HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Luongo Thread: Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For (Mod Warning in OP)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-09-2012, 11:08 PM
  #326
mstad101
Registered User
 
mstad101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,106
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucbourdon View Post
I would take kadri is a heart beat, he clearly hates toronto.

This kid has very top end talent, but has some huge issues with charecter, and fitness.

I think there is something behind the scenes going on with this kid and toronto.
This makes me believe he is the exact opposite of what Gillis likes to target with his acquisitions.
Booth was known to have a good work ethic but lacked on ice performance after a concussion and extended amount of time away from the rink. Yet one thig always remained was that he worked hard and gave everything on the ice.

If Kadri isn't playing up to snuff for the Marlies because he doesn't wanna be there or is unhappy not being in the NHL. Than I would not care to acquire him, he may have the talent to be an NHL player one day, if he lacks the drive and character I don't think giving up our best tradable asset for him as the main piece coming back.

mstad101 is offline  
Old
11-09-2012, 11:20 PM
  #327
SunshineRays
Registered User
 
SunshineRays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 864
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
FLA's on the fence IMO. They would first have to see what their goaltending looks like this year. Only then will their level of interest be clear.

They got good goaltending during the regular season last year, but then I can't see how they were too impressed by it in the playoffs.
I'm guessing it's more than that. Tallon publicly stated they couldn't afford to pay Garrison the $$ he got w/ Vancouver ($27M+). He was their top 2 defenseman. Yet, they got approval from ownership to go after a $40+M contract (Luongo) when they are already secure with that position? It doesn't make any sense. They clearly need or want Luongo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by I in the Eye View Post
It's clear to see those who "need" Luongo... But not as clear to see those who "want" Luongo... Given that many purchasing decisions are made without consciously weighing the pro's and con's in a balance sheet, I'd bet that there are more teams (potentially any team that doesn't have a top 5 goalie) then what most fans speculate who are in the market for Luongo...

Do people not buy things, expensive things, out of pure "want"? Why all the focus on strict, survival "need"?

Who wouldn't "want" a top 5 goaltender? Out of those teams who would "want" one, there only needs to really be one or two who "really wants" one to make substantial deals...

I am not concerned at all about there being a market for Luongo... IMO, it's a question of the best time to deal Luongo, given all the factors...

Luongo is going to Florida... If not Florida, some place that hasn't really been considered... That's my prediction...
Great explanation. I've been trying to say this for some time.

I read a good article about spending after the last lockout. Owners had more $$ and were projecting more $$ down the road due to the new CBA. They went on a spending spree. I project something similar after a new CBA, though it's not finalized. Luongo is an upgrade on 20 of 30 teams. He brings marketability, stability and the ability to draw free agents. All those factors will bring *more teams to the yard* after the lockout once owners finally get more $$ in their pockets - and they know for sure what the landscape is.

I'm not concerned about the market either. Like you, I'm concerned about 'timing' of trade. Also concerned about what Gillis 'considers' good player return. After the Booth trade, Ballard trade, Oreskovich and Gragnani as 'musts' in a package - I'm concerned their player scouting is garbage. After hearing Bozaks name as a target, I'm a little freaked out.

SunshineRays is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 12:31 AM
  #328
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,303
vCash: 500
^ The pro scouting definitely has me cautious as well. I don't like hearing names like Bozak being considered, but then nothing has happened yet so who knows?

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 12:42 AM
  #329
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,303
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Do you have any links to those? I'd never heard of those rumours before.

You can read up on it on the LeafsNation message board in older Lu threads. I'm not too inclined to hunt these older rumours down at this point...

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 12:59 AM
  #330
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,717
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
Are you valuing Gardiner as a blue chip sure fire #1 defenseman or valuing Luongo as a goalie who isn't that good any more? Otherwise your comment makes no sense at all.
What does projects to be a #2 mean? Why would a team think of him in that way? Much like us with Edler, he's their shot at a franchise defensemen. He's not "sure fire", just like Edler isn't, doesn't mean you trade that potential.

They have a defensemen that turned 22 in July who put up 30 points as a 21 year old rookie pro. He's long and he skates really well. You don't trade players like that imo, definitely not for 33 year old goalies.

Scurr is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 01:07 AM
  #331
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,717
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
No, this is perfect. Kadri and Colborne are prime targets to be moved, and they're hurting their own value. Which makes them "cheaper" to acquire. A true buy low state.


I've been thinking about this and _if_ it came down to Bozak + Frattin or Colborne + Kadri, the former actually having NHL pedigree, I'd prefer Colborne + Kadri. Assume more risk in the deal for the chance of a greater upside.


