HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
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 Lu Thread (MOD WARNING IN OP)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-06-2012, 04:34 PM
  #451
I am the Liquor
Registered User
 
I am the Liquor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,256
vCash: 8345
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
Agreed. And huge difference in performance too.
We'll see where the cap goes but we can easily get under the cap.
How so?

.005 in Sv% is a huge difference in performance? Considering the teams that were in front of each of them the edge probably goes to Dubnyk in that regard.

If Luongo were all that, then the Canucks would be moving Schneider and not Luongo, considering the return would be significantly higher for Schneider because he has upside and isnt saddled with a boat anchor of a contract.

As far as easily getting under the cap, considering many teams will be trying to do the exact same thing at the exact same time, it will be anything but easy.

I am the Liquor is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 04:40 PM
  #452
RealisticLeaf55
Hurt a Smurf
 
RealisticLeaf55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Ottawa, On.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,890
vCash: 2090
Quote:
We need forwards more than defensemen, so Kulemin would make more sense as a starting point(assuming JVR and Lupul are off the table).
Hey, by all means I can respect that. I just thought that defense may have been an issue for Van city (not a big one of course) Kulemin is someone I'd entertain an offer for but he is a hard guy to let go of, Grabovski would not be too forgiving . You sure you don't want to lose a dirty napkin and Luongo's most recent jersey for Gomez?

RealisticLeaf55 is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 04:41 PM
  #453
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,078
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
How so?

.005 in Sv% is a huge difference in performance? Considering the teams that were in front of each of them the edge probably goes to Dubnyk in that regard.

If Luongo were all that, then the Canucks would be moving Schneider and not Luongo, considering the return would be significantly higher for Schneider because he has upside and isnt saddled with a boat anchor of a contract.

As far as easily getting under the cap, considering many teams will be trying to do the exact same thing at the exact same time, it will be anything but easy.
If the return for Schneider were significantly better than Luongo, then I would rather we move him instead. But most teams call him "unproven", so I'm not sure he would garner that much more.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 04:47 PM
  #454
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
How so?

.005 in Sv% is a huge difference in performance? Considering the teams that were in front of each of them the edge probably goes to Dubnyk in that regard.
If Luongo were all that, then the Canucks would be moving Schneider and not Luongo, considering the return would be significantly higher for Schneider because he has upside and isnt saddled with a boat anchor of a contract.

As far as easily getting under the cap, considering many teams will be trying to do the exact same thing at the exact same time, it will be anything but easy.
I'm basing my position on watching Luongo and Dubnyk play. I'd much rather face Dubnyk during the season than Luongo. I see Dubnyk as a below average starter and one of the big holes on the Oilers along with their defence that I don't want to help fill.
As for the cap, I'm quite sceptical that it goes to where you anticipate next year. In fact, I'll bet that we see very modest decreases, if any, given the growth in revenue we've seen every year. The Canucks have most of their key players signed to very friendly long term contracts and are in great shape to pick up some cap casualities if teams do run up against the cap.

vanwest is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 04:50 PM
  #455
New Liskeard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
So if his play diminishes, trade him to a cap floor team like Florida. For the last 4 years of his deal when he makes a fraction of his cap hit, he'd be very appealing as a veteran backup to bring them to the cap floor. And if the new CBA allows part of the salary to be paid by the team trading him( up to 3 mil acc. to last proposal) he becomes even more appealing to cap floor teams.
Why would aquiring a player who's skills are on the decline be advantageous for anyone? This is another, in a long line of reaches for you. If Lou's play drops off, it will not be beneficial for anyone, and he will not be easy to trade. To suggest otherwise is ignorant.

New Liskeard is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 04:56 PM
  #456
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,078
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
Why would aquiring a player who's skills are on the decline be advantageous for anyone? This is another, in a long line of reaches for you. If Lou's play drops off, it will not be beneficial for anyone, and he will not be easy to trade. To suggest otherwise is ignorant.
To reach the cap floor? To acquire a veteran presence with leadership qualities? To acquire a former face of their franchise? Obviously they won't trade the moon for him, but if at 38-39 you decide Luongo is no longer worth it, you could trade him for a 4th rounder or something to Florida. It would be as if he were on a 5-6 year contract, for all practical purposes.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 04:58 PM
  #457
RealisticLeaf55
Hurt a Smurf
 
RealisticLeaf55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Ottawa, On.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,890
vCash: 2090
Quote:
New Liskeard Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale
So if his play diminishes, trade him to a cap floor team like Florida. For the last 4 years of his deal when he makes a fraction of his cap hit, he'd be very appealing as a veteran backup to bring them to the cap floor. And if the new CBA allows part of the salary to be paid by the team trading him( up to 3 mil acc. to last proposal) he becomes even more appealing to cap floor teams.

