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 use the RUMOR prefix in thread title. Proposals must contain the PROPOSAL prefix in the thread title.

Patrick Sharp

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-10-2012, 10:45 PM
  #126
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Definitely, why not?
- Forwards have more trade value than goalies
- It is more risky to have a goalie on a long term contract than a forward
- The market for forwards is notoriously better than the market for goalies
- Hossa does not have a NTC
- Gillis is searching for a trade for Luongo, meaning he loses leverage in negotiations.
- Regardless of whether or not they are deserved, Luongo has issues with his perception as an elite player due to his history of losing big games via blowouts. It might not be his fault, but it has to leave a bad taste in GMs mouths.

I could probably go on, but I dont see what that would accomplish.

StringerBell is offline  
Old
10-10-2012, 10:48 PM
  #127
WhiteLight
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 15,284
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
Not even in the same universe.
What are the Hawks' 2 biggest needs? #1 goalie and #2 center.

That deal can give you both. Bishop is better than any goalie the hawks have in the organization, and has #1 potential.

SDC has terrific skills, vision and hockey sense. He is limited by his size and strength but could very well be a 50 point NHL player.

All that for a slight downgrade from Sharp to Michalek.

WhiteLight is offline  
Old
10-10-2012, 10:55 PM
  #128
Vankiller Whale
Fire Benning
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,938
vCash: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyLager View Post
- Forwards have more trade value than goalies
Last time Luongo was traded he netted a former 90-point power forward+
Quote:
- It is more risky to have a goalie on a long term contract than a forward
Goalies have a longer shelf life than skaters. Also, Luongo doesn't have a NMC, so there's not much risk at all(or at least the same amount associated with Hossa/Franzen)

Quote:
- The market for forwards is notoriously better than the market for goalies
But goaltending is a much more important position than wing.
Quote:
- Hossa does not have a NTC
So? As long as he's willing to waive to the eam that offers the best return, who cares?
Quote:
- Gillis is searching for a trade for Luongo, meaning he loses leverage in negotiations.
Gillis has said he's perfectly happy going into the season with both, and so has Luongo.
Quote:
- Regardless of whether or not they are deserved, Luongo has issues with his perception as an elite player due to his history of losing big games via blowouts. It might not be his fault, but it has to leave a bad taste in GMs mouths.
Nothing tangible, in other words.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-10-2012, 11:10 PM
  #129
zytz
lumberjack
 
zytz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6,876
vCash: 500
Hossa may have been the best regular season RW in the game last year. Can the same be said of Luongo?

Furthermore, Lu doesn't deliver in the playoffs. In fact sometimes he flat out ***** the bed. Hossa has disappeared from the scoresheet during the playoffs before, but you better believe he always brings a Selke caliber defensive game no matter what.

zytz is offline  
Old
10-10-2012, 11:13 PM
  #130
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Last time Luongo was traded he netted a former 90-point power forward+
A former 90+ point player who was nowhere near that level anymore. Luongo was also what, 7 years younger then? Plus didnt have his current contract issues. Trying to equate a players current trade value to his former trade value is illogical. I do not think Luongo has amazing value, but I sure as heck think its better than Parrish and Kvasha.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Goalies have a longer shelf life than skaters. Also, Luongo doesn't have a NMC, so there's not much risk at all(or at least the same amount associated with Hossa/Franzen)
If Luongo slips at all on the depth chart with his new team then he only becomes effective in roughly a third of his teams games. If Hossa slips in production over the next 5 years he will still be a great 3rd liner. I would rather pay 5 million dollars to an elite 3rd liner than an elite backup.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
But goaltending is a much more important position than wing.
So you think Luongo will return more than Nash?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
So? As long as he's willing to waive to the eam that offers the best return, who cares?
That is a huge assumption. I feel like Columbus could put together a pretty good offer, but you dont often see those trades proposed for a good reason.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Gillis has said he's perfectly happy going into the season with both, and so has Luongo.
For sure, but one would think that in 3 years Chicago will be happier having Hossa than Vancouver having Luongo (assuming Schneider is still there too).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Nothing tangible, in other words.
Like it or not perception plays a factor in player value.

StringerBell is offline  
Old
10-10-2012, 11:14 PM
  #131
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 12,991
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Last time Luongo was traded he netted a former 90-point power forward+
How many years ago was that now? A lot has changed since 2006.

