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.

Luongo to Flyers?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-16-2009, 01:20 PM
  #101
DUHockey9
Registered User
 
DUHockey9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hogwarts
Country: United States
Posts: 4,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fogducker View Post
Carter + JVR + 1st for Luongo

DUHockey9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 01:34 PM
  #102
Go Habs Go
Registered User
 
Go Habs Go's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Mississauga
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by twenty2 View Post
You also forgot Drury, etc.

Problem with Briere is he still earns his money. Despite injury issues this past season he's a PPG forward since the lockout. He's not that old now. He may be up there when his deal ends, but currently he still earns his contract. Most of the list you made up doesn't...

In fact the worst contract on the Flyers is not Briere, Lupul, Carle, or any of the players that play up to their contract...it's Randy Jones and it's not even close.

You know NOTHING about the NHL. You just follow other people's opinions like a blind man caught in a parade.

So pathetic.

If the Flyers didn't have Richards or Carter, Briere would be the best thing to happen to this team since the lockout, $6.5m or not. Argue that about anyone else on your little list.
Why are you being such a jerk. It was you that first argued that Briere's contract isn't that bad so it must be you that brings up arguments to prove your point. Otherwise, you have no argument.

Go Habs Go is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 01:34 PM
  #103
FlyLife
Nuthin but a G Thang
 
FlyLife's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Livin the High Life
Country: United States
Posts: 2,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fogducker View Post
Carter + JVR + 1st for Luongo
That is fine if all of you feel that is the "asking price" for Luongo, but if you guys actually think that Paul Holmgren will trade Carter, JVR and a 1st round pick for a guy that is about to be a UFA you are highly mistaken.

I know you guys got a great deal when you guys traded for him, but look at that deal again, and try to compare it to Carter, JVR and a 1st. It doesn't even come close, and he was a year away from RFA when you guys traded for him, not a UFA.

FlyLife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 01:43 PM
  #104
Go Habs Go
Registered User
 
Go Habs Go's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Mississauga
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff VanRichards View Post
That is fine if all of you feel that is the "asking price" for Luongo, but if you guys actually think that Paul Holmgren will trade Carter, JVR and a 1st round pick for a guy that is about to be a UFA you are highly mistaken.

I know you guys got a great deal when you guys traded for him, but look at that deal again, and try to compare it to Carter, JVR and a 1st. It doesn't even come close, and he was a year away from RFA when you guys traded for him, not a UFA.
Thats exactly right, if a trade were to go down, it has to be reasonable. If its not reasonable, then whats the point of discussing it? It will never happen because the Flyers aren't chumps. And if Vancouver does entertain the idea of trading Luongo, it will be because they MUST. Otherwise, they would be foolish to trade away a solid goalie without a sureshot replacement in net for no good reason. Carter is a legitimate first line player, might make Team Canada in 2010, still incredibly young and is only getting better. JVR is one of the best prospects in the world at his age who more likely then not will become a star in the NHL and a 1st round pick. This kind of trade would make Vancouver much better for years to come. What does it do for Philly? A good solid goalie whose only knock is that he hasn't accomplished much in the playoffs so far in his career (even though its not really his fault but it still can't be neglected) and has at best another 5 years of prime hockey? He's good but for that what Philly has to give up, they can get so much more elsewhere.

Go Habs Go is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 01:49 PM
  #105
Peter Griffin
Registered User
 
Peter Griffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,390
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff VanRichards View Post
It doesn't even come close, and he was a year away from RFA when you guys traded for him, not a UFA.
I see this a lot I'm pretty sure it's wrong. After the 2006-07 season, Luongo's first as a Canuck he would've had 7 accrued season's under his belt, enough to make him an UFA. Jay Feaster stated that Nonis had a back-up plan to immediately ship Luongo to Tampa Bay for Vinny Lecavalier if he couldn't get Luongo signed to a long term contract shortly after the trade. That doesn't make much sense if Roberto was scheduled to become an RFA after the 2006/07 season. Sure Luongo could've signed an offersheet after that one season, but it either would've been ridiculously high as to not interest the Canucks at all, thus awarding them four 1st round picks or the Canucks could've just matched the offer.

At the time of his last trade Roberto was one year away from UFA status, was completely unproven in the post-season and was traded by an innept GM who had a massive mancrush for one Todd Bertuzzi. The other rumoured offers from LA and Ottawa were arguably much better than the one Keenan accepted from Vancouver.

