HFBoards

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

The Luongo Thread: We're doing 65, so we should be there in a billion years...

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-01-2012, 01:32 PM
  #101
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
I suppose his track record against the canucks (where is that passittobulis article dispelling this myth when you need it ) didn't matter to Gillis as he already passed on Bolland... ?
I'm not suggesting that is the deal to be made, I just think it's... interesting.

Scurr is online now  
Old
08-01-2012, 01:37 PM
  #102
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
I'm not suggesting that is the deal to be made, I just think it's... interesting.
Sarcasm? My radar's been busted from too much trade forum "discussion".

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 01:47 PM
  #103
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Sarcasm? My radar's been busted from too much trade forum "discussion".
No sarcasm. Our bottom 6 is consistently outplayed by the other teams in the playoffs and is a big reason we don't score enough. Bolland is an elite 3rd liner, even if you take his production against us out he still scores more in the playoffs than Kesler.

I understand peoples hesitation in sending Luongo to Chicago, I'm hesitant as well. Still, I think the net gain of strengthening our bottom 6 and weakening Chicago's makes the deal closer than people thing.

Scurr is online now  
Old
08-01-2012, 01:51 PM
  #104
John Swartzwelder
MOAR TUFFNESS!!!1
 
John Swartzwelder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,358
vCash: 50
Bolland is consistently 0.5 PPG in the playoffs not vs canucks. that's great production for a 3rd line centre.

John Swartzwelder is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 01:54 PM
  #105
Nuckles
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ ( ͡ ᴥ͡)
 
Nuckles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Potato
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,977
vCash: 50
Zero interest in Bolland. He hates the Canucks/Sedins, and he isn't good at faceoffs.

The guy I want from the Blackhawks is Hossa. Basically the same contract as Luongo's, and both are the same age.
We fill a need for a top 6 winger, Chicago fills a need for a good starting goalie.

There is no way we help out the Blackhawks so much without us getting helped as well. Giving them Luongo makes them an extremely good team, so the loss of Hossa makes them a bit worse offensively.

__________________

Richer's Ghost made my avatar
Nuckles is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 01:56 PM
  #106
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
No sarcasm. Our bottom 6 is consistently outplayed by the other teams in the playoffs and is a big reason we don't score enough. Bolland is an elite 3rd liner, even if you take his production against us out he still scores more in the playoffs than Kesler.

I understand peoples hesitation in sending Luongo to Chicago, I'm hesitant as well. Still, I think the net gain of strengthening our bottom 6 and weakening Chicago's makes the deal closer than people thing.
If the deal was close, MG would not have turfed the offer. After that CanucksArmy article, it just seems pointless to continue debating it. Fun for a time though!

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 02:28 PM
  #107
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,234
vCash: 500
Bolland is clearly not a third liner. Maybe he plays that role on a championship team (maybe he would here.. sounds promising) but the vast majority of teams consider a center of Bollands calibre a second line guy.

Honest question, is there a team in the league with a third line center better than Dave Bolland? Now that Jordan Staal's been dealt I can't think of one.

I can think of a hell of a lot of teams that don't have two centers as good as he is, let alone three.. even ignoring his performances against the Canucks over the years.

Anyway it's probably moot - unless there was something about the original offer we didn't know (it included Olesz or Crawford, say) and the Blackhawks are prepared to step up - but I don't think Dave Bolland is a third liner in any respect other than perhaps the way you could pigeonhole a player with his skill set.

For me the only questions about that player would be his ability to remain healthy and his willingness to re-sign in Vancouver; other than that as the centerpiece of a package deal he's just about perfect for this team.

dave babych returns is online now  
Old
08-01-2012, 02:38 PM
  #108
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
Bolland is clearly not a third liner. Maybe he plays that role on a championship team (maybe he would here.. sounds promising) but the vast majority of teams consider a center of Bollands calibre a second line guy.

Honest question, is there a team in the league with a third line center better than Dave Bolland? Now that Jordan Staal's been dealt I can't think of one.

I can think of a hell of a lot of teams that don't have two centers as good as he is, let alone three.. even ignoring his performances against the Canucks over the years.

Anyway it's probably moot - unless there was something about the original offer we didn't know (it included Olesz or Crawford, say) and the Blackhawks are prepared to step up - but I don't think Dave Bolland is a third liner in any respect other than perhaps the way you could pigeonhole a player with his skill set.

For me the only questions about that player would be his ability to remain healthy and his willingness to re-sign in Vancouver; other than that as the centerpiece of a package deal he's just about perfect for this team.
Others disagree with your last statement (myself included). He's a good player, but not an elite talent. It's not his fault either. But as you correctly pointed out, the point is moot because the deal from CHI was rejected.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 02:44 PM
  #109
Nuckles
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ ( ͡ ᴥ͡)
 
Nuckles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Potato
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,977
vCash: 50
Bolland is way too inconsistent offensively to be considered a top 6 forward.
Every Hawks fan will tell you he's an extremely good 3rd liner forced to play a top 6 role sometimes.

