HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
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.

Columbus - Vancouver trade.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-01-2012, 12:08 PM
  #26
SilverHaireDevil
Registered User
 
SilverHaireDevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
So can you explain to me why he is still with Vancouver if you dont need him?

Why wasnt he traded for any significant offer to get playoff help for the last 2 playoff ?

All season long Vancouver fans explained to me Schneider wasn't traded because he is too valuable for Vancouver as a backup insurance behind Luongo. (While at the same time Vancouver fan was making a ton of Schneider proposal!)

If he was too valuable in the past 2 years, he is still too valuable next year right?
No reason to trade a Goalie like Schneider at the deadline when you might (and they did) need him in the playoffs.

SilverHaireDevil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 12:17 PM
  #27
Crede777
Deputized
 
Crede777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 7,680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuck This View Post
Schneider is going to be the best goalie in the league in two years.
Am I getting trolled here or can someone actually predict the future?

Crede777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 12:22 PM
  #28
AvantiCanada*
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,407
vCash: 500
Vancouver takes that trade and runs.

Schneider seems like he wants to hit UFA status, I wouldn't risk to much for him under that circumstance. Perhaps if Gillis could resign him to a 3 year deal, then trade him, he would garner that kind of return.

Or maybe if the BJ's GM was granted access to Schneider to see if he can get an idea of what Schneider wanted.

Otherwise I see this as an awful trade for the BJ's, a team with historically poor center ice depth.

AvantiCanada* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 12:24 PM
  #29
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
Just like there is no guarantee he would re-sign for one season only. Hell, in a trade scenario the Canucks might allow the other team to talk extension with Schneider (or execute a sign-and-trade with terms favourable to all parties).

Making your completely pointless speculation.. completely pointless.
I agree with you, but assuming he will extend is also completely pointless speculation.

So do you agree with this part: For proposal purpose, we should consider Schneider as a 1 year rental with possibility to extend.

Its a good compromise between he will leave as UFA and will extend forever?

Im asking everyone of you, for proposal purpose, how should we base the value of a future UFA ? Most of the value of Schneider is in the possibility to extend him, not in is 1 year left before UFA. But its hard to gauge the value of the possibility of extending a player, its very variable according to each team, and probably low when it come to a team like Colombus.


Last edited by palindrom: 05-01-2012 at 12:31 PM.
palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 12:26 PM
  #30
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverHaireDevil View Post
No reason to trade a Goalie like Schneider at the deadline when you might (and they did) need him in the playoffs.
So you agree that Vancouver need Schneider? Contrary to what Bourne Endeavor said?

Beside, i would rather get a player i will need, than keeping a player i might need. Whoever is in the goals for Vancouver, we can be sure there is a precious asset wasted on the bench.

what if Vancouver traded Schneider for a player similar to Kassian, and kept Hodgson ?


Last edited by palindrom: 05-01-2012 at 12:42 PM.
palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 12:45 PM
  #31
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,365
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
So do you agree with this part: For proposal purpose, we should consider Schneider as a 1 year rental with possibility to extend.

Its a good compromise between he will leave as UFA and will extend forever?
It varies from situation to situation depending on the team's needs, the player's articulated goals and interests, the financial situation of each, etc.

There's no absolute rule to anything and it's silly to pretend there is, but for example if Columbus (a team in a rebuild with a long-term need for goaltending) is trading for Cory Schneider (a player ready to establish himself as a number one) then you have to assume that there is some framework to agree to a long-term contract, be it one signed ahead of the trade or some discussion between Columbus and Schneider ahead of pulling the trigger on a trade.

If there's no interest in a long term deal then there is simply no trade to be made. Why on Earth would Columbus make a deal for a player with no interest signing there?

So the tacit assumption in a thread like this is if the Vancouver Canucks want to trade Cory Schneider and if the Columbus Blue Jackets want to trade for him and if Schneider is interested in signing a medium-to-long-term deal with the Jackets, then....