Quote:
Goalies have a longer shelf life than skaters. Also, Luongo doesn't have a NMC, so there's not much risk at all(or at least the same amount associated with Hossa/Franzen)
That would be better stated as some goalies have a longer shelf life than some skaters. Just like some skaters have a longer shelf life than some goalies. Nothing is absolute.

Quote:
But goaltending is a much more important position than wing.
This opinion doesn't change the point about forwards tending to have higher market value.

Quote:

So? As long as he's willing to waive to the eam that offers the best return, who cares?
And if he's not willing to waive it then you're screwed. You conveniently left that out.

Quote:

Gillis has said he's perfectly happy going into the season with both, and so has Luongo.
Which was smart of him, but part of the reason that he had a hard time dealing Bobby this summer is because everyone knew Bob wanted out giving them a leg up in negotiations.

Quote:
Nothing tangible, in other words.
Perceived market value is intangible by definition.

Like it or not, reputations count.

Sevanston is offline  
Old
10-10-2012, 11:19 PM
  #132
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Sevanston you must be a heck of a fast typer to copy my post in only a minute

StringerBell is offline  
Old
10-10-2012, 11:26 PM
  #133
Vankiller Whale
Fire Benning
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,938
vCash: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston View Post
How many years ago was that now? A lot has changed since 2006.
Yes, which is why we'd be wanting a similarly aged forward on a similar contract(Ex. Franzen+, much less than what he originally went for, and it was still considered a steal for us at the time.)

Quote:
That would be better stated as some goalies have a longer shelf life than some skaters. Just like some skaters have a longer shelf life than some goalies. Nothing is absolute.
There are about 9 times as many skaters as goaltenders. Thomas, Brodeur, Kiprusoff, Vokoun, etc have all been into their late 30s and are considered top-notch goaltenders. If you can find 9 times as many skaters as goaltenders doing well at that age, then I will concede that to you.


Quote:
This opinion doesn't change the point about forwards tending to have higher market value.
It does to a GM who wants to make an impact on his team.

Quote:
And if he's not willing to waive it then you're screwed. You conveniently left that out.
In an interview during the poker tournament, Luongo said he'd love Florida, but would also like going to Toronto, Chicago, or "anywhere with passionate fans"

Quote:
Which was smart of him, but part of the reason that he had a hard time dealing Bobby this summer is because everyone knew Bob wanted out giving them a leg up in negotiations.
So why did Luongo go along with it saying he had no problem staying if he was desperate to leave?

Quote:
Perceived market value is intangible by definition.

Like it or not, reputations count.
Yes, and a couple of bad games will make GMs forget all about him having the 2nd most wins of any goaltender since the lockout, or having a playoff sv% in the top 20 of all time(just behind Lundqvist, just ahead of Rinne). Especially since there's never been an elite goaltender who's had bad games before.


Last edited by Vankiller Whale: 10-10-2012 at 11:48 PM.
Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 12:50 AM
  #134
Chris Hansen
THESE LEGS ARE FRESH
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MandyAlwaysKnows View Post
What are the Hawks' 2 biggest needs? #1 goalie and #2 center.

That deal can give you both. Bishop is better than any goalie the hawks have in the organization, and has #1 potential.

SDC has terrific skills, vision and hockey sense. He is limited by his size and strength but could very well be a 50 point NHL player.

All that for a slight downgrade from Sharp to Michalek.
Sharp to Michalek is more than a "slight downgrade." Bishop is a meaningless part of the deal. If the Hawks are going to acquire a goaltender, it will be a proven one. And Da Costa is just another vanilla prospect. Chicago has enough forward prospects as it is.

Chris Hansen is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 01:09 AM
  #135
sketch22
Registered User
 
sketch22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,371
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Definitely, why not?
It is quite simple why not.
Think of it this way on what teams does Lou represent enough of an upgrade to justify trading for him?
CBJ, Chi, EDM, Philly, Col, NYI, Tor, WPG, TB, and Florida.

Col, EDM, and WPG have younger goalies who they believe in.
Yzerman said a while back that he will eventually get his franchise goalie in the draft or as a UFA and not by trading. So TB is gone.
The NYI are already paying a goalie a lot of money forever and I doubt that want to take on Lou's contract.
Philly is paying way to much for Bryz to have any interest in Lou.
I don't see Lou waiving to go to the Jackets.
So that leaves 3 teams who might have a serious interest in Lou.

Now think of how many teams would have a serious interest in Marion Hossa if the Hawks decided to make him available.

