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.

The All Purpose Luongo Thread (MOD WARNING IN OP)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-27-2012, 12:00 AM
  #826
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,743
vCash: 50
I do think that in any further discussions around Luongo, we should have a nice list of examples of arguments we've had. I'd never ask a mod or someone else to take this on, but CBA stuff affecting value, Luongo being "forced out" or Vancouver being "forced to trade" him, how the life contract has no benefit and is all bad, etc., have all been done ad nauseum.

And I think Canucks fans are starting to learn that the Kessels, Riellys and Gardiners are off limits, Burke isn't 100% fired if he doesn't make this trade, and what Toronto is doing in terms of rebuilding or competing is subjective and isn't concrete or following a set guide, but we'd better include that too.

Cogburn is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 12:09 AM
  #827
DaveT83*
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,760
vCash: 500
If the rumors of Bozak being the CENTREPIECE are true - what does Centerpiece mean to you?
IMO that mean's he's the best player offered.

DaveT83* is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 12:11 AM
  #828
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,483
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveT83 View Post
If the rumors of Bozak being the CENTREPIECE are true - what does Centerpiece mean?
It means Cox heard of Gillis' demand for Gardiner, 1st, Frattin, Bozak, and decided to use the least valuable piece as a centrepiece in his speculation to cater to Toronto readers.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 12:19 AM
  #829
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,743
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveT83 View Post
If the rumors of Bozak being the CENTREPIECE are true - what does Centerpiece mean to you?
IMO that mean's he's the best player offered.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
It means Cox heard of Gillis' demand for Gardiner, 1st, Frattin, Bozak, and decided to use the least valuable piece as a centrepiece in his speculation to cater to Toronto readers.
This is what I'm feeling. Bozak is an alright piece, we need a third line center, but in no way is he enough to carry other, lesser pieces for a star goaltender.

If he is a center piece, thats a start.

If he is the roster player coming back, with prospects, then super, but the usual assortment of Blacker/Biggs/Finn/Ashton doesn't do it for me.

Cogburn is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 12:36 AM
  #830
Numbers
Registered User
 
Numbers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,066
vCash: 500
Bozak, Frattin, Cobourne, Ashton/Finn/Biggs

This deal is taking one player from full time roster last year. 3 prospect players who are not top prospects by any means and do not come close to selling the farm. Colbourne is highest rated at 7.5C on hockey's future, the rest are 7.0C

Numbers is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 01:21 AM
  #831
Back in 94
In Gillis I trust
 
Back in 94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TieClark View Post
Because he's not fine... he's just being a professional. Ovechkin, even if he's playing like **** isn't going to sit around Washington and get 15 minutes a night with limited PP time because he's a star. Similarly, an aging Luongo isn't going to sit around playing 30-40 games and be perfectly happy.
You're right, he's not going to be perfectly happy. But how exactly is this situation a disaster? Luongo has been very professional throughout the summer and lockout, he's good friends with Schneider, a great teammate, and a former captain. He has shown no signs of being a cancer in the Canucks locker room.

This whole disaster argument is complete BS created by opposing team fans trying to lower Luongos trade value.

Back in 94 is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 04:50 AM
  #832
Man Bear Pig
Registered User
 
Man Bear Pig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 8,929
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
It means Cox heard of Gillis' demand for Gardiner, 1st, Frattin, Bozak, and decided to use the least valuable piece as a centrepiece in his speculation to cater to Toronto readers.
Despite popular belief, Cox really doesn't come off like a Leafs fan. Yes, he writes for a paper here but that's about it. He's an idiot tbh. I also believe it was Shannon who reported Bozak as the centerpiece, no? Shannon is honestly my most disliked character in the Toronto media. That guy will flip his opinion at the drop of a hat. Reminds me of a politician.

Man Bear Pig is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 07:42 AM
  #833
NYVanfan
Registered User
 
NYVanfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperJayMann View Post
Most goalies retire before or around their mid 30's, very few have played to 40 and beyond. Like you say, there is no reason to believe his skills will suddenly disappear any time soon. But, there is no reason to believe he will have the longevity to fulfill his contract. Since 1885 only seven goalies have played to the age of 42, if Vancouver eats retirement years then Luongo will be traded for more value than what has been proposed on this board. If not, I'm afraid Canuck fans will be disappointed with the return.

