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.

Canucks Almost had Vinny Lecavlier and Tampa Almost had Luongo

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-09-2009, 12:39 AM
  #26
Telos
Moderator
In Dean We Trust
 
Telos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Reno, Nv.
Country: United States
Posts: 25,581
vCash: 1527
Send a message via ICQ to Telos Send a message via AIM to Telos Send a message via MSN to Telos Send a message via Yahoo to Telos
Quote:
Originally Posted by Live in the Now View Post
It says that the Kings were made a similar offer if in fact we were able to get Luongo...it would not have been taken.
We were offered him but we didn't take it because Dean believed we wouldn't be able to re-sign him. It was a good call on his part.

I didn't know about the Lightning deal, but it is an interesting scenario. But at the time it was sort of a win/win with lose/lose mixed in. Lightning lose their franchise center with no one legitimate player to take his place (given this is 2006 before Stamkos was drafted), and the same goes for Luongo who gains their franchise center but loses their franchise goaltender. They both get a huge piece they have been seeking but at the same time lose their most important piece they currently had toward succeeding... I think whoever got Luongo in the end would have been the winner, but it is a tough trade any way you look at it.

__________________

"I think part of his game is hes over aggressive at times, which I like. Well tame that. Id rather tame a lion than paint stripes on the kitty cat." - Dean Lombardi discussing Brayden McNabb
Telos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 02:23 AM
  #27
unknown
Registered User
 
unknown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: vancouver
Posts: 482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Telos View Post
Lightning lose their franchise center with no one legitimate player to take his place (given this is 2006 before Stamkos was drafted
brad richards had 91 points in 2005 he was not an adequate replacement as the 1st line centre? imo a team with richards st louis boyle and luongo wouldnt be a bottom feeder, look at the nucks roster his first year in vancouver and luongo brought that team to the 2nd round.

unknown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 02:48 AM
  #28
4rde
 
4rde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,830
vCash: 500
Sure elite goaltender is better than elite forward, BUT lets see..

3 years after the Nucks refused this trade and said Luongo is not going anywhere, Vancouver has been in the playoffs once (lost in the second round) mainly because of lack of scoring. So in this case VL might have been better choice, IMO you dont need Luongo so that your goaltender can steal game sometimes, but after they would have taken VL, they should get new goalie to build on for next couple of years and bam they would be obvious cup choice this year.

I mean if they had Lecavalier now, i admit having LaBarbera and Sanford isnt cup goaltending, but as i said if they built on someone 3 years ago who knows.

Hard choices i guess back then though, and i dont think it was bad decision to refuse the trade.

4rde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 02:48 AM
  #29
AgentNaslund*
 
AgentNaslund*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by unknown View Post
brad richards had 91 points in 2005 he was not an adequate replacement as the 1st line centre? imo a team with richards st louis boyle and luongo wouldnt be a bottom feeder, look at the nucks roster his first year in vancouver and luongo brought that team to the 2nd round.
LUongo brought a crappy team a division title and a 2nd round. Stars vastly outplayed in the series, but because Of LUOngo we won.

But credit feaster for trying. Offering his best player.

AgentNaslund* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 03:01 AM
  #30
RewBicks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Country:
Posts: 1,628
vCash: 500
Quote:
3 years after the Nucks refused this trade and said Luongo is not going anywhere, Vancouver has been in the playoffs once (lost in the second round) mainly because of lack of scoring. So in this case VL might have been better choice, IMO you dont need Luongo so that your goaltender can steal game sometimes, but after they would have taken VL, they should get new goalie to build on for next couple of years and bam they would be obvious cup choice this year.

Two years... this one's not over, and I (personally) suspect they'll get past the second round this year if he's healthy...

RewBicks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 03:01 AM
  #31
CrosbyCrosby*
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arde View Post
Sure elite goaltender is better than elite forward, BUT lets see..

