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.

Luongo: "Whatever the future holds is going to be fine with me"

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-20-2012, 03:19 AM
  #376
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyLager View Post
Goalies who play 41 games aren't really starters. They're either a 1A/1B guy, or someone who's been out with an injury. Either way I don't think they can properly be compared to a guy who's dealt with the rigors of a full season. Just like you can't compare Schneider's numbers to Lundqvists and say our Ginger Jesus had a better year.

Of course you can. Can't you see Elliot and Schneider were the 2 best goalies in 2012? Who cares if they didn't crack 40 games! Seriously. *Heavy Sarcasm

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 03:21 AM
  #377
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoke meat pete View Post
So statements like "year to year dominance" and "in the top 10 every year" are inaccurate.


That doesn't take away from the fact he is a good goalie.

Wow. Let me ask you this: In FLA, in his last 3 yrs there, was Lu a dominant goaltender? Yes or no?

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 03:23 AM
  #378
RECsGuy*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Who's going to regret it? It's not up to AV or MG, it's up to Lu... He's cited that it's time to move on... It's not MG kicking him out the door... In fact, from what we have seen, MG has tried to keep both for as long as possible. People thought Schneider would be traded long before this.


In the end, the decisions have come from Luongo himself.
Let's not play stupid. Up until Game 3 of the 2012 Playoff's Rd.1 matchup between Vancouver and Los Angeles, Luongo had been given every chance to succeed since leaving Sunrise. Luongo's "time to move on" line comes from his recognition that Schneider starting 3 straight PO games combined with CS's new large contract for a "back-up" means he will not be afforded that luxury any longer, so saying that the No. 1 job is Luongo's for the taking or even "his to lose" simply isn't true anymore. Unlike the past, everything from this point forward is contingent on CS's performance. And, once again, this is all my opinion.

RECsGuy* is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 03:25 AM
  #379
smoke meat pete*
VoiceofReason
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Wow. Let me ask you this: In FLA, in his last 3 yrs there, was Lu a dominant goaltender? Yes or no?
Oh my. Goodnight fellas.

.914
.931
.918

smoke meat pete* is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 03:29 AM
  #380
RECsGuy*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Wow. Let me ask you this: In FLA, in his last 3 yrs there, was Lu a dominant goaltender? Yes or no?
Dude, stop throwing that word around. And, no, he wasn't. He was still good. Perhaps very good, particularly in '03-'04. But let's tone down the hyperbole.

'02-'03: 2.71, 0.918
'03-'04: 2.43, 0.931
'05-'06: 2.97, 0.914

Those are nowhere near dominant numbers, then again, he was only 23-25 years old during this period.

RECsGuy* is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 03:29 AM
  #381
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoke meat pete View Post
Oh my. Goodnight fellas.

.914
.931
.918

.918, finishing 10th on the nhl.com list in 2002-2003... facing 2475 shots against. Put another way, your one step analysis to judging goaltender ability is porous at best... Basically you are out of your depth.


Good night, and sleep tight. I'll await your return to this thread tomorrow.


Last edited by Bleach Clean: 09-20-2012 at 03:47 AM.
Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 03:31 AM
  #382
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ag925 View Post
Dude, stop throwing that word around. And, no, he wasn't. He was still good. Perhaps very good, particularly in '03-'04. But let's tone down the hyperbole.

'02-'03: 2.71, 0.918
'03-'04: 2.43, 0.931
'05-'06: 2.97, 0.914

Those are nowhere near dominant numbers, then again, he was only 23-25 years old during this period.


Now factor in shot volume.


Edit: I'm sorry, but the fact that Lu had/has the ability to garner a Vezina nomination by facing 2475 shots while still posting a top3 save percentage (2004) is astonishing to me. (Prequel being a .918 sv % while facing 2011 shots). Without even getting into the shot quality against (FLA). There are some recognized starters that have never cracked 2000 shots against in their careers...The guy is, and was, a horse.


Last edited by Bleach Clean: 09-20-2012 at 03:45 AM.
Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 03:38 AM
  #383
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ag925 View Post
Let's not play stupid. Up until Game 3 of the 2012 Playoff's Rd.1 matchup between Vancouver and Los Angeles, Luongo had been given every chance to succeed since leaving Sunrise. Luongo's "time to move on" line comes from his recognition that Schneider starting 3 straight PO games combined with CS's new large contract for a "back-up" means he will not be afforded that luxury any longer, so saying that the No. 1 job is Luongo's for the taking or even "his to lose" simply isn't true anymore. Unlike the past, everything from this point forward is contingent on CS's performance. And, once again, this is all my opinion.