Colborne steps into the 3C position right now, and Kadri can be on the RW, where Frattin would have been. It just makes too much sense for these two, more mature prospects, to be dealt IMO.
So instead of taking the guy producing in the NHL and the other guy that lit up the AHL we'll take the guys not producing anywhere? Interesting.

Are you talking about Colborne and Kadri stepping into our lineup?

Scurr is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 01:08 AM
  #332
Pseudonymous
Registered User
 
Pseudonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,498
vCash: 500
was gardiner always listed at 6'2.. i seem to remember him being listed at 6 foot the last time i checked which wasn't that long ago.

also when i go over the list of big name D's in the league, how many aren't strong/physical? Even hamhuis lays out big hip checks.

When a player lacks a big frame or a physical game, i find it hard to get as high on a young D man

keith comes to mind but not many like that and keith skates like the wind

hes also playing 21+ min a night, because hes on a lousy toronto team, given great minutes

i think there are alot of young players who would put up more pts if they got to play that much


Last edited by Pseudonymous: 11-10-2012 at 01:17 AM.
Pseudonymous is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 01:10 AM
  #333
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,717
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudonymous01 View Post
also when i go over the list of big name D's in the league, how many aren't strong/physical? Even hamhuis lays out big hip checks.
Good thing for the Leafs Gardiner is 6'2" then? Not too many defensemen make it to the league at all at 21, he's got some time to fill out.


Last edited by Scurr: 11-10-2012 at 01:16 AM.
Scurr is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 01:18 AM
  #334
Pseudonymous
Registered User
 
Pseudonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Good thing for the Leafs Gardiner is 6'2" then? Not too many defensemen make it to the league at all at 21, he's got some time to fill out.
Its not his size, its his style of play, from what ive heard, he isn't that type of D.

I could be wrong, this is just what ive been told, i didn't watch him outside of the NHL

Either way im sure hes going to be good but when you show nothign from the physical edge to your game, nor play very physical, you need to put up numbers and hes doing that, theres nothign special about him, he could simply be maturing quickly and his offense doesn't go past this and then he simply brings nothing its not like he can play more than the minutes hes paying, hes already great minutes and alot of them.

alot of players come into the league and do well the first year cuz people dont know the player, beginners luck, theyre proving themselves, they dont get the toughest competition sometimes, nobody takes them as serious on the ice, then the next year, they take a step back . id like to see another full year from him to even think of him as this untouchable prospect people make him out to be. it'd need to be another pretty good jump in offense if thats what hes going to be is a smart offensive D

i dont know, im just saying that this guy is far from a sure fire top pairing d, actually i think hes just a good prospect. this guy is going to have to get REAL DAMN GOOD to be a player that relies on offense and smartness. this isn't a 6'2 physical D who punishes players, if that guy put up 30 pts in his first year, thats huge

truthfully, out of all the trade proposals, i like hemsky + mps.. but thats because im higher on MPS than alot of people around here and i think we can get him and someone else thats good because his stock is so low BUTTT there prob wont be a trade with edmonton so i guess its kind of moot

trading luongo for a prospect d without a real physical game, meh. our D are already too passive for me. all we need is more Chris Tanev's. hah Chris Tanev is good but its the same thing, he'll never be that good because he doesn't have that in his game


Last edited by Pseudonymous: 11-10-2012 at 01:54 AM.
Pseudonymous is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 01:54 AM
  #335
Socratic Method Man
Weise's Lost Lunch
 
Socratic Method Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,666
vCash: 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Good thing for the Leafs Gardiner is 6'2" then? Not too many defensemen make it to the league at all at 21, he's got some time to fill out.
Scurr, I'm curious where you learned this from, and how sure you are about this? Because I've seen Gardiner listed everywhere from 6'0 - 6'2, but I remember readinhg an article, which seemed to be a fairly credible source, that said Gardiner is 6'0.5.

This also makes sense because he's listed at 184 lbs or less on hockeydb, nhl.com, ahl.com, and hfboards. If he were 6'2, then 184 lbs would be really skinny. And Jake doesn't look that skinny. So around 6'0 seems to make more sense to me all things considered.

Socratic Method Man is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 02:03 AM
  #336
Pseudonymous
Registered User
 
Pseudonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Socratic Method Man View Post
Scurr, I'm curious where you learned this from, and how sure you are about this? Because I've seen Gardiner listed everywhere from 6'0 - 6'2, but I remember readinhg an article, which seemed to be a fairly credible source, that said Gardiner is 6'0.5.