See the difference?

sketch22 is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 01:45 AM
  #136
mriswith
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sketch22 View Post
So that leaves 3 teams who might have a serious interest in Lou.

Now think of how many teams would have a serious interest in Marion Hossa if the Hawks decided to make him available.

See the difference?
Less teams may be interested, but goaltending is a funny position in that if you don't have it, you REALLY notice it. There is a much larger urgency in fixing that hole. That impacts value substantially.

Also, there are a lot of teams with questionable goaltending. Those teams may be okay with what they have now, but come December/January, if the goaltending has clearly dropped off a cliff that can change in a hurry. Especially for a contender like Washington - or even Chicago.

mriswith is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 01:55 AM
  #137
Intense Rage
Registered User
 
Intense Rage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,207
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Sharp to Michalek is more than a "slight downgrade." Bishop is a meaningless part of the deal. If the Hawks are going to acquire a goaltender, it will be a proven one. And Da Costa is just another vanilla prospect. Chicago has enough forward prospects as it is.
Inb4 DaCosta would be our best prospect.

Intense Rage is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 02:04 AM
  #138
sketch22
Registered User
 
sketch22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,371
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by schism View Post
Less teams may be interested, but goaltending is a funny position in that if you don't have it, you REALLY notice it. There is a much larger urgency in fixing that hole. That impacts value substantially.
Except when only a couple of teams are in need (and only 1 of those teams is in dire need) it still won't effect the value as much as having 15 teams in a bidding war.

Quote:
Originally Posted by schism View Post
Also, there are a lot of teams with questionable goaltending. Those teams may be okay with what they have now, but come December/January, if the goaltending has clearly dropped off a cliff that can change in a hurry. Especially for a contender like Washington - or even Chicago.
Washington has two young goaltenders and Holtby played extremely well in the playoffs. I don't think things are going to fall off a cliff enough for them to make a move for Lou.
And last year Chicago routinely won even with some of the worst goaltending in recent memory.
So yes, maybe one or two more teams might find themselves in need of a goaltender, but if Crawford rebounds from his sophomore slump and Theodore has another solid season then the market from Lou could just as easily decrease.
However the market for an elite winger like Hossa will always be hot. Their values are not at all equal.

sketch22 is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 05:52 AM
  #139
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 26,054
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MandyAlwaysKnows View Post
What are the Hawks' 2 biggest needs? #1 goalie and #2 center.

That deal can give you both. Bishop is better than any goalie the hawks have in the organization, and has #1 potential.

SDC has terrific skills, vision and hockey sense. He is limited by his size and strength but could very well be a 50 point NHL player.

All that for a slight downgrade from Sharp to Michalek.
#1 We want to fill a hole without creating another
#2 Bishop is not a #1
#3 Crawford is better than Bishop
#4 SDaCosta is not better than what options we have for #2 C


This Deal is really bad for the Hawks any way you look at it.

Bubba88 is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 10:02 AM
  #140
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 12,991
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Yes, which is why we'd be wanting a similarly aged forward on a similar contract(Ex. Franzen+, much less than what he originally went for, and it was still considered a steal for us at the time.)
When I said a lot has changed, I didn't just mean Luongo's age. His reputation and the value of goalies on the market in general are both vastly different than they were in 2006.

In 2006, people believed that the only way to the Cup was to have an elite goalie; that belief is now much more in doubt.

In 2006, Luongo was considered an elite goalie without a single black mark on his record; now he has three playoff defeats in a row for which he is given almost all of the blame. Regardless of whether or not he deserves it, they're still a part of his reputation, and like I said, reputation counts.

Quote:
There are about 9 times as many skaters as goaltenders. Thomas, Brodeur, Kiprusoff, Vokoun, etc have all been into their late 30s and are considered top-notch goaltenders. If you can find 9 times as many skaters as goaltenders doing well at that age, then I will concede that to you.
I'm not going to do 9 times the amount of work you did. You were speaking in absolutes, so I only really need one example of a skater who outlasted a goalie. Off the top of my head, Lidstrom, Pronger, Selanne, Chelios, Bertuzzi, Recchi, Brind'Amour, and Alfredsson are all skaters who were able to play at a high level past the age of 35.

You also didn't mention goalies whose play dropped off significantly as they got later into their 30s. Turco, Osgood, Conklin, Mason, and Huet are the first ones that come to mind, and there are certainly others.