3 years after the Nucks refused this trade and said Luongo is not going anywhere, Vancouver has been in the playoffs once (lost in the second round) mainly because of lack of scoring. So in this case VL might have been better choice, IMO you dont need Luongo so that your goaltender can steal game sometimes, but after they would have taken VL, they should get new goalie to build on for next couple of years and bam they would be obvious cup choice this year.

I mean if they had Lecavalier now, i admit having LaBarbera and Sanford isnt cup goaltending, but as i said if they built on someone 3 years ago who knows.

Hard choices i guess back then though, and i dont think it was bad decision to refuse the trade.
Once in 2 years and only missed last year due to Luongo completely burning out for unknown reasons (may have been the wife's pregnancy but he said it was other reason).

CrosbyCrosby* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 03:05 AM
  #32
Burke's Evil Spirit
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 15,123
vCash: 500
Man, it really illustrates Feaster's fall from grace. He couldn't get Luongo for Lecavalier, ended up getting Smith for Richards. Ouch.

Burke's Evil Spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 03:13 AM
  #33
unknown
Registered User
 
unknown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: vancouver
Posts: 482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arde View Post
Sure elite goaltender is better than elite forward, BUT lets see..

3 years after the Nucks refused this trade and said Luongo is not going anywhere, Vancouver has been in the playoffs once (lost in the second round) mainly because of lack of scoring. So in this case VL might have been better choice, IMO you dont need Luongo so that your goaltender can steal game sometimes, but after they would have taken VL, they should get new goalie to build on for next couple of years and bam they would be obvious cup choice this year.

I mean if they had Lecavalier now, i admit having LaBarbera and Sanford isnt cup goaltending, but as i said if they built on someone 3 years ago who knows.

Hard choices i guess back then though, and i dont think it was bad decision to refuse the trade.
he won a division title and took us to the 2nd round in year one, year two he kept a injury riddled team with an even more anemic offense in playoff contention missing by just 1 point. year three he was so phenomenal in november that a team that has basically played .500 hockey since his injury is still in 5th in the conference.

vinny's team is in the hunt for another 1st overall pick because they are the among the worst in the league.

seems like a no brainer to me take the team with 11 wins or the goalie who has 11 wins on his own this season.

unknown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 03:56 AM
  #34
4rde
 
4rde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,830
vCash: 500
I didnt say it was bad decision to keep Luongo. I just mentioned that in Vancouver's case, who knows what could they do with Lecavalier instead. They would have one of the best offense's in this league right now and great defense, the key part of taking Vinny would have been getting a new goalie from somewhere, not as good as Luongo but one who still can steal games. You can win cup without goalie like Luongo, for example 04-05 Canes with Ward (he wasnt really great goalie back then but did well in the playoffs), last year i wouldnt say Osgood is any better than so many goalies out there.

4rde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 04:20 AM
  #35
unknown
Registered User
 
unknown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: vancouver
Posts: 482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arde View Post
I didnt say it was bad decision to keep Luongo. I just mentioned that in Vancouver's case, who knows what could they do with Lecavalier instead. They would have one of the best offense's in this league right now and great defense, the key part of taking Vinny would have been getting a new goalie from somewhere, not as good as Luongo but one who still can steal games. You can win cup without goalie like Luongo, for example 04-05 Canes with Ward (he wasnt really great goalie back then but did well in the playoffs), last year i wouldnt say Osgood is any better than so many goalies out there.
look how well tampa fared in their hunt for a net minder after khabibulin left.

unknown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 04:24 AM
  #36
timorousme
luongod
 
timorousme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jumptheshark View Post
but we all know that the x-factor is always the wild card
what does this even mean?

timorousme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 04:31 AM
  #37
Macke*
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, B.C
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,756
vCash: 500
It would have been interesting to say the least.

With Vinny you got to think Naslund's fall wouldn't have happen so fast and they would have had a "West Coast Express 2" so to speak...and it would have been exciting hockey.