Peter Griffin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 02:49 PM
  #106
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 14,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Griffin View Post
I see this a lot I'm pretty sure it's wrong. After the 2006-07 season, Luongo's first as a Canuck he would've had 7 accrued season's under his belt, enough to make him an UFA. Jay Feaster stated that Nonis had a back-up plan to immediately ship Luongo to Tampa Bay for Vinny Lecavalier if he couldn't get Luongo signed to a long term contract shortly after the trade. That doesn't make much sense if Roberto was scheduled to become an RFA after the 2006/07 season. Sure Luongo could've signed an offersheet after that one season, but it either would've been ridiculously high as to not interest the Canucks at all, thus awarding them four 1st round picks or the Canucks could've just matched the offer.

At the time of his last trade Roberto was one year away from UFA status, was completely unproven in the post-season and was traded by an innept GM who had a massive mancrush for one Todd Bertuzzi. The other rumoured offers from LA and Ottawa were arguably much better than the one Keenan accepted from Vancouver.
This is correct. Luongo was one year removed from UFA status.

Keenan was Bertuzzi's biggest backer but he also loved Brian Allen from his time in Vancouver as well.

I'd use Ottawa and Los Angeles' rumoured offers as comparables before looking at the Vancouver offer. Keenan made the wrong choice and unlike the fans of Vancouver was unaware just how far Bertuzzi had fallen from where he was at just 3 seasons earlier.

Like PG said, Vincent Lecavalier was offered in a swap for 1 season of Roberto Luongo. That should give a pretty good idea what type of player he'll command if he's made available this summer. Is Jeff Carter a good comparable for Vinny Lecavalier? I don't see why not.

Drop the Sopel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 03:31 PM
  #107
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,909
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by go kim johnsson 514 View Post
The people who think the Flyers need to dump Briere for his cap hit are the ones who don't get it. Clearly. The Flyers spent more on inferior players over the past year who do much less and are a bigger waste of time and space.
No offense, but it's you who clearly doesn't get it. There are bigger wastes of space on the roster, yes, but Briere has the riskiest contract. He's a one dimensional forward that is signed to the age of 37. When his offensive production starts to decline he's going to be a huge albatross. Moreover, in the salary cap world your 5th best player and 3rd best center shouldn't be your highest paid player. His contract throws our salary structure out of wack. At this point he is nothing but an expensive luxury on the Flyers. It's salary cap management 101.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 03:33 PM
  #108
CloutierForVezina
Registered User
 
CloutierForVezina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,379
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by twenty2 View Post
You really don't get it do you?

How exactly does an argument go over your head 4 times?

Without one of Carter or Richards Flyers are KEEPING Briere and his $6.5m contract. We're not moving him because he's not worth his contract, because I can tell you that if the salary cap jumped up by about $3m him, Lupul, every one of our offensive pieces would be staying.

I've never talked to anyone as completely unable to see one thing right in front of them as you...

Oh wait...this is HF...I do it every day.

Listen, you don't have to want Briere, but it's not a bad contract. It's BECOME a bad contract for the FLYERS. That's different than being a bad contract.
I don't see why you keep mentioning that without carter or richards you're keeping briere. Richards is your franchise player and he's certainly not going anywhere, I really don't see philly letting carter go anywhere either so...? If you wanted briere as a safety net in case one of the two didn't pan out, why wasn't he signed to a 3 or a 4 year deal, not the mammoth of a contract he has now?

No, you're not trading him because no other team in the league wants danny b at 6.5mill/year when he's 37. It's a bad contract because it handcuffs your salary cap for years to come and you have essentially no chance at ever shedding it.

Long term, evenly spread out, giant contracts are terrible in this salary cap age especially when the player is past his prime and the cap is rumoured to drop as much as 10 million in 2 years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by go kim johnsson 514
The people who think the Flyers need to dump Briere for his cap hit are the ones who don't get it. Clearly. The Flyers spent more on inferior players over the past year who do much less and are a bigger waste of time and space.
Briere's contract will handcuff the team in the coming years and continue to prevent them from aquiring an elite goaltender in the forseeable future. Or anything else for that matter. We've all heard the rumours that the cap is going to drop upwards of 10million dollars for the 2010-2011 year. In that year, the flyers already have 43 million commited without any of the following signed:
Top 6 winger
Entire 4th line
4 defencemen
Goalie
Backup Goalie

Even assuming you get every one of those for a bargain basement 1 million each, you're looking at 53 million commited minimum and I don't want to see the quality of your goaltenders or d corps when that happens.