Either way it'll be interesting to see what happens.
right, and thx for looking that up

but he doesnt need to play til 42. Just 38-39 and that's 5-6 more years of elite or near-elite play. It's a cheater contract, and that's a bonus. All the more so for an acquiring team if the CBA renders it such that the canucks are on the hook for the retirement caphit.

My point is that history shows that with a keeper who has put up the career #s he has to this point, that's a safe bet, so it's disingenuous (or at least arguing the highly unlikely) to say that an acquiring team would be 'saddled' long term with a low-value caphit.

But of course, I understand the motivation, to validate the lowballs...


Last edited by NYVanfan: 10-27-2012 at 08:06 AM.
NYVanfan is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 09:22 AM
  #834
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Speaking of the Giguere trade, Jason Blake was a 60-point forward at the time of the trade.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LEAFS FAN 4 EVER View Post
Prior to Toronto adding Phaneuf if anyone here proposed that trade with Matt Stajan, Ian White, Jamal Mayers & Niklas Hagman everyone would said there is no chance Calgary trades him for those players.
Stats for players in the Phaneuf trade at the time of the trade:

To Calgary
F Matt Stajan 55 GP, 16-25-41, -3
F Niklas Hagman 55 GP, 20-13-33, -3
F Jamal Mayers 44 GP, 2-6-8, -5
D Ian White 56 GP, 9-17-26, +1

To Toronto
F Fredrik Sjostrom 46 GP, 1-5-6, 2
D Dion Phaneuf 55 GP, 10-12-22, 3
D Keith Aulie

Stajan was coming off of a 55-point season, Hagman had just had 22-20-42 in 65 the year before, and 27-14-41 in 82 the year before that. White was in his fourth season, with production of 26, 21, 26 at that point. Phaneuf's previous three were 50, 60, 47.

The trade was fair (if not in Calgary's favor) based on the assets as they were at the time. Calgary simply mismanaged them afterwards.

It's basically like this:

Mayers=Sjostrom

White<Phaneuf

Stajan>Aulie

Hagman>nothing

Hagman easily cancels out the difference between White and Phaneuf. Calgary was able to deal Phaneuf and Aulie because they had guys like Giordano and Brodie coming up, and Bouwmeester on the roster. That trade wouldn't be made today. Phaneuf would likely be shopped for a better center than Stajan in a 1-1 deal. But that's due to team needs, not because of player quality. Phaneuf to Philly for Briere (or Phaneuf+ for Giroux?)would be a great deal if Calgary still had him.

Quote:
As for Giguere it was obvious Jonas Hiller was the Ducks #1 Goalie and they didn't want to pay Giguere all that $ to be their back up, so Burke was able to give them Vesa Toskala and Jason Blake who Toronto fans weren't happy with.
Toronto fans weren't happy with Larry Murphy either. Fans in Detroit didn't mind him too much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post
But this isn't a "cap mistake". His cap hit is far lower then it should be because of the type of contract.

Also, he hasn't worn out his welcome, and he isn't someone that's been mired in rumours for multiple seasons like either Phaneuf or Giguere.

And the Phaneuf, Aulie, what ever else, weren't being sold super cheaply at the time. White was highly regarded, and I would argue is still a valuable asset. Hagman was seen as a 20+ goal scorer
Hagman had 20 goals and 33 points in 55 games at the time of the trade, and it was his third consecutive 20-goal season. He wasn't "seen" as one. He WAS one. He was also very good defensively.

Quote:
I recall him hitting 30 the year prior to the trade, Mayers was a space filler and played a role while he was with the Flames, Stajan...well Calgary thought a hell of a lot more of him then I did, signing him to a contract before more then a few games were played.
Stajan was coming off of a 55-point season and had 41 in 55 at the time of the deal, finishing with a career-high 57 points. He's also strong defensively and good on faceofffs. That's how he ended up in a checking role. Last season he played some time on the top line and showed that he's still perfectly capable of playing the scoring center role; some Flames fans think he may end up centering Iggy and Cammalleri, instead of Cammy filling that spot with Tanguay on the left side.