If not it's all moot.

dave babych returns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 12:51 PM
  #32
Ched Brosky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crede777 View Post
Am I getting trolled here or can someone actually predict the future?
its a bold prediction by the poster

3 years ago (during the 08/09 season) i was telling all my hockey friends that Schneider would be better than Luongo in 5 years time. Not career wise as I knew Schneider would just be getting a year or 2 as a starter after 5 years, but at current level of play.

It was my bold prediction as I took into account Luongo's age, and Schneider's, as well as Luongo's 1st injury (groin pull) and how Schneider has developed and has been a top goalie in every league he had played in.

Fast foward to the end of the year 3 and he's on the cusp of making my bold prediction come true

I can definitely see Schneids become a top 3-5 goalie by 30 years old.

In the next 4 years I can see the top goalie list looking like this (in no order)
Lundqvist, Rinne, Quick, Price, Schneider, Rask, Bernier and Lindback (if they get a chance to start)

Ched Brosky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 01:01 PM
  #33
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
I
So the tacit assumption in a thread like this is if the Vancouver Canucks want to trade Cory Schneider and if the Columbus Blue Jackets want to trade for him and if Schneider is interested in signing a medium-to-long-term deal with the Jackets, then....

If not it's all moot.
Then my argument to these 'IF' is:

1. Vancouver doesnt want to trade Schneider, they didn't do it so far despite getting Significant offer. But they could be forced to trade him if Luongo want to stay and Schneider want to leave.

2. According to past NHL trade history, a bottom standing team like Columbus doesnt want to acquire a future UFA. Also, i believe Columbus would rather wait until the current Mason contract expire (2013) before acquiring another (expensive $ ?) young goalie. I could see a veteran like Biron mentoring Mason next season, then they could see their option summer 2013.

3. According to past history, Colombus is not able sign/extend prized UFA unless overpayment.

Well, maybe its a moot thread.

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 01:10 PM
  #34
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
So can you explain to me why he is still with Vancouver if you dont need him?

Why wasnt he traded for any significant offer to get playoff help for the last 2 playoff ?

All season long Vancouver fans explained to me Schneider wasn't traded because he is too valuable for Vancouver as a backup insurance behind Luongo. (While at the same time Vancouver fan was making a ton of Schneider proposal!)

If he was too valuable in the past 2 years, he is still too valuable next year right?
The deadline is not the most opportunistic time to move a goaltender, especially one who we want for insurance and to further build his value. Our alternative were Luongo to be injured is Eddie Lack. A stellar prospect himself, you do not go into the playoffs with a wild card if you can avoid it. Beyond that there were few buyers at the deadline and teams are unwilling to most significant pieces. Likewise, most have a goaltender they prefer to rely on at that given time. With the off season looming, this is when teams can reevaluate their roster and determine if Schneider is worth the cost, should he be made available.

Nevertheless, we have Luongo. Therefore, trading Schneider is an option. We do not need him, as your post stated.

Bourne Endeavor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 01:21 PM
  #35
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crede777 View Post
Am I getting trolled here or can someone actually predict the future?
That or all fans better worry....because Lundquist,Rinne,Price,Thoma/Rask,Quick and others are all retiring in less than 2 years.

Liferleafer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 01:28 PM
  #36
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
The deadline is not the most opportunistic time to move a goaltender, especially one who we want for insurance and to further build his value. Our alternative were Luongo to be injured is Eddie Lack. A stellar prospect himself, you do not go into the playoffs with a wild card if you can avoid it. Beyond that there were few buyers at the deadline and teams are unwilling to most significant pieces. Likewise, most have a goaltender they prefer to rely on at that given time. With the off season looming, this is when teams can reevaluate their roster and determine if Schneider is worth the cost, should he be made available.

Nevertheless, we have Luongo. Therefore, trading Schneider is an option. We do not need him, as your post stated.
But Schneider could have been traded summer 2011.

What if Vancouver accepted Oliver Ekman-Larsson for Schneider (it was proposed many time last summer and this season) instead of signing Smith, and Smith end up as Vancouver backup ?

Is not the OP proposal similar?

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 01:30 PM
  #37
Luck 6
\\_______
 
Luck 6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,412
vCash: 500
I think if Schneider were traded to CBJ, there would need to be some form of pre-discussed contract before the deal could be finalized. I don't think that's too crazy of a notion, either. It benefits both teams a great deal: CBJ in security and VAN in value.

