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.

Luongo: the continuing saga ...

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-05-2012, 09:03 AM
  #376
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
I doubt it actually. With reports that Gillis was asking for Gardiner, Frattin, Bozak, and the 5th overall pick for Luongo, I don't see Gillis dropping his price all that much. For some reason you seem to have a false sense of how this deal is going to go down, and I don't know why.
And you have every right to feel that way....just as i feel Burke won't even come close to that asking price...or anyone else for that matter.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 09:13 AM
  #377
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,785
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
And you have every right to feel that way....just as i feel Burke won't even come close to that asking price...or anyone else for that matter.
Then we'll see the Canucks keeping both goalies and having another dominant season because of them, and other teams without a legitimate starter struggling.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 09:23 AM
  #378
Hockey 4 Life
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 654
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
I doubt it actually. With reports that Gillis was asking for Gardiner, Frattin, Bozak, and the 5th overall pick for Luongo, I don't see Gillis dropping his price all that much. For some reason you seem to have a false sense of how this deal is going to go down, and I don't know why.
If you think that is what the return for lou will be your going to be terribly dissappointed. I believe van will get a solid package but this supposed asking price makes me want to throw up on a luongo jersey.

Hockey 4 Life is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 09:43 AM
  #379
Alflives
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,539
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
And you have every right to feel that way....just as i feel Burke won't even come close to that asking price...or anyone else for that matter.
Perhaps expecting a "package" in return for Luongo, is not what is best for Vancouver? Do you feel Burke would be more accepting of a "player-for-player" deal? Then, the return for Luongo would be more fair. If this would happen, who might "the player" from Toronto be?

Personally, I would like to see Luongo playing for the Leafs. I know his professionalism would have a strong influence on the younger Leaf's players. Plus, he is a huge upgrade on the Leafs' current net-minders. However, for Vancouver to trade him for a "package" of players seems a step backwards for that franchise. Hence, the "player-for-player" concept.

Luongo to Toronto. ? to Vancouver. (One player only in return.)

Alflives is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 09:54 AM
  #380
doorman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Thunder Bay
Country: Canada
Posts: 414
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LEAFANFORLIFE23 View Post
I can't wait for this deal to be done I think people on both sides will be PISSED at the return
exactly, lol, like I said he is worth more than Leaf fans wanna admit and not as much as Nucks fans feel he is. Though until the new CBA comes out, we won't know who is more upset.

doorman is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 10:00 AM
  #381
Nuck This
Registered User
 
Nuck This's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLeastOfTheBunch View Post
Not sure what's going on in this thread, but earlier some were talking about Millard's reports or the rumour he's generated. In October Cox mentioned that trade talks included with Bozak being the centrepiece..Take it for what it's worth.

I don't think Burke's parting with that 1st round pick, but we will see.
lol....Bozak will not be the centerpiece

Nuck This is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 10:03 AM
  #382
bobbyflex
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,392
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuck This View Post
lol....Bozak will not be the centerpiece
it wasn't leaf fans who reported it. Don't blame us

bobbyflex is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 10:38 AM
  #383
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alflives View Post
Perhaps expecting a "package" in return for Luongo, is not what is best for Vancouver? Do you feel Burke would be more accepting of a "player-for-player" deal? Then, the return for Luongo would be more fair. If this would happen, who might "the player" from Toronto be?

Personally, I would like to see Luongo playing for the Leafs. I know his professionalism would have a strong influence on the younger Leaf's players. Plus, he is a huge upgrade on the Leafs' current net-minders. However, for Vancouver to trade him for a "package" of players seems a step backwards for that franchise. Hence, the "player-for-player" concept.

Luongo to Toronto. ? to Vancouver. (One player only in return.)
I think Burke will be looking at a package, he doesn't have a "1 expendable player" that would cover it. I mean Lupul just had a PPG season and some are saying a 1st needs to be added...so what does that leave? Kessel...no. Phaneuf....no.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 10:39 AM
  #384
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Then we'll see the Canucks keeping both goalies and having another dominant season because of them, and other teams without a legitimate starter struggling.
If Gillis sticks to that price that is probably what will happen. And i for one will be ok. I'd like Luongo...but not at that price.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 10:43 AM
  #385
ACC1224
Steelers 4 - 3
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 28,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
I think Burke will be looking at a package, he doesn't have a "1 expendable player" that would cover it. I mean Lupul just had a PPG season and some are saying a 1st needs to be added...so what does that leave? Kessel...no. Phaneuf....no.
If Burke has another deal for a Centre lined up maybe Grabovski straight up for Luongo?