Quote:
Luongo+prospect for Bozak (vs. Stajan),
Stajan wins by a decent margin at both ends and on they're about equal on faceoffs. Bozak is a bit more physical, but it doesn't make up the difference. Similar players in most respects though; both are good two-way all-around second-line centers.

Quote:
Franson/Gunnarsson (vs. White), Kulemin (vs. Hagman) and Frattin/Brown (vs. Mayers). It's not a perfect proxy, I feel White beats the two defenders mentioned
By a fair margin.

Quote:
and Kulemin beats Hagman in terms of value
Only due to age. Hagman was a significantly better player.

Quote:
but none the less, an approximate trade is possible on this basis, and Leafs fans and many other think that Calgary got robbed.

I'm not saying I'd do that, but c'mon. How is it blind robbery of one potential star (younger but already declining), and overpayment for another (older but consistent as get out)?
Easy. Neither trade is overpayment.

pdd is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 09:37 AM
  #835
Numbers
Registered User
 
Numbers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,066
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Stats for players in the Phaneuf trade at the time of the trade:

To Calgary
F Matt Stajan 55 GP, 16-25-41, -3
F Niklas Hagman 55 GP, 20-13-33, -3
F Jamal Mayers 44 GP, 2-6-8, -5
D Ian White 56 GP, 9-17-26, +1

To Toronto
F Fredrik Sjostrom 46 GP, 1-5-6, 2
D Dion Phaneuf 55 GP, 10-12-22, 3
D Keith Aulie

Stajan was coming off of a 55-point season, Hagman had just had 22-20-42 in 65 the year before, and 27-14-41 in 82 the year before that. White was in his fourth season, with production of 26, 21, 26 at that point. Phaneuf's previous three were 50, 60, 47.

The trade was fair (if not in Calgary's favor) based on the assets as they were at the time. Calgary simply mismanaged them afterwards.

It's basically like this:

Mayers=Sjostrom

White<Phaneuf

Stajan>Aulie

Hagman>nothing

Hagman easily cancels out the difference between White and Phaneuf. Calgary was able to deal Phaneuf and Aulie because they had guys like Giordano and Brodie coming up, and Bouwmeester on the roster. That trade wouldn't be made today. Phaneuf would likely be shopped for a better center than Stajan in a 1-1 deal. But that's due to team needs, not because of player quality. Phaneuf to Philly for Briere (or Phaneuf+ for Giroux?)would be a great deal if Calgary still had him.



Toronto fans weren't happy with Larry Murphy either. Fans in Detroit didn't mind him too much.



Hagman had 20 goals and 33 points in 55 games at the time of the trade, and it was his third consecutive 20-goal season. He wasn't "seen" as one. He WAS one. He was also very good defensively.



Stajan was coming off of a 55-point season and had 41 in 55 at the time of the deal, finishing with a career-high 57 points. He's also strong defensively and good on faceofffs. That's how he ended up in a checking role. Last season he played some time on the top line and showed that he's still perfectly capable of playing the scoring center role; some Flames fans think he may end up centering Iggy and Cammalleri, instead of Cammy filling that spot with Tanguay on the left side.



Stajan wins by a decent margin at both ends and on they're about equal on faceoffs. Bozak is a bit more physical, but it doesn't make up the difference. Similar players in most respects though; both are good two-way all-around second-line centers.



By a fair margin.



Only due to age. Hagman was a significantly better player.



Easy. Neither trade is overpayment.
That is nice of you to break down the trade, but lets try to stay on topic. How does this relate to Luongo? The type of pieces in this trade are not what Vancouver are interested in. They do not need a slew of roster players. They need 1 or 2 good roster pieces, and futures. Optimally a high end roster piece would be great, but lets not get ahead of ourselves. So do you have a proposal to shared based on this?

Numbers is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 10:35 AM
  #836
Nuck This
Registered User
 
Nuck This's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,035
vCash: 500
If Bozak is the "centerpiece" do you honestly think Gillis would trade him for that. I'd way rather keep him until the trade deadline, when other teams who think they have the goaltending position shored up...don't. There will be more suitors when that time comes and more opportunity for better assets coming our way. I think Leafs fans will be shocked when they see what they had to give up.