The reason some teams wouldn't allow a player to pre-discuss a contract is obvious, the player being traded may have no interest in signing with the team he is being moved too when in turn hurts his value. Schneider's case is a bit more unique, I would think Vancouver would allow teams to discuss contract with Schneider prior to him being traded. Or at the very least make a list of teams he'd like to play for, and what his expected contract demands would be.

Luck 6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 01:38 PM
  #38
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luck 6 View Post
I think if Schneider were traded to CBJ, there would need to be some form of pre-discussed contract before the deal could be finalized. I don't think that's too crazy of a notion, either. It benefits both teams a great deal: CBJ in security and VAN in value.

The reason some teams wouldn't allow a player to pre-discuss a contract is obvious, the player being traded may have no interest in signing with the team he is being moved too when in turn hurts his value. Schneider's case is a bit more unique, I would think Vancouver would allow teams to discuss contract with Schneider prior to him being traded. Or at the very least make a list of teams he'd like to play for, and what his expected contract demands would be.
At 26-27yo, players usually sign the most important contract of their career.

After being paid 900 000$ in the last 2 years, it hard to assume Schneider would accept a reasonable long term contract to play with he worst team of the league.

Lets face it, its more about Vancouver fan wishing Schneider would increase his value by accepting an extension than realist assumption.

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 02:50 PM
  #39
Luck 6
\\_______
 
Luck 6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,412
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
At 26-27yo, players usually sign the most important contract of their career.

After being paid 900 000$ in the last 2 years, it hard to assume Schneider would accept a reasonable long term contract to play with he worst team of the league.

Lets face it, its more about Vancouver fan wishing Schneider would increase his value by accepting an extension than realist assumption.
Again, I think Schneider is an exception. To add to that, young goalies in general can be exceptions. The closest example I can come up with is Jimmy Howard. He was a Calder nominee in 09-10 while making $0.75mil, he followed that season up with an alright season making $0.8mil before hitting UFA. He signed a two year extension for 2.25mil / season at the age of 26/27.

Schneider very well may sign a short term deal to prove himself as a starter before signing longterm, I'm assuming that's what Howard was trying to do. A 3 year deal for Schneider that eats up 2 years of UFA status would make sense.

YEAR 1: $2,000,000 (RFA YEAR)
YEAR 2: $3,000,000
YEAR 3: $4,000,000
CAPHIT: $3,000,000

For a 3 year term, I don't see that as an unrealistic term. If you added a 4th year at 5 million he'd have a cap hit of 3.5mil.

Everyone seems to compare Schneider to Halak, but when Halak signed his 4 year deal he had already started 115 games at the NHL level. Schneider has started 62 games, which is about half that.

Another example is Brian Elliot. He was set to become a UFA this offseason after putting together fantastic numbers, but instead he too signed a short term cheap contract to prove himself. He could have easily cashed in for twice what he's making now, and he's in that same age 26/27 range is Schneider is in.

Luck 6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 02:51 PM
  #40
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
But Schneider could have been traded summer 2011.

What if Vancouver accepted Oliver Ekman-Larsson for Schneider (it was proposed many time last summer and this season) instead of signing Smith, and Smith end up as Vancouver backup ?

Is not the OP proposal similar?
Provide me a legitimate source where such a rumor was made and has any legs to stand on. Otherwise, if this offer were proposed, then Schneider is highly liable to be in Phoenix. There is no way Phoenix was offering Larsson. Furthermore, Schneider had less value then in comparison to now.

Bourne Endeavor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 02:53 PM
  #41
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luck 6 View Post
Again, I think Schneider is an exception. To add to that, young goalies in general can be exceptions. The closest example I can come up with is Jimmy Howard. He was a Calder nominee in 09-10 while making $0.75mil, he followed that season up with an alright season making $0.8mil before hitting UFA. He signed a two year extension for 2.25mil / season at the age of 26/27.

Schneider very well may sign a short term deal to prove himself as a starter before signing longterm, I'm assuming that's what Howard was trying to do. A 3 year deal for Schneider that eats up 2 years of UFA status would make sense.