ACC1224 is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 10:48 AM
  #386
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACC1224 View Post
If Burke has another deal for a Centre lined up maybe Grabovski straight up for Luongo?
Even if Burke has a deal for a center (i would assume 1C), why trade Grabo? Just makes another hole at C. I'd rather package Bozak++ and put Connolly there than sub Grabo with Connolly.

I'm also not sure Van would do it.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 10:54 AM
  #387
kthsn
Registered User
 
kthsn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Even if Burke has a deal for a center (i would assume 1C), why trade Grabo?
To Vancouver one good piece is more enticing than a package unless the package is an "A package".

kthsn is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 10:58 AM
  #388
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
To Vancouver one good piece is more enticing than a package unless the package is an "A package".
I understand...but unfortunately, it needs to work for TO to, and trading our best and only gritty center who plays defense doesn't work.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 11:17 AM
  #389
ACC1224
Steelers 4 - 3
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 28,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Even if Burke has a deal for a center (i would assume 1C), why trade Grabo? Just makes another hole at C. I'd rather package Bozak++ and put Connolly there than sub Grabo with Connolly.

I'm also not sure Van would do it.
Move Bozak back to the 2nd line.

I like Grabovski but to me he would be the mostly likely candidate in a one for one deal.

ACC1224 is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 11:20 AM
  #390
kthsn
Registered User
 
kthsn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
I understand...but unfortunately, it needs to work for TO to, and trading our best and only gritty center who plays defense doesn't work.
*if* Burke had a deal in place for another C.

If a team has an elite skater in every position then it guarantees the playoffs, in that case I can see Grabovski becoming expendable in a Luongo deal.

kthsn is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 11:20 AM
  #391
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACC1224 View Post
Move Bozak back to the 2nd line.

I like Grabovski but to me he would be the mostly likely candidate in a one for one deal.
I guess i'd need to know the mystery center we aquire before having an educated opinion.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 11:22 AM
  #392
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
*if* Burke had a deal in place for another C.

If a team has an elite skater in every position then it guarantees the playoffs, in that case I can see Grabovski becoming expendable in a Luongo deal.
You would do Grabo straight up?

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 11:24 AM
  #393
ACC1224
Steelers 4 - 3
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 28,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
You would do Grabo straight up?
I would think Bozak and a pick would be more desirable for them as it gives them more cap space.

ACC1224 is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 11:24 AM
  #394
Vankiller Whale
And so it begins
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,767
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
You would do Grabo straight up?
I would do Grabo + 2nd.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 11:26 AM
  #395
GordieHoweHatTrick
Registered User
 
GordieHoweHatTrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 13,009
vCash: 500
You guys don't get sick of regurgitating the same old news over, and over, and over again?

GordieHoweHatTrick is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 11:28 AM
  #396
DaveT83*
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,760
vCash: 500
Why would Vancouver want Grabo?

They deep at C - Grabo too small to play a shutdown roll on 3rd/4th lines.

Starting Goalie for a 3rd line C doesn't make any sense.

Its a package - involving pick(s)+bozak+a salary dump.
No firsts.

The deal is all but done - unfortunately Luongo is comin to T.O. Another dysfunctional loser added to the already cancerous mix.

DaveT83* is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 11:28 AM
  #397
ACC1224
Steelers 4 - 3
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 28,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GordieHoweHatTrick View Post
You guys don't get sick of regurgitating the same old news over, and over, and over again?
What news?

ACC1224 is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 11:29 AM
  #398
ACC1224
Steelers 4 - 3
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 28,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveT83 View Post

The deal is all but done - unfortunately Luongo is comin to T.O. Another dysfunctional loser added to the already cancerous mix.
Sounds like you're Adopting him.

ACC1224 is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 11:29 AM
  #399
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACC1224 View Post
I would think Bozak and a pick would be more desirable for them as it gives them more cap space.
Now we are back to my point...a 1 for 1 deal won't work for multiple reasons.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-05-2012, 11:30 AM
  #400
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveT83 View Post
Why would Vancouver want Grabo?

They deep at C - Grabo too small to play a shutdown roll on 3rd/4th lines.

Starting Goalie for a 3rd line C doesn't make any sense.

Its a package - involving pick(s)+bozak+a salary dump.
No firsts.

The deal is all but done - unfortunately Luongo is comin to T.O. Another dysfunctional loser added to the already cancerous mix.
LOL...always a ray of Leaf sunshine. I can't wait to see your posts when the Leafs are winning.

Liferleafer 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 08:45 PM.

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.