"Play stupid"? What are you even talking about anymore? Luongo wants out. It is well known that he is the initiator in this. He's read the tea leaves, and figures it's time for him to leave. It's not MG booting him out of the door... As far as anyone knows, that is.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 03:38 AM
  #384
n00bxQb
Registered User
 
n00bxQb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,085
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TOGuy14 View Post
At this point I think it is the wrong move.

Schneider is already 26 and hasn't spent a full season as a starter. At some point he needs to get his reps in, and by keeping Luongo around you are just wasting his prime years / development

Conversely, Luongo won't be gaining value anytime soon considering the very small (or none) amount of leverage that Vancouver has in trade talks involving him.

Essentially I think this non-decision might turn out to be very detrimental to the team. At some point you need to roll the dice and take a chance, even if it is just that, a chance.

(I should also note that I am a Toronto fan that really doesn't have much interest in Luongo so I am not trying to talk his value down)
You don't know Gillis very well. The guy is calculated in everything he does. Chances, he does not take.

n00bxQb is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 04:54 AM
  #385
nhlfan9191
Registered User
 
nhlfan9191's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Saskatoon, Sk
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,459
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ag925 View Post
Dude, stop throwing that word around. And, no, he wasn't. He was still good. Perhaps very good, particularly in '03-'04. But let's tone down the hyperbole.

'02-'03: 2.71, 0.918
'03-'04: 2.43, 0.931
'05-'06: 2.97, 0.914

Those are nowhere near dominant numbers, then again, he was only 23-25 years old during this period.
Lol I'm pretty skeptical of Luongo nowadays for a bunch of reasons. But Luongo was incredible in 2004. He just about carried our god awful team into the playoffs all by himself and then lost in Vezina votes because our players never get the credit they deserve. The couple years before that, he was rising to elite level. He peaked IMO in 2007. After that, even tho his numbers are always good, inconsistency crept into his game.

nhlfan9191 is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 05:21 AM
  #386
RECsGuy*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
It's not MG booting him out of the door... As far as anyone knows, that is.
"I don't think it was either one of us that really, either I demanded a trade or Mike, you know, suggested that I leave, but I think it was just more of a mutual understanding that it was time for me to go and Cory to take over."

16:38-16:51


RECsGuy* is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 06:45 AM
  #387
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ag925 View Post
"I don't think it was either one of us that really, either I demanded a trade or Mike, you know, suggested that I leave, but I think it was just more of a mutual understanding that it was time for me to go and Cory to take over."

16:38-16:51


A mutual understanding does not equate to management pushing him out of the door...


Put another way, if the decision is 50% Lu and 50% management, do you still put all the blame on management for eventually trading Lu?


If yes, then should they force him to stay?


If no, then you can't fully attribute his departure to MG.




You would be correct only if Lu wanted to stay and MG was adamant in dealing him. Clearly, that's not the case.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 07:16 AM
  #388
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueBaron View Post
I think you are mistaken. Either way that is just wild speculation on your part. I will add my own wild speculation and say I doub't Burke wants to trade our First . Kadri and Blacker I can see, but I also see him wanting to move a little salery back. At this point though, hard to say until we see what the new CBA looks like.
I'm saying the Leafs wouldn't do that. They're not going to mortage the future to trade for a guy like Luongo, which is why it made no sense for them to propose Schenn for Luongo straight up like some Vancouver fans try to grasp onto.

More likely, you had the likes of Elliotte Friedman realize that Schenn was on the block because his development stalled, Luongo was on the block because he lost the starting job. Vancouver could use a young, shutdown dman, Toronto could use a number one goalie, so somebody in the hockey reporting world thought it was a good idea. There's a substantial leap going from that to assuming that Schenn was offered by Burke/Gillis to Vancouver for Roberto Luongo straight up.