Why would aquiring a player who's skills are on the decline be advantageous for anyone? This is another, in a long line of reaches for you. If Lou's play drops off, it will not be beneficial for anyone, and he will not be easy to trade. To suggest otherwise is ignorant.
If the leafs took on Giguere's contract, there is bound to be somebody to find value in Luongo's contract. I am a firm believer that although I am hesitant on obtaining Luongo, I have no doubt he will be consistant for atleast another 4 seasons. Personally though, I like my rental goalies so lets let Luongo go home to Florida

RealisticLeaf55 is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 05:00 PM
  #458
ACC1224
Burke was right.
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 28,124
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RealisticLeaf55 View Post
If the leafs took on Giguere's contract, there is bound to be somebody to find value in Luongo's contract. I am a firm believer that although I am hesitant on obtaining Luongo, I have no doubt he will be consistant for atleast another 4 seasons. Personally though, I like my rental goalies so lets let Luongo go home to Florida
4 seasons isn't the problem, it's beyond that.

ACC1224 is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 05:06 PM
  #459
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,078
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACC1224 View Post
4 seasons isn't the problem, it's beyond that.
Again, you can either ask him to retire or trade him to Florida for a pittance, and be happy with the 5ish years of goaltending you've got.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 05:07 PM
  #460
NYVanfan
Registered User
 
NYVanfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACC1224 View Post
4 seasons isn't the problem, it's beyond that.
you mean the 2-3 seasons from age 37-39, before he retires?
doesnt seem like much of a risk

NYVanfan is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 05:09 PM
  #461
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
Why would aquiring a player who's skills are on the decline be advantageous for anyone? This is another, in a long line of reaches for you. If Lou's play drops off, it will not be beneficial for anyone, and he will not be easy to trade. To suggest otherwise is ignorant.
If there's a team having trouble reaching the cap floor getting a back up goalie with a $1.5 or $2 million salary and a $5.5 cap hit would be great value.

vanwest is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 05:10 PM
  #462
ACC1224
Burke was right.
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 28,124
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYVanfan View Post
you mean the 2-3 seasons from age 37-39, before he retires?
doesnt seem like much of a risk
Hopefully by that point they'll need to spend the money elsewhere.

I agree it's worth the risk and why his value is around Bozak + 2nd.

ACC1224 is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 05:11 PM
  #463
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACC1224 View Post
4 seasons isn't the problem, it's beyond that.
Yep. Years 5 and 6 are the big risk for sure. Mind you the way that GM's hand out outrageous contracts during the offseason and at the trade deadline it doesn't look like they worry about 5 years down the road.

vanwest is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 05:15 PM
  #464
ACC1224
Burke was right.
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 28,124
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
Yep. Years 5 and 6 are the big risk for sure. Mind you the way that GM's hand out outrageous contracts during the offseason and at the trade deadline it doesn't look like they worry about 5 years down the road.
Of course the difference being it doesn't cost you any assets to sign someone to an "outrageous contract". To pay a premium to take one on is silly.

ACC1224 is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 05:18 PM
  #465
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACC1224 View Post
Of course the difference being it doesn't cost you any assets to sign someone to an "outrageous contract". To pay a premium to take one on is silly.
Again, I don't see GM's thinking that far down the road. No one that I have read has suggested that the Leafs pay a premium. If there is another goalie with similar qualities to Luongo who they can sign in free agency then they should go for it. I've said repeatedly that, IMO, no such goalie exists. He's as elusive as that mythical number one center.

vanwest is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 05:21 PM
  #466
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,078
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACC1224 View Post
Of course the difference being it doesn't cost you any assets to sign someone to an "outrageous contract". To pay a premium to take one on is silly.
"Premium" and "Bozak + 2nd" don't seem like good fits for each other. 3 decent future pieces for a currently elite goaltender is not a premium either.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 05:56 PM
  #467
CanuckLuck
Registered User
 
CanuckLuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Kelowna, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACC1224 View Post
Of course the difference being it doesn't cost you any assets to sign someone to an "outrageous contract". To pay a premium to take one on is silly.
Luongo probably won't fetch a premium.