This also makes sense because he's listed at 184 lbs or less on hockeydb, nhl.com, ahl.com, and hfboards. If he were 6'2, then 184 lbs would be really skinny. And Jake doesn't look that skinny. So around 6'0 seems to make more sense to me all things considered.
Yeah I agree

he got it from the official maple leafs site

http://mapleleafs.nhl.com/club/player.htm?id=8474581

says 6'2 but all other sites say the same weight and 6 foot

watching some highlights, he appears to be similar height as Clarke MacArthur who is 6 foot.. ill give him 6'1 at the very most considering hes clearly shorter than guys listed at 6'2 and he stands close to as tall as stamkos when they had a little girly fight

so 6'0.5 makes the most sense


Last edited by Pseudonymous: 11-10-2012 at 02:15 AM.
Pseudonymous is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 02:42 AM
  #337
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,303
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
So instead of taking the guy producing in the NHL and the other guy that lit up the AHL we'll take the guys not producing anywhere? Interesting.

Are you talking about Colborne and Kadri stepping into our lineup?


Yes, Colborne and Kadri would be expected to step into the NHL line-up. At the very least Colborne. Then, it's just a matter of projection -- Do you project them to be "replacement" level right now. If you do, then you aren't losing anything in the exchange.



Colborne produced in a similar fashion to Bjugstad at the lower level (PPG in the WCHA), then has had strong stretches in the AHL. He was breaking out before he injured his wrist... Likewise, Kadri was PPG right when he stepped into the AHL. I look at what they're doing now as a short-term issue. Long-term, they should be just as valuable as Bozak + Frattin, if not more so.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 04:36 AM
  #338
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,198
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstad101 View Post
This makes me believe he is the exact opposite of what Gillis likes to target with his acquisitions.
Booth was known to have a good work ethic but lacked on ice performance after a concussion and extended amount of time away from the rink. Yet one thig always remained was that he worked hard and gave everything on the ice.

If Kadri isn't playing up to snuff for the Marlies because he doesn't wanna be there or is unhappy not being in the NHL. Than I would not care to acquire him, he may have the talent to be an NHL player one day, if he lacks the drive and character I don't think giving up our best tradable asset for him as the main piece coming back.
That can easily be attributed to age and experience. Kadri is young and despite actually providing reasonable offensive flourishes when called up, Wilson frequently failed to utilize him or tossed him back down. He may simply have wore out his welcome in Toronto, especially given the unrealistic expectations fans had of him.

I see him doing quite well here, where he would be far less scrutinized and benefit from a winning environment.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 05:02 AM
  #339
Sam Slick*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: St John's NL
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Yes, Colborne and Kadri would be expected to step into the NHL line-up. At the very least Colborne. Then, it's just a matter of projection -- Do you project them to be "replacement" level right now. If you do, then you aren't losing anything in the exchange.



Colborne produced in a similar fashion to Bjugstad at the lower level (PPG in the WCHA), then has had strong stretches in the AHL. He was breaking out before he injured his wrist... Likewise, Kadri was PPG right when he stepped into the AHL. I look at what they're doing now as a short-term issue. Long-term, they should be just as valuable as Bozak + Frattin, if not more so.
At this point Bleach, we'd pay someone to take Kadri. He is busting here IMO. Needs a change of scenery.

Sam Slick* is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 05:45 AM
  #340
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,303
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Slick View Post
At this point Bleach, we'd pay someone to take Kadri. He is busting here IMO. Needs a change of scenery.


He's at the crossroads for sure. If he gets back on track in a new environment, then his upside is a Ribeiro/Huselius type of offensive weapon. Little to no defense. That said, if he doesn't... He'll bounce around the league until finally all teams give up on him.


It can go either way - Which is bad for a #7 overall prospect, but might be good for a team regarding him as a cheap option to find something special. But I hear what you are saying...

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 05:57 AM
  #341
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 10,036
vCash: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Slick View Post
At this point Bleach, we'd pay someone to take Kadri. He is busting here IMO. Needs a change of scenery.
Even as a Canucks fan, I don't think his value is quite that low... at least not yet?

vanuck is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 08:58 AM
  #342
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I in the Eye View Post
It's clear to see those who "need" Luongo... But not as clear to see those who "want" Luongo... Given that many purchasing decisions are made without consciously weighing the pro's and con's in a balance sheet, I'd bet that there are more teams (potentially any team that doesn't have a top 5 goalie) then what most fans speculate who are in the market for Luongo...

Do people not buy things, expensive things, out of pure "want"? Why all the focus on strict, survival "need"?

Who wouldn't "want" a top 5 goaltender? Out of those teams who would "want" one, there only needs to really be one or two who "really wants" one to make substantial deals...

I am not concerned at all about there being a market for Luongo... IMO, it's a question of the best time to deal Luongo, given all the factors...

Luongo is going to Florida
... If not Florida, some place that hasn't really been considered... That's my prediction...
You may be correct, although, FLA let Garrison go (#2D) because they couldn't afford the 5M Van offered him. You think they will give Luongo his 6.7? #2D would be a bigger issue than a goalie they really don't need....no?