Vinny was still on his cheap contract then so finding a goalie wouldn't have been that hard...(Man if only they signed cujo Summer 05)

Macke* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 04:45 AM
  #38
4rde
 
4rde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by unknown View Post
look how well tampa fared in their hunt for a net minder after khabibulin left.
They got Smith and he to me can win you a cup. But other than that Tampa really fails at getting new players. For example the Marc Denis trade was awfull.

4rde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 04:47 AM
  #39
Hooker
Registered User
 
Hooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,369
vCash: 500
I think what everyone is missing here is that by keeping Luongo, the Canucks missed out on Lecavalier and Stamkos.

Hooker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 04:55 AM
  #40
thestonedkoala
Everyone! PANIC!
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 17,854
vCash: 500
But didn't the Canucks draft Schneider in 2004? Wasn't he Luongo Jr in 2006?

I mean seriously Schneider + LeCavalier > Luongo

thestonedkoala is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 05:02 AM
  #41
pedrospecialk
Registered User
 
pedrospecialk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Waltham, MA
Country: Iran
Posts: 3,258
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to pedrospecialk
Quote:
Originally Posted by timorousme View Post
what does this even mean?
My thoughts exactly .

pedrospecialk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 05:19 AM
  #42
Legionnaire
Kill! Jeff, Kill!!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA-LA Land
Country: United States
Posts: 34,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fivehole93 View Post
Would have been interesting to see how the Kings would look today if they had picked up Luongo in a trade. If in fact Feaster made the same deal to the Kings I think I may have done it. If Luongo came to LA I don't know if he would have resigned long term then again who knows if Vinny would have signed long term.

I believe the rumor was Brown and Frolov being the big part of the Luongo deal. I bet the Panthers are kicking themselves about that one.

Vinny and Anze as the 1-2 centers in LA now. One can dream, one can dream.
With Luongo in net perhaps certain free agents don't sign elsewhere. Add Gomez or Chara? Probably no Doughty. But you never know, we could be like the Bruins now.

Legionnaire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 05:23 AM
  #43
Tusk
Registered User
 
Tusk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 3,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by excape View Post
Shhhh.
hahaha, I just got that, I didn't even think of that when I typed it, I should of said passed on Gretzky, in his prime.

Tusk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 06:06 AM
  #44
unknown
Registered User
 
unknown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: vancouver
Posts: 482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Marshall View Post
I think what everyone is missing here is that by keeping Luongo, the Canucks missed out on Lecavalier and Stamkos.
good thing the consolation prize is luongo and hodgson

unknown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 06:16 AM
  #45
unknown
Registered User
 
unknown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: vancouver
Posts: 482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arde View Post
They got Smith and he to me can win you a cup. But other than that Tampa really fails at getting new players. For example the Marc Denis trade was awfull.
it took trading a conn smyth winner 3 years later to get that goalie. who is to say vancouver would have had an easier time signing a goalie or trading for one. this city isnt exactly a free agent hot spot.

unknown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 08:45 AM
  #46
4rde
 
4rde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by unknown View Post
this city isnt exactly a free agent hot spot.
If i would be free agent goalie and vancouver offered me a deal i would be glad to play along guys like Lecavalier, sundin, sedins, demitra, kesler etc.

I dont know about the weather and such though.

4rde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2009, 10:44 AM
  #47
TOML
Registered User
 
TOML's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Walnut Grove
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,369
vCash: 500
Dreger: "Any new info for me, cuz? What's new in TO?"

Nonis: "Aw, nothing. I get coffee for Brian now and then."

Dreger: "C'mon, man. Gimme anything. Remember... I'm an 'insider.'"

Nonis: "Hmmm... Well how about a three year old rumour going around when I was GM of the 'nucks?"

Dreger: "Sure, cuz. I need something... anything... to put on my blog..."

TOML is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-10-2009, 03:13 AM
  #48
doglover8891
rajinikanthfan1
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 476
vCash: 500
if i were the canucks i would never trade luongo away he is our star and even if the penguins traded crosby malkin staal fleury whitney gonachar sabourin for luongo i would never accept it at all

doglover8891 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 03:51 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.