Nuckles is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 02:52 PM
  #110
ruutu37
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 67
vCash: 500
Does anyone think Washington is interested in Lu? There is a lot of talk about Florida, and rightly so, but I have a feeling he could go somewhere nobody is talking about.

ruutu37 is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 02:57 PM
  #111
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
Bolland is clearly not a third liner. Maybe he plays that role on a championship team (maybe he would here.. sounds promising) but the vast majority of teams consider a center of Bollands calibre a second line guy.

Honest question, is there a team in the league with a third line center better than Dave Bolland? Now that Jordan Staal's been dealt I can't think of one.

I can think of a hell of a lot of teams that don't have two centers as good as he is, let alone three.. even ignoring his performances against the Canucks over the years.

Anyway it's probably moot - unless there was something about the original offer we didn't know (it included Olesz or Crawford, say) and the Blackhawks are prepared to step up - but I don't think Dave Bolland is a third liner in any respect other than perhaps the way you could pigeonhole a player with his skill set.

For me the only questions about that player would be his ability to remain healthy and his willingness to re-sign in Vancouver; other than that as the centerpiece of a package deal he's just about perfect for this team.
Chicago disagrees.

It's why they are continually looking for a 2nd line Center, if Bolland was the answer don't you think he'd get played there?

He's not nearly effective when counted on for offense. Ask Hawk fans.

arsmaster is online now  
Old
08-01-2012, 02:58 PM
  #112
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,593
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruutu37 View Post
Does anyone think Washington is interested in Lu? There is a lot of talk about Florida, and rightly so, but I have a feeling he could go somewhere nobody is talking about.
Doubt it. Their "rookie phenom" played so great in their minds, they never bothered to re-up Vokuon (a very respectable starting goalie in his own right).

Barney Gumble is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 03:03 PM
  #113
Lucbourdon
Kefka cheers for Van
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 38,841
vCash: 50
I don't care how bad he was last year, bolland nearly single handedly destroyed us in not one but two series in the past few years.

The guy is a monster in the playoffs, and he would be a huge upgrade on our third line, and a slot in 2nd line guy.

Lucbourdon is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 03:05 PM
  #114
Screw
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Peachland
Country: Canada
Posts: 36
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruutu37 View Post
Does anyone think Washington is interested in Lu? There is a lot of talk about Florida, and rightly so, but I have a feeling he could go somewhere nobody is talking about.
I would target John Carlson out of Washington on a deal. The Caps have never been on the radar though. I think they may have their starter in Holtby.

Screw is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 03:11 PM
  #115
Nuckles
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ ( ͡ ᴥ͡)
 
Nuckles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Potato
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,977
vCash: 50
I seriously don't get why some Canucks fans are still discussing doing a Luongo + Edler for Kane + Hjalmarsson swap.

It improves Chicago MUCH more than us, and leaves us with a huge hole on defense. We'd also have no great offensive d-men.
And then we'd get a 4th-5th mediocre defensive d-man and a very talented forward with tons of personal problems (and I want him as far away from the Canucks as possible).

We have no great defensive prospects to replace Edler anytime soon, but we have a couple of pretty good wingers who could be top 6 ready in a year or two (Kassian and Jensen).

Nuckles is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 03:12 PM
  #116
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucbourdon View Post
I don't care how bad he was last year, bolland nearly single handedly destroyed us in not one but two series in the past few years.

The guy is a monster in the playoffs, and he would be a huge upgrade on our third line, and a slot in 2nd line guy.
And he looked like a powder puff this year against the Coyotes.

The past against us is clouding judgement.

It's moot though, will not happen.

Definitely not that interested in a guy who has spoken out against - our players, coaches, management, city, fans, etc...

The only way you make a move for Bolland and Hjalmarsson is if you already know a team that will trade you value for both.

Bolland is a better fit for need, Hjalmarsson for Swedishness...but I don't want either.

arsmaster is online now  
Old
08-01-2012, 03:24 PM
  #117
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,227
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuckles37 View Post
I seriously don't get why some Canucks fans are still discussing doing a Luongo + Edler for Kane + Hjalmarsson swap.

It improves Chicago MUCH more than us, and leaves us with a huge hole on defense. We'd also have no great offensive d-men.
And then we'd get a 4th-5th mediocre defensive d-man and a very talented forward with tons of personal problems (and I want him as far away from the Canucks as possible).

We have no great defensive prospects to replace Edler anytime soon, but we have a couple of pretty good wingers who could be top 6 ready in a year or two (Kassian and Jensen).
Connauton is a great offensive defenseman prospect. Bieksa is also better than Edler offensively, and would have better PP numbers if he had a better shot

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 03:31 PM
  #118
Nuckles
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ ( ͡ ᴥ͡)
 
Nuckles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Potato
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,977
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Connauton is a great offensive defenseman prospect. Bieksa is also better than Edler offensively, and would have better PP numbers if he had a better shot
Remember what happened when Ehrhoff left? Everyone tried to be more of an offensive d-man for the entire season.
I still have nightmares about all the 2 on 1s we gave up from the d-men ALWAYS pinching up in the offensive zone.