Anyways, what you were trying to imply was that Luongo will maintain his high level of play longer than Hossa will. With Hossa's recent concussion, you might end up being right, but the simple fact is that you don't know because you can't predict the future. They're both on lifetime contracts over the age of 30, so the longevity of both of them is equally questionable.

Quote:
It does to a GM who wants to make an impact on his team.
A GM will make the largest impact by getting the player they need without paying above market value.

Quote:
In an interview during the poker tournament, Luongo said he'd love Florida, but would also like going to Toronto, Chicago, or "anywhere with passionate fans"
Does he count Phoenix or Columbus as places with passionate fans?

If you're the GM and your best offer comes from a place Luongo doesn't like, you're SOL. No GM in the league is going to be trying to pay top dollar (i.e. Hossa) for a situation where they could very easily end up SOL.

Quote:
So why did Luongo go along with it saying he had no problem staying if he was desperate to leave?
He was backpedaling once it was clear he wasn't going anywhere.

If he had no problem staying, why did he ask for a trade in the first place?

Quote:
Yes, and a couple of bad games will make GMs forget all about him having the 2nd most wins of any goaltender since the lockout, or having a playoff sv% in the top 20 of all time(just behind Lundqvist, just ahead of Rinne). Especially since there's never been an elite goaltender who's had bad games before.
When all of those bad games occur in the playoffs for three years in a row, yes, a GM will forget all of that.

And that's me giving him a pass on this year's LA series. Actual GMs might not give him that pass.


Last edited by Sevanston: 10-11-2012 at 10:09 AM.
Sevanston is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 10:10 AM
  #141
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 12,991
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyLager View Post
Sevanston you must be a heck of a fast typer to copy my post in only a minute
And I did that from my phone!

As I was reading your post, I honestly thought I double posted until I checked the username.

Clearly we're picking up on the same waves.

Sevanston is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 11:45 AM
  #142
Vankiller Whale
Fire Benning
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,938
vCash: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston View Post
When I said a lot has changed, I didn't just mean Luongo's age. His reputation and the value of goalies on the market in general are both vastly different than they were in 2006.

In 2006, people believed that the only way to the Cup was to have an elite goalie; that belief is now much more in doubt.
Alright, you need an elite goaltender unless you tank for several years straight like Chicago/Pittsburgh. The only team actively doing that right now is Edmonton, but even they have shown interest in Luongo(reportedly beating the Leafs top offer)

Quote:
In 2006, Luongo was considered an elite goalie without a single black mark on his record; now he has three playoff defeats in a row for which he is given almost all of the blame. Regardless of whether or not he deserves it, they're still a part of his reputation, and like I said, reputation counts.
I'm not sure which 3 defeats you're talking about, Boston was certainly not his fault, he managed to take a team averaging a goal per game to game 7, which is much more than anyone could hope for from elite goaltending. We also had most of our team injured or missing altogether. As for LA, during the first two games, Luongo was playing fine, arguably our MVP for those two games, he just got swapped out in an attempt to change momentum. I've never heard anyone blame Luongo for our loss to LA.

Quote:
I'm not going to do 9 times the amount of work you did. You were speaking in absolutes, so I only really need one example of a skater who outlasted a goalie. Off the top of my head, Lidstrom, Pronger, Selanne, Chelios, Bertuzzi, Recchi, Brind'Amour, and Alfredsson are all skaters who were able to play at a high level past the age of 35.
Bertuzzi absolutely was not playing at a high level well into his 30s. And it's telling you had to list a lot of retired players to make your list look bigger than it actually is, while all of mine are active.

Quote:

You also didn't mention goalies whose play dropped off significantly as they got later into their 30s. Turco, Osgood, Conklin, Mason, and Huet are the first ones that come to mind, and there are certainly others.
And none of them are in the same category as Luongo.

Quote:
Anyways, what you were trying to imply was that Luongo will maintain his high level of play longer than Hossa will. With Hossa's recent concussion, you might end up being right, but the simple fact is that you don't know because you can't predict the future. They're both on lifetime contracts over the age of 30, so the longevity of both of them is equally questionable.
Fine, but the original argument for Hossa having more value was that he was a "safer" contract.

Quote:
A GM will make the largest impact by getting the player they need without paying above market value.
Like Gaustad for a 1st round pick?

Quote:
Does he count Phoenix or Columbus as places with passionate fans?
I have no idea. You should ask him. Although a team like Phoenix is about as likely interested in Luongo as they would Hossa given their financial difficulties.

