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
10-11-2012, 02:58 PM
  #151
Vankiller Whale
#GetJimBinned
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,902
vCash: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyLager View Post
You honestly don't see more risk in a goalie not living up to his 10 year contract than a forward?
No. If neither have a NMC, and goalies tend to play longer than forwards, there absolutely is no more risk with a goaltender than a forward.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 03:03 PM
  #152
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
No. If neither have a NMC, and goalies tend to play longer than forwards, there absolutely is no more risk with a goaltender than a forward.
If the forward drops one spot on the depth chart he'll still be playing every game, but if a goalie drops one spot on the depth chart he'll be watching twice as many games as he plays.

This really doesn't count for anything to you?

StringerBell is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 03:07 PM
  #153
Vankiller Whale
#GetJimBinned
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,902
vCash: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyLager View Post
If the forward drops one spot on the depth chart he'll still be playing every game, but if a goalie drops one spot on the depth chart he'll be watching twice as many games as he plays.

This really doesn't count for anything to you?
It's a lot easier for a forward to drop on the depth chart than a goalie. Worst case scenario either can be buried in the minors.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 03:07 PM
  #154
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 12,975
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
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.
They need to find replacements for Campbell, Byfuglien, Versteeg and Ladd more than they need to find a replacement for Antti Niemi.

Quote:
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.
They also know how having to find excuses for him affects his value.

Quote:
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.
Yes, and I could've come up with guys like Gordie Howe.

Some players can play until they're old. Some can't. It's not absolute, and it never has been.

Quote:
Also, Luongo doesn't habe a NMC. There's no logical reason to say Hossa's contract is safer than Luongo's.
Oh sorry, Lu has a NTC. Hossa still doesn't, so the point still stands.

Quote:
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.
A GM might also decide to walk away from the deal altogether if they don't think the goalie is worth the extra cost. And I think everyone in Chicago, from the fans all the way up to Stan Bowman, will agree that Luongo's not worth the extra cost.

Quote:
And Gillis refused the Bolland offer, so obviously it wasn't enough.
Obviously no one's offering a package that Gillis thinks is enough, so the market clearly disagrees with his judgement of Luongo's value.

Quote:
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.
At this point, the cat's out of the bag. The rumor has consequences until it gets overidden by other consequences (like the trade deadline)

Quote:
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.
I know what you're saying. I'm disagreeing with it, and I'm disagreeing with your reasoning as well.

Sevanston is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 03:28 PM
  #155
Vankiller Whale
#GetJimBinned
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,902
vCash: 1815
If you really think the better way to build a contender is to find replacements for all those players you lost without giving up core pieces, by all means, go ahead. It would certainly cost a lot more than Luongo, though.

And if Hossa is just coming off a concussion, and Franzen is significantly less talented than Luongo, what makes either of them more likely to play longer at a high level?

And how does a NTC make him less safe? If he is unwilling to retire(unlikely) he can be buried in the minors. There's a huge difference between a NTC and NMC.

The rest is simply speculation on what GMs may or may not have offered, for all we know the offer was Bolland+Saad+1st.(and no, Gillis would not neccessarily have "taken it and run" if he was intent on getting a top 6 RW).

In my proposal all teams ended up better, although most Hawks fans were unwilling to deal Kane period, which is understandable.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 04:31 PM
  #156
nhlfan9191
Registered User
 
nhlfan9191's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,869
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
No. If neither have a NMC, and goalies tend to play longer than forwards, there absolutely is no more risk with a goaltender than a forward.
That's crap. There's 16 spots for forwards. Only two spots for a goalie. If a forward loses his scoring touch, the team he's playing for can turn him into a role player like Montreal is doing with Scott Gomez. A goaltender is way more of a risk. There's also risk that dumping a player in the minors will be gone with the new CBA.

nhlfan9191 is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 04:56 PM
  #157
Vankiller Whale
#GetJimBinned
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,902
vCash: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by nhlfan9191 View Post
That's crap. There's 16 spots for forwards. Only two spots for a goalie. If a forward loses his scoring touch, the team he's playing for can turn him into a role player like Montreal is doing with Scott Gomez. A goaltender is way more of a risk. There's also risk that dumping a player in the minors will be gone with the new CBA.
I'm pretty sure in a worst case scenario Luongo could at least play backup until his term is up, assuming he doesn't retire. And the burying in the minors applies to all lifetime contracts, even if you think it's a risk

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 05:10 PM
  #158
Iridium128
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 286
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MandyAlwaysKnows View Post
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.
Well if SDC isn't going to be a 2C next year, why don't we wait an extra year for Danault/McNeil/Teravainen and still keep Sharp? We need a 1G/2C now, not more C prospects.