Nuck This is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 10:50 AM
  #837
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,757
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerRoeper View Post
We keep hearing this argument but I think gms do worry about it.

Besides, if you're a money-losing team (and reportedly the majority of NHL teams are), why do you want Luongo, who makes more money than his cap hit until he's 40?
Likely because he's the most valuable asset available in terms of helping teams win.

When a team line CBJ or TB makes the the playoffs, their attendance goes up a couple thousand per game. That's a lot of money.

If Luongo was a UFA, I bet he'd have no problem getting a 6 year deal at $7 million per season. So I'd speculate that there's value in his contact.

DJOpus is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 10:53 AM
  #838
TMI
Mod Supervisor
 
TMI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Posts: 43,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
Likely because he's the most valuable asset available in terms of helping teams win.

When a team line CBJ or TB makes the the playoffs, their attendance goes up a couple thousand per game. That's a lot of money.

If Luongo was a UFA, I bet he'd have no problem getting a 6 year deal at $7 million per season. So I'd speculate that there's value in his contact.
Does Tampa Bay's attendance go up by a couple of thousand when they make the playoffs? They didn't make the playoffs last year, yet their building was 96% full for the season. Their attendance couldn't jump by a couple of thousand unless they played in an NFL stadium.

TMI is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 11:08 AM
  #839
TieClark
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,050
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Back in 94 View Post
You're right, he's not going to be perfectly happy. But how exactly is this situation a disaster? Luongo has been very professional throughout the summer and lockout, he's good friends with Schneider, a great teammate, and a former captain. He has shown no signs of being a cancer in the Canucks locker room.

This whole disaster argument is complete BS created by opposing team fans trying to lower Luongos trade value.
He hasn't shown signs to this point. When the season goes longer and longer and he's barely playing as a veteran goalie with not many years left at his regular level of play chances are he's going to get pissed and start saying **** in post game interviews that sparks distraction. Phil kessel once said "it's not working out here" in relation to the way the team was going and media went nuts saying he wanted out of Toronto. That's the kind of stuff that will be happening all year long.

Opposing teams didn't make this up. The actual people involved started all of it by using horrible asset management

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColePens View Post
I know we've been here before and I'm growing tired of warnings. We had a 30+ thread for Lu shut down due to this type of bickering. I want to keep this thread going for great conversation. If we cannot agree, simply move on.

Please keep it civil so we can keep this thread open.
I'm not sure why you're getting worried about this thread... Since last night there has been solid debate going both ways without name calling or anything like that.

TieClark is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 11:32 AM
  #840
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,857
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThirdManIn View Post
Does Tampa Bay's attendance go up by a couple of thousand when they make the playoffs? They didn't make the playoffs last year, yet their building was 96% full for the season. Their attendance couldn't jump by a couple of thousand unless they played in an NFL stadium.
It's not as much about their attendance going up during the regular season (in the short-term at least), but about playoff games. That's the money maker for every NHL team. Luongo's salary is paid by going through a round of the playoffs. Playoffs generate more revenue then regular season, and player contracts are all paid out by then.

Not to mention the long-term impact that this has on not only attendance but merchandise sales and general overall spending that happens in markets with winning teams, opposed to losing ones.

NFITO is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 12:23 PM
  #841
Ho Borvat
Registered User
 
Ho Borvat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,605
vCash: 500
Interesting thought,

How come Canuks fans crucify Kadri for being out of shape, yet Gillis traded for an out of shape Kassian and we didnt seem to care too much?

Ho Borvat is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 12:28 PM
  #842
TieClark
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,050
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kack zassian View Post
Interesting thought,

How come Canuks fans crucify Kadri for being out of shape, yet Gillis traded for an out of shape Kassian and we didnt seem to care too much?
Not to mention nobody said he was out of shape...

TieClark is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 12:40 PM
  #843
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,303
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TieClark View Post
Not to mention nobody said he was out of shape...

What did Eakins say again?

Also, have you taken a look at my Dreger reference about CBJ being involved it talks? This should satisfy your requirements.


The speculation about _only_ TO and FLA should not persist beyond this point, per our criteria. Agreed?