Quote:
If you're the GM and your best offer comes from a place Luongo doesn't like, you're SOL. No GM in the league is going to be trying to pay top dollar (i.e. Hossa) for a situation where they could very easily end up SOL.
They would if there are enough interested parties to make it worth it to them to outbid other teams, up to a point.

Quote:
He was backpedaling once it was clear he wasn't going anywhere.

If he had no problem staying, why did he ask for a trade in the first place?
He didn't. At least not that we know of.

Quote:
When all of those bad games occur in the playoffs for three years in a row, yes, a GM will forget all of that.

And that's me giving him a pass on this year's LA series. Actual GMs might not give him that pass.
So Lundqvist just had a terrible series against the Devils, I guess that means GMs don't really want him. GMs aren't so shortsighted to not take everythin into account(Like how the team was playing, etc.) And there's no doubt he would stil be a huge improvement on goalies like Crawford, Reimer, etc, regardless of his perceived "flaws".

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 12:06 PM
  #143
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Last time Luongo was traded he netted a former 90-point power forward+.
Last time he was traded, he wasn't signed to a 9yr deal making 5.3mil dollars.

Bertuzzi was coming off that brutal incident, and was going to be a UFA.

You are over exaggerating the return Luongo got last time, which really wasn't that good of a return in the end.

Hawkaholic is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 12:08 PM
  #144
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
He didn't. At least not that we know of.
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/...sks_for_trade/

It's funny how you will probably dismiss this as a rumour, but when we bring up Luongos trade value you say Toronto offered Schenn, or Chicago offered Bolland, as if it's gospel.

Hawkaholic is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 12:45 PM
  #145
Vankiller Whale
Fire Benning
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,938
vCash: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
Last time he was traded, he wasn't signed to a 9yr deal making 5.3mil dollars.

Bertuzzi was coming off that brutal incident, and was going to be a UFA.

You are over exaggerating the return Luongo got last time, which really wasn't that good of a return in the end.
That's why asking for a similar player on a similar contract(Hossa, and I know you'd say no, I'm just saying why their value is similar), or a lesser player on a similar contract(Franzen)+ is not being unfair. He's getting a lesser return, and the centrepiece of that return would also be on a lifetime contract. And everyone had thought Florida had gotten ripped off, and that was before the pieces didn't pan out as expected.

Quote:
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/...sks_for_trade/

It's funny how you will probably dismiss this as a rumour, but when we bring up Luongos trade value you say Toronto offered Schenn, or Chicago offered Bolland, as if it's gospel.
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=394319
Gillis after that incident said that they hadn't even talked about what they intended to do in the future, so there's no way that rumour could be true, unless Luongo asked later in the offseason, and then decided to chane his mind and stay on board. Regardless, the fact right now he's said he's fine staying on means we have no pressure to trade him.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 01:00 PM
  #146
sketch22
Registered User
 
sketch22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,371
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=394319
Gillis after that incident said that they hadn't even talked about what they intended to do in the future, so there's no way that rumour could be true, unless Luongo asked later in the offseason, and then decided to chane his mind and stay on board. Regardless, the fact right now he's said he's fine staying on means we have no pressure to trade him.
Gillis denied the fact that Lou had given him a list of teams he would accept a trade to. He didn't deny that Lou had asked for a trade.

sketch22 is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 01:27 PM
  #147
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 12,991
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Alright, you need an elite goaltender unless you tank for several years straight like Chicago/Pittsburgh. The only team actively doing that right now is Edmonton, but even they have shown interest in Luongo(reportedly beating the Leafs top offer)
Chicago's in your list of teams that don't need an elite goaltender, so why should they give up an elite RW to get him?

Because they're not the same team as they were in 2010? Cool, but the results of their tanking are all still there, so they don't need an elite goaltender.

Quote:
I'm not sure which 3 defeats you're talking about, Boston was certainly not his fault, he managed to take a team averaging a goal per game to game 7, which is much more than anyone could hope for from elite goaltending. We also had most of our team injured or missing altogether. As for LA, during the first two games, Luongo was playing fine, arguably our MVP for those two games, he just got swapped out in an attempt to change momentum. I've never heard anyone blame Luongo for our loss to LA.
You never heard me blame him for LA either. I was talking about the 2009-2011 playoffs.

He has had to shoulder a lot of blame for the Boston loss whether he deserved it or not. This is the third time I've said that.

