons, and the team's top goal scorer in 197071 and 197273. Keon was considered one of the fastest skaters in the NHL, and one of the best defensive forwards of his era.[3] He would usually play against the opposing team's top centre, and developed a reputation for neutralizing some of the league's top scorers. In 197071, he scored eight shorthanded goals, setting an NHL record.
ULF_55 is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 09:24 PM
  #98
Durkin67
Leaf Opinionist
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Canada/Africa
Posts: 2,949
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Epictetus;48368087]1) Thinking that Luongo will waive to come to Toronto (and even tougher market than Vancouver) because he wants to be a starting goaltender is not a strong argument.

2) His cap-hit is the main point of emphasis on that contract. And it is disgusting.

3) Because people are interested in the lesser of the two goods. Additionally, it's not Luongo or bust. That's not how the goaltending market works.

4) Really? Because the Vancouver fans will tell you something completely different. The only ones that are saying his value is low are the people who want him. And also, define 'cheaper than you think'. /QUOTE]



1. His options to remain a starting goaltender are likely limited. If he supplies a list of teams he will accept a trade to, TOR could very well be on that list. If Burke's team (read: Nonis) tables a favourable offer (not difficult with the number of suitors available) Luongo must honour the arrangement, or be painted with the same brush Heatley was when he embarrassed himself upon his exit from Ottawa.

2. 5 million is a reasonable cap hit for a franchise goalie. Hardly 'disgusting'-

3. Im just nowhere near as clever as you. I don't see a point anywhere in this statement.

4. VAN fans can say what the hell they like. Gillis needs to sign his new starting goalie. And when the market for an expensive goalie is this thin, Its anything but a seller's market.

Durkin67 is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 09:24 PM
  #99
hockeyfanz
Registered User
 
hockeyfanz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 6,687
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 080 View Post
Luongo would become the new 'L' in LACK.
It will become the new English spelling...you know sort of like LLAMA....LLACK.

hockeyfanz is offline  
Old
04-18-2012, 09:26 PM
  #100
blasted_Sabre
Global Moderator
Warden of the North
 
blasted_Sabre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Muskoka
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,732
vCash: 500
I'd rather target Kipper TBH. One year (maybe two?) and if he doesnt work out hes gone. Although I suspect he still has at the least one good year left in him.

One of Burke's BEST moves is not having locked the team into a huge retirement deal.

Luongo is proving RIGHT NOW why those deals are bad news. They are essentially unmoveable, and you're stuck with them for longer then most professionals athletes entire careers.

blasted_Sabre 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 10:39 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.