Iridium128 is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 05:14 PM
  #159
WhiteLight
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 15,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iridium128 View Post
Well if SDC isn't going to be a 2C next year, why don't we wait an extra year for Danault/McNeil/Teravainen and still keep Sharp? We need a 1G/2C now, not more C prospects.
The point is, SDC is much better offensively than Danault/McNeill will ever be. Teravainen is more likely a winger.

Da Costa almost made the team in 2011-12, he's not too far off.

WhiteLight is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 05:56 PM
  #160
Martini*
Gods Team
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,786
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MandyAlwaysKnows View Post
The point is, SDC is much better offensively than Danault/McNeill will ever be. Teravainen is more likely a winger.

Da Costa almost made the team in 2011-12, he's not too far off.
No, he isnt. Danault has progressed nicely to the point that he might actually be the second line center the Hawks have coveted offensively to go along with excellent two way play. The Hawks have enough offense the way it is.

Martini* is offline  
Old
10-11-2012, 06:25 PM
  #161
wubwubwubwub
What, Me Worry?
 
wubwubwubwub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 13,172
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martini View Post
No, he isnt. Danault has progressed nicely to the point that he might actually be the second line center the Hawks have coveted offensively to go along with excellent two way play. The Hawks have enough offense the way it is.
I'll preface this by saying that Da Costa as a centrepiece for Sharp is a total joke, but his offensive talent definitely eclipses that of Danault. Da Costa is a pretty brilliant offensive player in the same vein as Spezza or Ribeiro. I think he very well could be a 60 pt 2nd liner who dictates the offense if he hits his peak. Danault could be a good 2nd line C, but he will be one who compliments a top line well. Da Costa, to me, is a guy who is invaluable in a game where your top line isn't producing, because he's a guy who can put up a 2 or 3 point game by himself.

Of course, this is all highly hypothetical, but if both Danault and Da Costa hit their peaks I think Da Costa will be an elite 2nd line C whereas Danault will be just a good one. Of course, Danault can also become an elite #3 whereas Da Costa has no shot.

wubwubwubwub is offline  
Old
10-12-2012, 05:54 AM
  #162
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 26,034
vCash: 500
Quote:
which is much more than anyone could hope for from elite goaltending.
3 good games out of 7 is not elite. Elite gives your team the chance to win almost EVERY game. Luongo hasn't done this. Just think about Game 7 and how he lost all the focus and really had a bad game


Quote:
Originally Posted by MandyAlwaysKnows View Post
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.
Trading Sharp away is always opening a hole. Great teammate, leader and lockerroom presence. Top5 LW in the NHL. Michalek couldn't fill this hole.

Bishop is not better than Crawford. Crawford is not good, but he is better than a guy that had no chance to become Halaks backup BEFORE Elliots great season and now has no chance to take away the starter spot from Anderson. Bishop is a backup at best - maybe in 4-5 years a good #1. This won't help the Hawks

Quote:
Originally Posted by MandyAlwaysKnows View Post
The point is, SDC is much better offensively than Danault/McNeill will ever be. Teravainen is more likely a winger.

Da Costa almost made the team in 2011-12, he's not too far off.
Point is, SDC is not better next season than Krüger or Pirri would be. His ceiling is not higher than McNeills or even Danaults. Hawks had a Top5 offense WITH Krüger being the #2 Center.

How does a player that "almost made the NHL" help a team to win the Cup as soon as possible? Right, it doesn't.

Bubba88 is offline  
Old
10-12-2012, 09:25 AM
  #163
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 12,975
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
If you really think the better way to build a contender is to find replacements for all those players you lost without giving up core pieces, by all means, go ahead. It would certainly cost a lot more than Luongo, though.