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 09:05 AM
  #343
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,303
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
You may be correct, although, FLA let Garrison go (#2D) because they couldn't afford the 5M Van offered him. You think they will give Luongo his 6.7? #2D would be a bigger issue than a goalie they really don't need....no?


True, but then they turned around and gave 4m per to Kuba (35). It was also rumoured Tallon got the go ahead from ownership to pursue Luongo... He just balked at the price. Lastly, bringing in Campbell at his monstrous 7.14m contract and signing guys like Flieshmann, Upshall and Kopecky should tell everyone what they need to know about FLA's ability to spend money --> They will do it if it works.



It's the return. It's always been the return. Not salaries.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 09:59 AM
  #344
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,717
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Socratic Method Man View Post
Scurr, I'm curious where you learned this from, and how sure you are about this? Because I've seen Gardiner listed everywhere from 6'0 - 6'2, but I remember readinhg an article, which seemed to be a fairly credible source, that said Gardiner is 6'0.5.

This also makes sense because he's listed at 184 lbs or less on hockeydb, nhl.com, ahl.com, and hfboards. If he were 6'2, then 184 lbs would be really skinny. And Jake doesn't look that skinny. So around 6'0 seems to make more sense to me all things considered.
So all those sites have the weight right and the height wrong... ok.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Socratic Method Man View Post
Scurr, I'm curious where you learned this from, and how sure you are about this?
Not sure, don't really care. He's long with a smooth stride, that's what I like about his frame. I couldn't care less if he's 6' or 6'2".

Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudonymous01 View Post
he got it from the official maple leafs site
No, I didn't.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/p...php?pid=113831

http://www.nhl.com/ice/player.htm?id=8474581

Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudonymous01 View Post
says 6'2 but all other sites say the same weight and 6 foot
No they don't.


Last edited by Scurr: 11-10-2012 at 10:09 AM.
Scurr is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 10:27 AM
  #345
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
True, but then they turned around and gave 4m per to Kuba (35). It was also rumoured Tallon got the go ahead from ownership to pursue Luongo... He just balked at the price. Lastly, bringing in Campbell at his monstrous 7.14m contract and signing guys like Flieshmann, Upshall and Kopecky should tell everyone what they need to know about FLA's ability to spend money --> They will do it if it works.



It's the return. It's always been the return. Not salaries.
I'll agree that they can spend money, i just think they would prefer spending it on scoring. And ya...it's the return that has stalled any deal with any team.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 10:59 AM
  #346
Moore Money
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucbourdon View Post
I would take kadri is a heart beat, he clearly hates toronto.

This kid has very top end talent, but has some huge issues with charecter, and fitness.

I think there is something behind the scenes going on with this kid and toronto.
Top end talent?

I don't usually disagree with you LB, but this is pretty funny.

He can't even crack the Leafs roster. How the hell is he ever going to crack the Canucks roster? especially with AV around.

edit: I'm going to assume you were drunk when you posted this.


Last edited by Moore Money: 11-10-2012 at 11:21 AM.
Moore Money is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 11:32 AM
  #347
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,486
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoolChamp View Post
Top end talent?

I don't usually disagree with you LB, but this is pretty funny.

He can't even crack the Leafs roster. How the hell is he ever going to crack the Canucks roster? especially with AV around.

edit: I'm going to assume you were drunk when you posted this.
There's no question about how talented he is. His skill is great. It's the other facets of his game he needs to work on(defensive play, decision making).

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 11:54 AM
  #348
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,522
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
There's no question about how talented he is. His skill is great. It's the other facets of his game he needs to work on(defensive play, decision making).
If Ron Wilson won't accept his poor defensive play and decision making what makes you think AV will?

Kadri has looked very bad so far this year too. I wouldn't even consider Schroeder for him 1 for 1 at this point, let alone Luongo for him.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
11-10-2012, 12:14 PM
  #349
Lucbourdon
Kefka cheers for Van
 
Lucbourdon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 39,542
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoolChamp View Post
Top end talent?

I don't usually disagree with you LB, but this is pretty funny.

He can't even crack the Leafs roster. How the hell is he ever going to crack the Canucks roster? especially with AV around.

edit: I'm going to assume you were drunk when you posted this.
Top end talent eventually, His skill set is actually very good, very RAW.

Lucbourdon is online now  
Old
11-10-2012, 12:20 PM
  #350
Tiranis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 20,959
vCash: 500
Not convinced that Kadri can provide anything that Schroeder can't. Just look at his point totals now that the Marlies suck offensively. At least Schroeder has proven he's willing to work as hard as anyone out there to improve himself and make the team. Kadri has been the opposite.

Would you trade Luongo for Schroeder?


Last edited by Tiranis: 11-10-2012 at 12:27 PM.
Tiranis 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 01:54 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.