Heck, it's the same thing with the Edmonton rumor. The Leafs should've been highly interested in moving from 5-to-1. The Oilers seemed prepared to move down if they can get a young NHL defenceman. Do we know if it was offered? no, we know that had it been offered, it would have made some sense in that both teams were accomplishing their needs, but also a lot more sense than a Luongo offer, because an Edmonton proposal would actually fit in with what both teams were trying to build.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
For kicks, what I'd want from various teams that would make me feel moving Luongo now is the best thing:

Florida: Petrovic, 1st, Upshall(optional Clemmensen/Theodore for Luongo(optional Raymond)

Columbus: David Savard, LA 1st, NYR 1st for Luongo, Raymond, Van 2nd

Chicago: Saad/Teravainen + 1st for Luongo + 2nd

Toronto: Kadri, 1st, Lombardi/Connolly for Luongo, 2nd

Wild Cards(partway through the season if something goes wrong for them)

Ottawa: Silfverberg for Luongo
Washington: Kuznetsov for Luongo + 1st
Tampa Bay: Connolly + 1st for Luongo + 2nd

And I know all Leafs fans except Liferleafer say no to the Toronto proposal, just put it up for consistency's sake. Wild cards give up a bit more value, because if they're looking to make a cup run, they'll be willing to give up more for a top-5 goalie before playoffs start than teams that are not quite there yet.

Just trying to provoke new discussion with new teams.

EDIT: And I'm not saying all teams will be willing to give this up, just what I'd want to make it worth moving Luongo, imo.
Ok.... that's fine for a starting price, but of course reality has to set in, and when none of those teams are going to be prepared to part with what you're asking, the price obviously goes down to the point that at least 1 team is willing to meet, and another is willing to come extremely close.

Right now, the only team that would consider making one of those deals would be Chicago, and that's the last place Vancouver should want to be sending him. It's also probably the worst deal of the bunch even if you ignore where you're sending him.

Furthermore, your valuation seems to be wildly off for absolutely no reason. Chicago can accomplish it with Saad/Tervanen and a downgrade of picks, but Toronto can't accomplish it with Kadri, Lombardi and a conditional 2nd? Surely, the value of sending him to the Eastern conference would override the difference between a 1st and conditional 2nd. Ottawa could accomplish it for Jacob Silferberg straight up, but Toronto couldn't accomplish it for Nazem Kadri straight up, and Columbus would require David Savard + two firsts?!?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
So if gossip is usually a mixture of ___truth___ and untruth, then that would your statement about there being _nothing_ factual would have to be incorrect right?


I mean, if a hint of a kernel of truth existed in this rumour, then that would render your "_nothing_ factual" statement inaccurate.
There's nothing factual to discuss based on that rumor because it is impossible to decipher fact from fiction as to the components of the rumor. All we know, is that Luke Schenn was available for trade, and knowing that had nothing to do with what reporters said.


Last edited by seanlinden: 09-20-2012 at 07:27 AM.
seanlinden is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 07:26 AM
  #389
RECsGuy*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
A mutual understanding does not equate to management pushing him out of the door...


Put another way, if the decision is 50% Lu and 50% management, do you still put all the blame on management for eventually trading Lu?


If yes, then should they force him to stay?


If no, then you can't fully attribute his departure to MG.




You would be correct only if Lu wanted to stay and MG was adamant in dealing him. Clearly, that's not the case.
WTF are you talking about?

You said Luongo's "time to move on" is a decision he made on his own.

I countered, with Luongo's own words, that "time to move on" was a decision Luongo AND Gillis mutually decided upon.

RECsGuy* is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 07:40 AM
  #390
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandV View Post
Shouldn't be hard to understand why, and I don't know how many times it needs to be said. We don't really know what talks are like between Gillis and other teams, but we do know that Vancouver is a competitive Cup contending team with a tight salary cap. Keeping Luongo has value in earning Vancouver preferential playoff seeding, goaltender insurance, and keeping our goalies rested for the playoffs. Having Schneider as backup last year instead of a typical backup probably earned at least 10 points in the standings. Kind of depends on the player but removing Luongo and adding futures plus an expensive skater that doesn't help the team at all makes us worse.

The thing is suggested offers usually end up being along the lines of: player prospect Lombardi and a 2nd. Lombardi adds negative value to the deal, so Vancouver would be more likely to say drop Lombardi and take back your 2nd, making it player and prospect for Luongo. Most of the cap space gained by moving Luongo has already been eaten up by Schneider's raise. From a team like Florida who operates on an internal budget and actual dollars are important it's one thing to say the deal has to be balanced, but a rich team like Toronto who could easily afford to deal with these unwanted contracts themselves.
Calling Lombardi negative value when we have no idea what the CBA is, is ambitious, at best. The fact is, if the CBA drops to the point where Lombardi becomes negative value (which is certainly a possibility), that CBA dropping will also adversely affect Luongo's value. As players with substantial contracts, their value moves in tandem. Having him in the proposal allows us to find something that should work in a range of salary caps between about $60m and $65m+, instead of only at a specific salary number.