And if Hossa is just coming off a concussion, and Franzen is significantly less talented than Luongo, what makes either of them more likely to play longer at a high level?

And how does a NTC make him less safe? If he is unwilling to retire(unlikely) he can be buried in the minors. There's a huge difference between a NTC and NMC.

The rest is simply speculation on what GMs may or may not have offered, for all we know the offer was Bolland+Saad+1st.(and no, Gillis would not neccessarily have "taken it and run" if he was intent on getting a top 6 RW).

In my proposal all teams ended up better, although most Hawks fans were unwilling to deal Kane period, which is understandable.
It's funny, here you dismiss what I said as speculation, and yet your entire post is nothing but speculation. From Luongo's willingness to retire (I don't care what he says now, it'll be different when it actually comes time to hang them up), to what an offer might have been, to what Gillis' response to that hypothetical offer might have been.

I think the best way to make the Hawks a contender again is to keep the core pieces they won the Cup with and fill in better talent around them. Giving up Hossa for Luongo would be directly contrary to that, and I don't think Luongo would make up for the loss of Hossa. We had one of the worst goaltending tandems in the league last year and special teams that were just as bad, and yet it still took the eventual conference finalists a beast mode Mike Smith, 5 OTs, and two absolutely horrendous goals on Crawford to knock us out. It seems to me we don't need an elite goaltender, we need an average one. Guess which one would be cheaper?

If Hossa's concussion is what keeps him from playing in the NHL, then he could be put on LTIR like Pronger or Savard.

Burying contracts might not even be allowed in the next CBA, so that point is on shaky ground. Even if it is, between Huet and Olesz, the Hawks have already lost $13M in burying contracts. Rocky Wirtz might as well have unlimited money, but his business sense is going to stop him from swallowing that pill sooner or later.

If Hawks fans are unwilling to make the deal, you would think they disagree with you about whether it makes their team better.


Last edited by Sevanston: 10-12-2012 at 09:31 AM.
Sevanston is offline  
Old
10-12-2012, 09:40 AM
  #164
Vankiller Whale
#GetJimBinned
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,902
vCash: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston View Post
It's funny, here you dismiss what I said as speculation, and yet your entire post is nothing but speculation. From Luongo's willingness to retire (I don't care what he says now), to what an offer might have been, to what Gillis' response to that hypothetical offer might have been.
I'm simply saying none of us know what people are offering for Luongo. It just seems narrow-minded to say there's no way Luongo could get a good return when he's still an elite player at the most important position in the game.

Quote:
I think the best way to make the Hawks a contender again is to keep the core pieces they won the Cup with and fill in better talent around them. Giving up Hossa for Luongo would be directly contrary to that, and I don't think Luongo would make up for the loss of Hossa. We had one of the worst goaltending tandems in the league last year and special teams that were just as bad, and yet it still took a Mike Smith beast mode, 5 OTs, and two absolutely horrendous goals on Crawford to knock us out. It seems to me we don't need an elite goaltender, we need an average one. Guess which one would be cheaper?
The Phoenix series is a small smaple size, but if you want to go there, why would Chicago lose to the underdog like that? Chicago is far better at every position...except one.

Quote:
Burying contracts might not even be allowed in the next CBA, so that point is on shaky ground. Even if it is, between Huet and Olesz, the Hawks have already lost $13M in burying contracts. Rocky Wirtz might as well have unlimited money, but his business sense is going to stop him from swallowing that pill sooner or later.

If Hossa's concussion is what keeps him from playing in the NHL, then he could be put on LTIR like Pronger or Savard.
Except when if/when that would happen it would be 5+ years in the future. And frankly, I doubt Luongo's pride would let him ride the bus. And you could also probably trade him to Florida, which is a cap floor team, as at that point his salary is much less than his cap hit.

Quote:
If Hawks fans are unwilling to make the deal, you would think they disagree with you about whether it makes their team better.
I think it's more that they love Hossa and despise Luongo, and are also selling short the impact of a goaltender on a team.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-12-2012, 09:48 AM
  #165
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 12,975
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
I'm simply saying none of us know what people are offering for Luongo. It just seems narrow-minded to say there's no way Luongo could get a good return when he's still an elite player at the most important position in the game.
Who's saying that? I'm not.