That said; Finn, Colbourne and a 1st isn't premium.

That's two 2nd-tier prospects and a mid range 1st.

CanuckLuck is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 06:05 PM
  #468
mstad101
Registered User
 
mstad101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,061
vCash: 500
I love all this arguing about Luo down the road and what may happen. Yet very little said by leaf fans about how small the percentage of prospects actually make the NHL. And even less make a meaningful impact on their team.

If Colbourne is so highly thought of, try and counter with something less asinine than Bozak and a 2nd. If that was the value of Luongo don't you think he'd be wreaking the bud already?

mstad101 is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 06:12 PM
  #469
sniper81
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: toronto
Posts: 1,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstad101 View Post
I love all this arguing about Luo down the road and what may happen. Yet very little said by leaf fans about how small the percentage of prospects actually make the NHL. And even less make a meaningful impact on their team.

If Colbourne is so highly thought of, try and counter with something less asinine than Bozak and a 2nd. If that was the value of Luongo don't you think he'd be wreaking the bud already?
it more or less common sense for us, colborne is the only centre with nhl upside in our system right now.

sniper81 is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 06:16 PM
  #470
ACC1224
Burke was right.
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 28,124
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstad101 View Post
I love all this arguing about Luo down the road and what may happen. Yet very little said by leaf fans about how small the percentage of prospects actually make the NHL. And even less make a meaningful impact on their team.

If Colbourne is so highly thought of, try and counter with something less asinine than Bozak and a 2nd. If that was the value of Luongo don't you think he'd be wreaking the bud already?
Colbourne or Bozak doesn't matter. It's the top prospects and the 1st that is asinine.

FYI - lockout is on

ACC1224 is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 06:28 PM
  #471
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACC1224 View Post
Colbourne or Bozak doesn't matter. It's the top prospects and the 1st that is asinine.

FYI - lockout is on
Thanks but you're a few months late.

vanwest is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 06:31 PM
  #472
Ched Brosky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,872
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACC1224 View Post
Colbourne or Bozak doesn't matter. It's the top prospects and the 1st that is asinine.

FYI - lockout is on
top prospects? aren't Reilly/Kadri/Frattin ur top 3 prospects? so how is it exactly a top prospect let alone plural top prospectS

Ched Brosky is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 06:33 PM
  #473
Ched Brosky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,872
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MastuhNinks View Post
Shows how much you know... Phaneuf is coming off of the best year of his career.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACC1224 View Post
Very, very little if this thread is any indication.
LOL delusional Leafs fans, just because he had a decent year which was his best as a Leaf (which says very little since his previous years were horrible) does NOT mean its a career year. Its not even his 2nd best year. You know he had a season where he was a finalist for the Norris right? One would think that would be his best year in his career no?

It was his 5th maybe 4th best year. Not a good year considering its 5 out of 7 and the other 2 it beat out were just horrible

Its sad that I know more about the captain of your favorite team than you guys do...on top of that you guys try to play it off as if I know nothing LOL


Last edited by Ched Brosky: 11-06-2012 at 06:41 PM.
Ched Brosky is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 06:35 PM
  #474
eyeball11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,924
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imagine17 View Post
If he declines then you trade him (clause in year 5 & 7 I believe to do so) or you dump him in the minors. Luongo has a NTC not a NMC so if he does decline you stick him in the minors & he likely retires. After making all that money he won't want to ride the busses in the AHL.



Its funny the majority of people who claim Luongo has a bad contract don't have the full understanding of how it works & that in fact cap circumvention contracts aren't bad!
Are you aware there's a proposal in the CBA that would see salaries over $100,000 in the AHL counting towards the cap?

eyeball11 is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 06:42 PM
  #475
mstad101
Registered User
 
mstad101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACC1224 View Post
Colbourne or Bozak doesn't matter. It's the top prospects and the 1st that is asinine.

FYI - lockout is on
Thanks genius. Maybe next you can tell me water is wet and ice cream is bad for your weight.

Again like every single other poster has said, what top prospect? I see secondary prospects who have very marginal NHL upside and a mediocre pick that could become an even lesse pick.

So please keep trying to convince me how a top quality tender is worth such little pieces.

mstad101 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 10:09 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.