To illustrate, if the salary cap ends up north of $65m, Lombardi doesn't need to be in the deal from Toronto's perspective. They'll ship him elsewhere for a late round pick, and be done with it. However, in that $65m cap world, Vancouver can likely afford Lombardi. In that $65m cap world, Lombardi likely has a very small value (which Vancouver may want), and Luongo has a value that would allow him to get Nazem Kadri+ from Toronto with or without salary balancing.

However, in a $60m cap world, Lombardi's value drops substantially (to negative), as does Luongo's (to below Nazem Kadri straight up), and then he's a requisite part of the deal. The reason Luongo's value drops so much of course, is because there's all of a sudden a ton of teams trying to clear cap, and not a lot of money to be spent.

Basically what I'm saying is -- in a situation where cap space isn't a major issue for the Canucks, they can have Lombardi if they want. In a situation where cap space becomes critically important, they have to take Lombardi, because the situation where cap space becomes critically important for Vancouver is the situation where it does that for every team.

It's completely impossible to come up with a trade valuation where salaries are substantially off, when we have no idea what the new cap will be, and by extension, the value of cap space.

seanlinden is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 07:45 AM
  #391
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ag925 View Post
WTF are you talking about?

You said Luongo's "time to move on" is a decision he made on his own.

I countered, with Luongo's own words, that "time to move on" was a decision Luongo AND Gillis mutually decided upon.


Excuse me?


You said VAN will regret the decision of moving on from Lu to anoint Schneider their future starter... Is this correct?


If correct, then this assumes that VAN management has full control over the decision being made. Which they don't. And so, if they don't have full control over the decision being made, how then are they liable to regret anything?

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 07:52 AM
  #392
RECsGuy*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
how then are they liable to regret anything?
They've decided to go with Cory as their No. 1, even if Luongo wants to stay...

"I don't think it was either one of us that really, either I demanded a trade or Mike, you know, suggested that I leave, but I think it was just more of a mutual understanding that it was time for me to go and Cory to take over."

...a decision I believe the Canucks organization will regret.

RECsGuy* is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 08:04 AM
  #393
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
There's nothing factual to discuss based on that rumor because it is impossible to decipher fact from fiction as to the components of the rumor. All we know, is that Luke Schenn was available for trade, and knowing that had nothing to do with what reporters said.


You're skirting your own logic. You said gossip (rumour) is usually a mixture of truth and untruth. Both elements. Then I said, if both elements persist in this rumour (per your logic), then that would mean that some truth did exist within it. Rendering your "nothing (as in 0.00%) factual" statement inaccurate.



I know we can't decipher fact from fiction from that rumour. Nor the percentages of each. I don't think anyone but Burke and/or Gillis could. But if you are going to dismiss this rumour as having _no_fact_ within it, then what stops you from doing the same with every rumour? Why this rumour in particular? And if you do this for every rumour, does it not contradict your statement of "gossip usually has a mixture of truth and untruth" --? Wouldn't it all be untruth/lie to you?


Last edited by Bleach Clean: 09-20-2012 at 08:23 AM.
Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 08:21 AM
  #394
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ag925 View Post
They've decided to go with Cory as their No. 1, even if Luongo wants to stay...

"I don't think it was either one of us that really, either I demanded a trade or Mike, you know, suggested that I leave, but I think it was just more of a mutual understanding that it was time for me to go and Cory to take over."

...a decision I believe the Canucks organization will regret.



I'm sorry, what did you say? Even if Lu wants to stay... This is not a caveat of the discussion. Period. Because he doesn't want to stay long term. Remember... time to move on and all that...



So we have a mutual decision. Lu wants to leave, eventually. MG wants to accommodate him, eventually. It's not one party directing traffic. Mutual decision, as in 50/50. So if one party alone is not responsible for Lu moving on, why does it alone bear the full burden of the decision? Answer: It doesn't. And if it does not, then why is it liable to regret something it did not have full control over in the first place?



Lu himself thinks Cory should start, and he doesn't want to be in the way... He even wants to move on in part because of that fact. But somehow this is all VAN's fault... As if Lu himself has no control over the process.


Edit: To clarify, I think this is an eventuality and not a decision. So who is to regret an action that was inevitable anyways?