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 12:47 PM
  #844
NYVanfan
Registered User
 
NYVanfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Stats for players in the Phaneuf trade at the time of the trade:

To Calgary
F Matt Stajan 55 GP, 16-25-41, -3
F Niklas Hagman 55 GP, 20-13-33, -3
F Jamal Mayers 44 GP, 2-6-8, -5
D Ian White 56 GP, 9-17-26, +1

To Toronto
F Fredrik Sjostrom 46 GP, 1-5-6, 2
D Dion Phaneuf 55 GP, 10-12-22, 3
D Keith Aulie

Stajan was coming off of a 55-point season, Hagman had just had 22-20-42 in 65 the year before, and 27-14-41 in 82 the year before that. White was in his fourth season, with production of 26, 21, 26 at that point. Phaneuf's previous three were 50, 60, 47.

The trade was fair (if not in Calgary's favor) based on the assets as they were at the time. Calgary simply mismanaged them afterwards.

It's basically like this:

Mayers=Sjostrom

White<Phaneuf

Stajan>Aulie

Hagman>nothing

Hagman easily cancels out the difference between White and Phaneuf. Calgary was able to deal Phaneuf and Aulie because they had guys like Giordano and Brodie coming up, and Bouwmeester on the roster. That trade wouldn't be made today. Phaneuf would likely be shopped for a better center than Stajan in a 1-1 deal. But that's due to team needs, not because of player quality. Phaneuf to Philly for Briere (or Phaneuf+ for Giroux?)would be a great deal if Calgary still had him.



Toronto fans weren't happy with Larry Murphy either. Fans in Detroit didn't mind him too much.



Hagman had 20 goals and 33 points in 55 games at the time of the trade, and it was his third consecutive 20-goal season. He wasn't "seen" as one. He WAS one. He was also very good defensively.



Stajan was coming off of a 55-point season and had 41 in 55 at the time of the deal, finishing with a career-high 57 points. He's also strong defensively and good on faceofffs. That's how he ended up in a checking role. Last season he played some time on the top line and showed that he's still perfectly capable of playing the scoring center role; some Flames fans think he may end up centering Iggy and Cammalleri, instead of Cammy filling that spot with Tanguay on the left side.



Stajan wins by a decent margin at both ends and on they're about equal on faceoffs. Bozak is a bit more physical, but it doesn't make up the difference. Similar players in most respects though; both are good two-way all-around second-line centers.



By a fair margin.



Only due to age. Hagman was a significantly better player.



Easy. Neither trade is overpayment.

Not sure what your point is, but the Phaneuf trade is a good cautionary reminder to canuck fans -- we dont want to trade a star for a bunch of spare parts

NYVanfan is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 12:48 PM
  #845
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,743
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Hagman had 20 goals and 33 points in 55 games at the time of the trade, and it was his third consecutive 20-goal season. He wasn't "seen" as one. He WAS one. He was also very good defensively.

Stajan was coming off of a 55-point season and had 41 in 55 at the time of the deal, finishing with a career-high 57 points. He's also strong defensively and good on faceofffs. That's how he ended up in a checking role. Last season he played some time on the top line and showed that he's still perfectly capable of playing the scoring center role; some Flames fans think he may end up centering Iggy and Cammalleri, instead of Cammy filling that spot with Tanguay on the left side.

Stajan wins by a decent margin at both ends and on they're about equal on faceoffs. Bozak is a bit more physical, but it doesn't make up the difference. Similar players in most respects though; both are good two-way all-around second-line centers.

By a fair margin.

Only due to age. Hagman was a significantly better player.

Easy. Neither trade is overpayment.
So I can take it from your analysis of my comments, you agree and seem to think I didn't make a big enough deal about the pieces in question. I apparently remember them being slightly worse then they were.

My point is strengthened.

As for relating this to Luongo, if these same pieces were offered for Luongo, Canucks fans would still claim its an underpayment, which I feel it is, but Toronto fans seem to think it cost them the moon, the stars and all the other lights in the sky.

Cogburn is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 01:08 PM
  #846
BigMacJokinen
Registered User
 
BigMacJokinen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 336
vCash: 500
Vancouver can't end up winning this trade I think. This is at least if Bozak is the best player they get in a trade, and get no high-level prospect. Of course it's for sure that no player they get back will be going to be as good player Luongo is now (while hard to compare goaltenders and players).