I'm saying that Hossa is way too good of a return.

Quote:
The Phoenix series is a small smaple size, but if you want to go there, why would Chicago lose to the underdog like that? Chicago is far better at every position...except one.
Do you see me saying that I'm happy with a Crawford-Emery tandem?

We need an improvement in net, but improving to league-average would be enough. There are some (including our GM) who believe Crawford can bounce back to that level. I don't, but giving up the pieces to improve to league-elite would be going too far. Especially if one of those pieces is Marian Hossa.

Quote:
Except when if/when that would happen it would be 5+ years in the future. And frankly, I doubt Luongo's pride would let him ride the bus. And you could also probably trade him to Florida, which is a cap floor team, as at that point his salary is much less than his cap hit.
To take the words right out of your post:

I'm simply saying none of us know

Quote:
I think it's more that they love Hossa and despise Luongo, and are also selling short the impact of a goaltender on a team.
There are a lot of Hawks fans who despise Luongo (who can blame them), but many admit that he'd be a huge improvement over what we have.

I think it's more that they think Luongo's not worth Hossa, and believe we could get a passable improvement without giving him up.

Sevanston is offline  
Old
10-12-2012, 10:06 AM
  #166
DontToewzMeBro
Registered User
 
DontToewzMeBro's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,459
vCash: 500
Stalberg - Toews - Kane
Sharp - Pirri -Hossa
Saad - Bolland - Shaw
Kruger - Boyle - Danault

Keith - Seabrook
Leddy - Hjarlmasson
Oduya - Brookbank

DontToewzMeBro is offline  
Old
10-12-2012, 10:18 AM
  #167
Vankiller Whale
#GetJimBinned
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,902
vCash: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston View Post
Who's saying that? I'm not.

I'm saying that Hossa is way too good of a return.

I get you don't want to trade him. That's fine. I'm only saying valuewise they're similar. Elite players on long contracts, one has a bigger market while the other plays a more important position.

Quote:
Do you see me saying that I'm happy with a Crawford-Emery tandem?

We need an improvement in net, but improving to league-average would be enough. There are some (including our GM) who believe Crawford can bounce back to that level. I don't, but giving up the pieces to improve to league-elite would be going too far. Especially if one of those pieces is Marian Hossa.
I haven't asked for Hossa(in this thread at least). All I've said is that Luongo has similar value to Hossa.

Quote:
To take the words right out of your post:

I'm simply saying none of us know
Exactly. And there's no reason to say Luongo's contract is any worse than Hossa's, both have risks, and both have potential outs.

Quote:
There are a lot of Hawks fans who despise Luongo (who can blame them), but many admit that he'd be a huge improvement over what we have.

I think it's more that they think Luongo's not worth Hossa, and believe we could get a passable improvement without giving him up.
Again, I'm fine with that. The whole reason why this started is because I had Franzen and a late 1st coming back as a return in a 3-way proposal, which I feel is fair value, considering Franzen also has a lifetime contract. I was told Luongo had nowhere near that value. I disagreed.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-12-2012, 10:28 AM
  #168
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 12,975
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
I get you don't want to trade him. That's fine. I'm only saying valuewise they're similar. Elite players on long contracts, one has a bigger market while the other plays a more important position.
They're not of similar value.

That "more important position" generally has less market value. Did you see what Vokoun went for? Or Halak? The returns for both of them were peanuts when compared to their performances.

All of your other points have been specious at best. Generally they try to imply that Luongo's contract is at least as safe as Hossa's for reasons like "goalies last longer" or "they can both be buried." You know, the things that I've been arguing against?

Sevanston is offline  
Old
10-12-2012, 10:39 AM
  #169
Vankiller Whale
#GetJimBinned
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,902
vCash: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston View Post
They're not similar of similar value.