YEAR 1: $2,000,000 (RFA YEAR)
YEAR 2: $3,000,000
YEAR 3: $4,000,000
CAPHIT: $3,000,000

For a 3 year term, I don't see that as an unrealistic term. If you added a 4th year at 5 million he'd have a cap hit of 3.5mil.

Everyone seems to compare Schneider to Halak, but when Halak signed his 4 year deal he had already started 115 games at the NHL level. Schneider has started 62 games, which is about half that.

Another example is Brian Elliot. He was set to become a UFA this offseason after putting together fantastic numbers, but instead he too signed a short term cheap contract to prove himself. He could have easily cashed in for twice what he's making now, and he's in that same age 26/27 range is Schneider is in.
Is Detroit and St-Louis among the worst team of the league?

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 03:13 PM
  #42
Crede777
Deputized
 
Crede777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 7,680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverback91 View Post
I can definitely see Schneids become a top 3-5 goalie by 30 years old.

In the next 4 years I can see the top goalie list looking like this (in no order)
Lundqvist, Rinne, Quick, Price, Schneider, Rask, Bernier and Lindback (if they get a chance to start)
It's possible, but nobody can predict how goaltenders will play on a yearly basis.

I will say that Schnieder is more proven than Bernier and Lindback and I personally am more comfortable about relying upon him over Rask. That said, there are two things:

1. You can't base value on what you think a player may be worth in 2 years. Columbus, when discussing moving Johansen, can't pretend his value is that of an 80 point top-line center despite thinking he's that in 2 years. What is relevant is what he currently is and what he has done in the past. For Schnieder, he has shown that he is a capable starter in Vancouver's system but that has been under limited exposure and his contract situation is not set in stone.

2. Goaltending is the most unpredictable position in the league. Look at this year's examples of Elliott and Smith. Nobody would have predicted that they'd put up the numbers they did even under Hitchcock and Tippett. There are very few consistently good goalies in the league (Thomas, Lundqvist, Miller, Kipprusoff). Miller had an off year this year so that part is in question. Rinne, Quick, Price, and Hiller are on their way towards proving that they belong in that first group. Then you have guys like Bryzgalov, Luongo, Vokoun, Backstrom, etc. who may have been in the first group in the past but are falling (have fallen) out due to recent events.

Point is, goalies do not nor have they in the past returned what their actual value to the team is. This is common knowledge, when compared to forwards and goaltenders teams often receive less than they think they should.

All this goes to say is that Schnieder either will not get moved (probably), but if he does it won't be for what many Vancouver fans think he's worth.

Crede777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 03:24 PM
  #43
Matty K
Registered User
 
Matty K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Caledon, ON
Country: Germany
Posts: 1,574
vCash: 500
Columbus gets takin to the cleaners...

Matty K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 03:41 PM
  #44
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
Then my argument to these 'IF' is:

1. Vancouver doesnt want to trade Schneider, they didn't do it so far despite getting Significant offer. But they could be forced to trade him if Luongo want to stay and Schneider want to leave.

2. According to past NHL trade history, a bottom standing team like Columbus doesnt want to acquire a future UFA. Also, i believe Columbus would rather wait until the current Mason contract expire (2013) before acquiring another (expensive $ ?) young goalie. I could see a veteran like Biron mentoring Mason next season, then they could see their option summer 2013.

3. According to past history, Colombus is not able sign/extend prized UFA unless overpayment.

Well, maybe its a moot thread.
Totally a moot thread. Columbus would be stupid to trade for Schneider considering Steve Mason will be better than him in two years.

StringerBell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 04:15 PM
  #45
candyman82
Registered User
 
candyman82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 2,455
vCash: 500
I want to know why we would give up on Ryan Johansen after only one pro year

candyman82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 05:09 PM
  #46
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by candyman82 View Post
I want to know why we would give up on Ryan Johansen after only one pro year
You wont give up Ryan Johansen, Cody Goloubev and 2 X 2nd for nothing.