Quote:
Bertuzzi absolutely was not playing at a high level well into his 30s. And it's telling you had to list a lot of retired players to make your list look bigger than it actually is, while all of mine are active.
It really is amazing that old players retire, isn't it?

Quote:
And none of them are in the same category as Luongo.
They're still goalies that fell off as they got older, which is what you were talking about.


Quote:
Fine, but the original argument for Hossa having more value was that he was a "safer" contract.
Hossa has a safer contract by sheer virtue of not having an NMC.


Quote:
Like Gaustad for a 1st round pick?
When did we start throwing deadline trades into this? They're a completely different beast.

By that point you already know how good your team is and if you don't want to give up a warm body for an extra piece, it's a lot easier not to do so.

Quote:
They would if there are enough interested parties to make it worth it to them to outbid other teams, up to a point.
Hossa's well past that point.

Bidding wars increase trade value marginally, not stratospherically. You might get an extra pick, prospect, or depth player, but not an extra star player of Hossa's caliber.

If you believe the Luongo for Bolland rumors, then you know that Luongo's value is an order of magnitude less than that of Hossa's, because Bolland's value is an order of magnitude less than Hossa's.

Quote:
He didn't. At least not that we know of.
What sketch22 said.

Quote:
So Lundqvist just had a terrible series against the Devils, I guess that means GMs don't really want him. GMs aren't so shortsighted to not take everythin into account(Like how the team was playing, etc.) And there's no doubt he would stil be a huge improvement on goalies like Crawford, Reimer, etc, regardless of his perceived "flaws".
Difference being no one's trying to trade Lundqvist. His value has never been in question. The Rangers are extremely lucky to have him, just like the Canucks are extremely lucky to have Luongo.

But you can bet that if Lundqvist were ever put on the market, or ever failed as visibly as Luongo has since 2009, then all of the black marks on his record would come straight to the surface. That's called bargaining.

No one's doubting Luongo would be an improvement over Crawford or Reimer. But there's no way he's an improvement that's worth Marian Hossa.


Last edited by Sevanston: 10-11-2012 at 01:33 PM.
Sevanston is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 02:31 PM
  #148
Vankiller Whale
Fire Benning
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,938
vCash: 1815
On my phone, so not going to do a line-by-quote response.

That Chicago isn't the same team(having lost Campbell, Byfuglien, Versteeg, etc) does play a large factor in whether they can repeat without an elite goaltender.

Just because fans look at Lu and say "Lolz choker" doesn't mean GMs think the same way. They know what the situation was, and how half or team was missing or injured during the Boston series, and how that would affect Luongo's ability to win games by himself.


That you had to find retired players to come up with a decent sized list(as well as Bertuzzi ) speaks volumes. If I had gone into the past I could have also found star goalies that played well late, like Hasek, Roy, etc.

Also, Luongo doesn't habe a NMC. There's no logical reason to say Hossa's contract is safer than Luongo's.

For a team that needs goaltending to make the playoffs, win a cup, etc, a GM may decide it would be more beneficial to a team to have a goaltender who stops an extra goal per game tuan a forward who scores a goal every 2-3 games.

And Gillis refused the Bolland offer, so obviously it wasn't enough.

Luongo has said he has no problem staying, Gillis has said he has no problem keeping him. Even if that rumour were true, it bears no consequence right now.

I'm fine with Hawks fans not wanting to trade Hossa. I'm just saying their value's similar. And in my three-way I had Franzen+ coming back for Luongo, it was deemed a ridiculous return for Luongo, drspite the parity of their contracts.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 02:51 PM
  #149
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Also, Luongo doesn't habe a NMC. There's no logical reason to say Hossa's contract is safer than Luongo's.
You honestly don't see more risk in a goalie not living up to his 10 year contract than a forward?

StringerBell is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 02:53 PM
  #150
WhiteLight
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 15,284
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba88 View Post
#1 We want to fill a hole without creating another
#2 Bishop is not a #1
#3 Crawford is better than Bishop
#4 SDaCosta is not better than what options we have for #2 C


This Deal is really bad for the Hawks any way you look at it.
1-You're not creating holes, you're filling them
2,3- Bishop is much much better than Crawford. Crawford should be a backup exclusively.
4-the only better option for #2 center the Hawks have are Sharp and Bolland. And the Hawks don't want to play them there. SCD is better than any centre prospect you have including McNeill. Not saying SDC will be a #2 centre in the next NHL season. But in time you could very well be.

WhiteLight 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 12:10 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.