That "more important position" generally has less market value. Did you see what Vokoun went for? Or Halak? The returns for both of them were peanuts when compared to their performances.
Obviously Vokoun's rights were worth peanuts, he was a pending UFA. And Luongo has quite a longer and better track record than Halak. And people still criticize the trade as being a steal for St. Louis.

Quote:
All of your other points have been specious at best. Generally they try to imply that Luongo's contract is at least as safe as Hossa's for reasons like "goalies last longer" or "they can both be buried." You know, the things that I've been arguing against?
Even if you say there's no correlation between the disproportionate amount of goaltenders currently active and well at 35+, certainly you can't say that goalies are any less likely to live up to their contract.

And they can both be buried in the minors, and if for some reason the league decides to give all contracts NMCs to prevent burying in the minors, Hossa is in the dame boat as Luongo, if Hossa is a third line forward on a 5mil+ cap hit, and Luongo is a backup on a 5mil+ cap hit.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-12-2012, 10:46 AM
  #170
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
We're not trading Hossa for Luongo. That is absolute lunacy.

digdug41982 is offline  
Old
10-12-2012, 10:49 AM
  #171
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
The mistake that Vancouver made was signing Schneider longterm before dealing Luongo. Like it or not, that signing cuts into Luongo's value because people know what a mess it would be for Vancouver to have both guys the 3 years at that price. It might not seem like it now, but it will, history has shown this so many times. This situation reminds me of Cujo/Potvin in Toronto. That trade was not pretty for Toronto, good for Vancouver though.

digdug41982 is offline  
Old
10-12-2012, 10:50 AM
  #172
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 12,975
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Obviously Vokoun's rights were worth peanuts, he was a pending UFA. And Luongo has quite a longer and better track record than Halak. And people still criticize the trade as being a steal for St. Louis.
Even as a steal, it still lowers the market value of goalies as a whole.

That's how markets work. You look at comparable situations and what their value was, and base the value you offer off of that. That's why everyone in the neighborhood gets pissed when someone sells their house for way less than perceived market value, because it lowers the value of every comparable house in the neighborhood.

Even if you want to dismiss those, what about Giguere? Seems like a similar situation.

Older veteran (with serious playoff credibility, unlike Lu) announces he doesn't want to backup a younger starter. What does he get? Vesa Toskala and Jason Blake. That is, a nothing between the pipes and a 2nd/3rd line tweener.

Luongo is better than Giguere for sure, but I don't think his record or his talent are so much better as to offset that value to the point of being worth a surefire 1st line RW (who's undoubtedly one of the best in the NHL today).

Quote:
Even if you say there's no correlation between the disproportionate amount of goaltenders currently active and well at 35+, certainly you can't say that goalies are any less likely to live up to their contract.
I'm not. But they aren't any more likely to either, which is what you seem to be saying.

Quote:
And they can both be buried in the minors, and if for some reason the league decides to give all contracts NMCs to prevent burying in the minors, Hossa is in the dame boat as Luongo, if Hossa is a third line forward on a 5mil+ cap hit, and Luongo is a backup on a 5mil+ cap hit.
Hossa as a third line forward still has him on the ice contributing in every game.

Luongo playing 25-40 games and spending the rest on the bench does not.

Sevanston is offline  
Old
10-12-2012, 10:52 AM
  #173
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Actually, now that I think about it, he went to NYI briefly. Nevertheless, should have traded Luongo first as this is a cap world.

digdug41982 is offline  
Old
10-12-2012, 10:57 AM
  #174
Vankiller Whale
#GetJimBinned
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,902
vCash: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
The mistake that Vancouver made was signing Schneider longterm before dealing Luongo. Like it or not, that signing cuts into Luongo's value because people know what a mess it would be for Vancouver to have both guys the 3 years at that price. It might not seem like it now, but it will, history has shown this so many times. This situation reminds me of Cujo/Potvin in Toronto. That trade was not pretty for Toronto, good for Vancouver though.
Before Schneider signed people were saying they don't need Luongo, they'll just offersheet Schneider. Now we have both locked up, and have said we're fine going with both, and Luongo's value goes down even further?

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-12-2012, 11:14 AM
  #175
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
The cap looks like it is going down quite a bit. That's the main problem with having both signed.

digdug41982 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 03:49 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.