In Schneider, Colombus would get a goalie who could make the difference between finishing last in the league and 25-26th for the 2012-2013 season, then Schneider could leave as UFA summer 2013 to sign a big contract elsewhere.

And even if Schneider sign a 3 years contract, he could still leave as UFA summer 2015, while Johansen will be 22yo and entering his prime.

Does it worth it to sacrifice your future for a short term fix in goal? that is a matter of opinion.

Ask Phoenix fans how they regret they didnt acquire Schneider for only OEL while Schneider value was lower, now that Schneider value skyrocketed, they probably could not afford to trade for him anymore. Colombus doesnt want to make the same mistake.


Last edited by palindrom: 05-01-2012 at 05:36 PM.
palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 05:27 PM
  #47
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
There is no way Phoenix was offering Larsson.
then why was there a ton of Schneider for OEL proposal out there ? There was probably a ton of fans who thought it was a reasonable offer.

Just look here for fun, a proposal from a moderator!:

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1012653

Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Crossbar View Post
To Phoenix
- Cory Schneider
- Keith Ballard
- Jordan Schroeder
-2012 2nd round

To Vancouver
-Kyle Turris
-Oliver Ekman-Larsson

Vancouver gets rid of some salary space and replaces Schroeder with a more talented Center that we could move to the Wing if we need to. Plus we finally cash in on Schneids and we get a young quarterback for our PP, (which we've missed since Ehrhoff left). Phoenix gets a potential #1 Goalie with a solid two way defender and a young centerman to replace Kyle.

Thoughts?
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1096405

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canuckaholic19 View Post
D

To PHX:
Cory Schneider (Age 25) RFA at seasons end
Chris Tanev (Age 22) ELC

To Van:
Oliver Ekman Larsson (Age 20) ELC
Jason Labarbera (Age 31) 1 More year on deal

Rationale: Now I know OEL is not a guy Phoenix wants to move. He may be even be labelled in that ever so presumptuous "untouchable" category. But Schneider isn't a guy Mike Gillis is dying to drive to the airport either. This trade I believe puts Phoenix moving forward in the Nashville Predators model of very strong defense and goaltending. They get another NHL ready young defenseman coming back in Tanev that will still create competition for spots in Phoenix. The Canucks get their future defenseman to replace Salo, and pair with Edler who could step into their lineup right away and make an impact. And a guy who has had success backing up Luongo before in Labarbera not putting too much pressure on Lack right away.

Well HF what do we think?

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 05:36 PM
  #48
Flair Hay
Registered User
 
Flair Hay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,300
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
then why was there a ton of Schneider for OEL proposal out there ? There was probably a ton of fans who thought it was a reasonable offer.

Just look here for fun, a proposal from a moderator!:

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1012653



http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1096405
These posts show ZERO people from Phoenix, just Canuck fans trying to get a quarter for 2 dimes and a nickel. Lunacy

Flair Hay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 05:43 PM
  #49
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhay1987 View Post
These posts show ZERO people from Phoenix, just Canuck fans trying to get a quarter for 2 dimes and a nickel. Lunacy
I would rather trust Canuck fans judgment, they are the one who watch Schneider often and therefore know his real value.

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 05:44 PM
  #50
Luck 6
\\_______
 
Luck 6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,412
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
Is Detroit and St-Louis among the worst team of the league?
I'm aware my comments were mostly based on his contract demands, I was trying to state that I doubt Schneider would expect anything unreasonable. In terms of re-signing, Schneider will likely need to pick a team that is infact one of the worst in the league and then help them build to the top.

The year before Vancouver acquired Luongo they were a mess, and they definitely didn't make the playoffs. They traded for his RFA rights a year away from UFA, and then re-signed him to a 4 year deal. Many were concerned Luongo wouldn't want to play in Vancouver: he's an east coast player, his family is in Florida, etc etc. Clearly they were wrong.

How many teams out there need a starting goalie? Maybe 3-5? None of them are top contenders either, I really doubt Schneider expects to goto such a situation. Personally, I think he'd be fully willing to sign in Columbus for 4 years or so and see where the franchise is taken. You might have to pay the man 4.25mil/yr. or so, but I think a deal gets done.

Luck 6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 06:53 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.