If we get rid of Edler, our team becomes worse overall (even with the addition of Kane) as our backend wouldn't be able to produce much offensively. Also, this will be Schneider's first year as a starter. I'd like him to have a good d-core in front of him.
Honestly, it would be a disaster.

Nuckles is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 03:34 PM
  #119
NugentHopkinsfan
Registered User
 
NugentHopkinsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 9,087
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Connauton is a great offensive defenseman prospect. Bieksa is also better than Edler offensively, and would have better PP numbers if he had a better shot
Bieksa is one of the worst power play d-men I have ever seen play hockey.

Edler has more offensive skill. And I find Edler overrated. He's a better passer than Bieksa, better shot, Better reads in the neutral zone(stupid drop pass aside), better dump ins, better pinches...

NugentHopkinsfan is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 03:40 PM
  #120
hackey
Posts: 1,258,486
 
hackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SoStopPostingSoMuch
Posts: 2,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuckles37 View Post
Zero interest in Bolland. He hates the Canucks/Sedins, and he isn't good at faceoffs.

The guy I want from the Blackhawks is Hossa. Basically the same contract as Luongo's, and both are the same age.
We fill a need for a top 6 winger, Chicago fills a need for a good starting goalie.

There is no way we help out the Blackhawks so much without us getting helped as well. Giving them Luongo makes them an extremely good team, so the loss of Hossa makes them a bit worse offensively.
What?
He had a massive concussion in the playoffs
The strap the head down on the gurney so it doesn't move type

Too much of a risk because of his massive contract

hackey is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 03:41 PM
  #121
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NugentHopkinsfan View Post
Bieksa is one of the worst power play d-men I have ever seen play hockey.

Edler has more offensive skill. And I find Edler overrated. He's a better passer than Bieksa, better shot, Better reads in the neutral zone(stupid drop pass aside), better dump ins, better pinches...
Weird that Bieksa had 5 less points than Edler in 5 less games....Edler must be pretty high on that list of worst PP d-men to ever play hockey.

In what world is Edler a better pincher than Bieksa...Bieksa is among the best d-men in the league at pinching at the right time.

arsmaster is online now  
Old
08-01-2012, 03:42 PM
  #122
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NugentHopkinsfan View Post
He's a better passer than Bieksa, better shot, Better reads in the neutral zone(stupid drop pass aside), better dump ins, better pinches...
And yet he produces better 5 on 5 while playing in tougher situations, against tougher competition with worse teammates....

Scurr is online now  
Old
08-01-2012, 03:45 PM
  #123
Callhee
Embrace the hate.
 
Callhee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 641
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Connauton is a great offensive defenseman prospect. Bieksa is also better than Edler offensively, and would have better PP numbers if he had a better shot
Big IF, Bieksa does not have a better shot and probably never will. Edler is younger, bigger, and has more offensive IQ. Bieksa has a knack for threading pucks and getting them through to the goalie, but he rarely threads a perfect pass to an open player the way Edler can. That's why Edler is on the PP and Bieksa isn't.

Furthermore, Bieksa has never scored 49 points, so you can't say Bieksa is offensively better than Edler like it's a FACT when in fact he has never put up those numbers. You can say Bieksa CAN be better than Edler offensively, you can state offensive zone start stats, 5v5 points all you want, but the fact of the matter is he hasn't played the same minutes and hasn't put up the points. It is an unknown what Bieksa can do if he were given Edler ice, it's not a given.

Callhee is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 03:50 PM
  #124
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,227
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by fenrir604 View Post
Big IF, Bieksa does not have a better shot and probably never will. Edler is younger, bigger, and has more offensive IQ. Bieksa has a knack for threading pucks and getting them through to the goalie, but he rarely threads a perfect pass to an open player the way Edler can. That's why Edler is on the PP and Bieksa isn't.

Furthermore, Bieksa has never scored 49 points, so you can't say Bieksa is offensively better than Edler like it's a FACT when in fact he has never put up those numbers. You can say Bieksa CAN be better than Edler offensively, you can state offensive zone start stats, 5v5 points all you want, but the fact of the matter is he hasn't played the same minutes and hasn't put up the points. It is an unknown what Bieksa can do if he were given Edler ice, it's not a given.
Agreed but all signs point to Bieksa being a better offensive defenseman than Edler. Edler has that booming shot which makes him better suited for his PP role than Bieksa, although with Garrison we have a good replacement for that if needed.

Bieksa's 5 on 5 production was absolutely outstanding. Only Erik Karlsson was better this season. And that's while playing with inferior offensive line mates while going up against tougher competition than Edler.

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 03:52 PM
  #125
BleedingOil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 793
vCash: 500
Ok so did Luongo actually say the only team he will accept a trade to is Florida?

BleedingOil 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 05:43 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.