Last edited by Bleach Clean: 09-20-2012 at 09:29 AM.
Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 08:36 AM
  #395
Vankiller Whale
Propaganda Minister
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,222
vCash: 900
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post


Ok.... that's fine for a starting price, but of course reality has to set in, and when none of those teams are going to be prepared to part with what you're asking, the price obviously goes down to the point that at least 1 team is willing to meet, and another is willing to come extremely close.

Right now, the only team that would consider making one of those deals would be Chicago, and that's the last place Vancouver should want to be sending him. It's also probably the worst deal of the bunch even if you ignore where you're sending him.

Furthermore, your valuation seems to be wildly off for absolutely no reason. Chicago can accomplish it with Saad/Tervanen and a downgrade of picks, but Toronto can't accomplish it with Kadri, Lombardi and a conditional 2nd? Surely, the value of sending him to the Eastern conference would override the difference between a 1st and conditional 2nd. Ottawa could accomplish it for Jacob Silferberg straight up, but Toronto couldn't accomplish it for Nazem Kadri straight up, and Columbus would require David Savard + two firsts?!?
Saad, Silfverberg, are both better prospects than Kadri right now. And Columbus' two firsts are likely to be extremely late, so yes.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 10:23 AM
  #396
smoke meat pete*
VoiceofReason
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
. Put another way, your one step analysis to judging goaltender ability is porous at best... Basically you are out of your depth.

Good night, and sleep tight. I'll await your return to this thread tomorrow.
I'm not sure why I am continuing to humor your confrontational attitude, but what are you going on about. 2 people made definative statements I proved to be inaccurate and asked politely what metrics were being used to determine they were correct.

Finally, a bit of an answer. Shot volume from 2003-2007. Seems like a stretch but if that is what puts him in the top 10 year after year so be it.

smoke meat pete* is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 11:03 AM
  #397
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 47,310
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ag925 View Post
Dude, stop throwing that word around. And, no, he wasn't. He was still good. Perhaps very good, particularly in '03-'04. But let's tone down the hyperbole.

'02-'03: 2.71, 0.918
'03-'04: 2.43, 0.931
'05-'06: 2.97, 0.914

Those are nowhere near dominant numbers, then again, he was only 23-25 years old during this period.
Since when is a .931SVP not dominant?

Despite a down year Luongo still put up similar numbers to Pekka Rinne, and better numbers than Carey Price, Ryan Miller, Cam Ward etc. Contrary to popular belief he has significant value.

Also, if people think Luongo will be a distraction and doesn't really care to be here, why is he still in Vancouver skating with teammates when other players from around the league are bolting elsewhere?

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 11:06 AM
  #398
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,303
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Since when is a .931SVP not dominant?

Despite a down year Luongo still put up similar numbers to Pekka Rinne, and better numbers than Carey Price, Ryan Miller, Cam Ward etc. Contrary to popular belief he has significant value.

Also, if people think Luongo will be a distraction and doesn't really care to be here, why is he still in Vancouver skating with teammates when other players from around the league are bolting elsewhere?
Simple, because every GM that asked bolted when they heard the price.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 11:26 AM
  #399
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,342
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoke meat pete View Post
Bryzgalov and Vokoun were too.

Luongo also wasn't in the top 10 in GAA or Save % last either, was he? (12th in save % and 16th in GAA). He's also very consistently been in the top 10, and out of the top 10.

2011-2012 12th and 16th
2010-2011 4th and 2nd
2009-2010 18th and 19th
2008-2009 5th and 5th
2007-2008 14th and 13th
2006-2007 4th and 6th
2005-2006 9th and 29th
I think you're looking too much at stats to be honest. I've been of the view that Luongo has been top 10 every year he has been with the Canucks. Goalies like Halak/Elliott/Smith thrive in a defensive system like St Louis and Phoenix and may put up an occasional great year. Luongo and a few others give you that every year. In my view if you have one of the top 10 goalies and maybe even a top 15 you have a pretty good shot come playoff time. Interestingly though we may be entering a period where goaltending is becoming even more important as the last two Cup winners had the Vezina winner on their team. We'll see if this is a blip or a new trend.

vanwest is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 11:29 AM
  #400
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 47,310
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Simple, because every GM that asked bolted when they heard the price.
So? A disgruntled player who has no interest in playing for his team anymore does not travel across the continent to skate with his teammates during a lockout.

y2kcanucks 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 07:58 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.