Vancouver can however benefit from a few things, such as getting more capspace and getting more depth. So maybe I was too hasty saying that they can't win this trade, however what I'm trying to say is that if a team can get Luongo with the best player being a caliber of Bozak - this will be huge win for the team getting him. I think it's not a good moment trading him and teams realize that Vancouver does have some pressure to trade him.

Maybe a bit offtopic but I still believe trading Cory Schneider would be the way to go. You can get more of an impact player back for him and Luongo would still carry for the Vancouver cup window before the Sedins decline too much. Without Sedins, I don't feel that Canucks can be a cup contender, borderline playoff team seems more possible. And then Canuks still has Lack being a possibility of being a nice goaltender in the future too.

BigMacJokinen is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 01:16 PM
  #847
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,743
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacJokinen View Post
Vancouver can't end up winning this trade I think. This is at least if Bozak is the best player they get in a trade, and get no high-level prospect. Of course it's for sure that no player they get back will be going to be as good player Luongo is now (while hard to compare goaltenders and players).

Vancouver can however benefit from a few things, such as getting more capspace and getting more depth. So maybe I was too hasty saying that they can't win this trade, however what I'm trying to say is that if a team can get Luongo with the best player being a caliber of Bozak - this will be huge win for the team getting him. I think it's not a good moment trading him and teams realize that Vancouver does have some pressure to trade him.

Maybe a bit offtopic but I still believe trading Cory Schneider would be the way to go. You can get more of an impact player back for him and Luongo would still carry for the Vancouver cup window before the Sedins decline too much. Without Sedins, I don't feel that Canucks can be a cup contender, borderline playoff team seems more possible. And then Canuks still has Lack being a possibility of being a nice goaltender in the future too.
Cap space means nothing, at the time, if we can't use it.

Trading Schneider makes more sense to me, tbh, but it's tough...he's the first goalie pegged to be a number one for a long time that we've ever drafted and developed.

As for the Sedins, they do give us an offensive angle we don't otherwise have (two 100+ point scoring Hart/Lindsay and Art Ross winners does that), but they seem to be the only players that don't fit the commitment to defense the other players must adhere to. They're not gone yet though

Cogburn is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 01:31 PM
  #848
DaveT83*
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,760
vCash: 500
Torontos best Offensive Prospect is Nazim Kadri - who in 4 years has not been able to crack the NHL's 5th worst lineup. This should be very telling as to the state/affairs of Toronto's organizational depth.

Vancouver fans should be reminded that Toronto simply cannot afford to offer much more than spare parts for Luongo. Nobody is trying to be rude - or undermine Lou's value.

DaveT83* is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 01:38 PM
  #849
RogerRoeper*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 21,694
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveT83 View Post
Torontos best Offensive Prospect is Nazim Kadri - who in 4 years has not been able to crack the NHL's 5th worst lineup. This should be very telling as to the state/affairs of Toronto's organizational depth.

Vancouver fans should be reminded that Toronto simply cannot afford to offer much more than spare parts for Luongo. Nobody is trying to be rude - or undermine Lou's value.
Florida has perhaps the best prospect depth and they don't seem interested in giving any plum prospects for Luongo. So apparently this isn't an issue of Toronto having nothing to offer to get Luongo.

RogerRoeper* is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 01:47 PM
  #850
worraps
Acceptance
 
worraps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,642
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post
Cap space means nothing, at the time, if we can't use it.

Trading Schneider makes more sense to me, tbh, but it's tough...he's the first goalie pegged to be a number one for a long time that we've ever drafted and developed.

As for the Sedins, they do give us an offensive angle we don't otherwise have (two 100+ point scoring Hart/Lindsay and Art Ross winners does that), but they seem to be the only players that don't fit the commitment to defense the other players must adhere to. They're not gone yet though
Retaining Luongo and trading Schneider would have been the best strategy for the Canucks to pursue at last season's trade deadline. Luongo will play sufficiently well through the rest of the Canucks window to win them a Cup and Schneider has a lot more trade value (age and contract). Sadly for Vancouver that ship has sailed.

As soon as AV started Schneider over Luongo when the chips were down in the Kings series, Vancouver became a toxic environment for Luongo. He has to go.

worraps 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 03:16 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.