CloutierForVezina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 03:35 PM
  #109
Saren
Multi Pass!
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Fhloston Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,088
vCash: 500
Did anyone mention Carter for Luongo straight up, with JVR being the conditional if Luongo signs more than 4 years?

Saren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 03:39 PM
  #110
phlocky
Registered User
 
phlocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeon View Post
Did anyone mention Carter for Luongo straight up, with JVR being the conditional if Luongo signs more than 4 years?
The league does not let you have any "player to be named later" in trades anymore. You can't have a "conditional player to be moved", only picks as far as I know.

phlocky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 03:42 PM
  #111
Saren
Multi Pass!
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Fhloston Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,088
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by phlocky View Post
The league does not let you have any "player to be named later" in trades anymore. You can't have a "conditional player to be moved", only picks as far as I know.
Useless.


Carter, VanRiemsdyk and the 1st is asking for a bit, so would taking out the first be better?

Saren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 03:46 PM
  #112
DUHockey9
Registered User
 
DUHockey9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hogwarts
Country: United States
Posts: 4,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by phlocky View Post
The league does not let you have any "player to be named later" in trades anymore. You can't have a "conditional player to be moved", only picks as far as I know.
There are future considerations though aren't there? What's the ruling on that? We traded Roenick to LA for future considerations and I can't recall if we ever got anything.

DUHockey9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 03:47 PM
  #113
CloutierForVezina
Registered User
 
CloutierForVezina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,379
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeon View Post
Useless.


Carter, VanRiemsdyk and the 1st is asking for a bit, so would taking out the first be better?
Could you do something like:

Van
Luongo
1st 2010 (Conditional on luongo not resigning longterm)

Philly
Carter
VanRiemsdyk

Would philly bite on that? I don't think they really want to move carter but they're going to be in some major salary cap trouble if they don't move away someone big by 2010-2011, and carter is due for a big salary increase the following year.

CloutierForVezina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 03:50 PM
  #114
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,909
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloutierForVezina View Post
Could you do something like:

Van
Luongo
1st 2010 (Conditional on luongo not resigning longterm)

Philly
Carter
VanRiemsdyk

Would philly bite on that? I don't think they really want to move carter but they're going to be in some major salary cap trouble if they don't move away someone big by 2010-2011, and carter is due for a big salary increase the following year.
No they wouldn't.

Luongo makes more than Carter and may want an increase in salary so how does he help us out of our cap jam? We need a goalie, but we can't get us further into a cap jam.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 03:51 PM
  #115
El Duderino
Registered User
 
El Duderino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,744
vCash: 500
What about Giroux + JVR for a signed Luongo? Is that close value-wise? I know, cap-space will be a problem for this deal.

El Duderino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 03:54 PM
  #116
Payaso619*
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Mexico
Posts: 4,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 16 View Post
What about Giroux + JVR for a signed Luongo? Is that close value-wise? I know, cap-space will be a problem for this deal.
I would never do that deal. I'd rather just keep Luongo.

Payaso619* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 04:03 PM
  #117
phlocky
Registered User
 
phlocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,968
vCash: 500
There is one and only 1 scenario where I can see Van trading Luongo and it is as follows:

First, Luongo has to go unsigned to an extension through the next season. Second, Van has to be out of the playoff hunt before the trade deadline. Third (now this is ONLY specifically for him being traded to Philly), Philly has to have serious questions about their current goalie situation at that time.

If all of those 3 things happen then I could see Luongo getting dealt to Philly. With Philly in the playoff hunt next year (and assumption necessary under the premiss that they would seek to add Luongo as their goalie for a playoff run) then it is unlikely they would be trading any of the significant pieces that are making them competative for that season. That means that guys like Carter, Giroux, Richards, Parent, Coburn and Carle are off limits. JVR will probably still be in the minors so he'll likley be the center piece of the deal. Just so that everyone understands, JVR is FAR FAR superior to anything that came the Flyers way in the Forsberg trade so I doubt that Vanc gets much more than JVR in a deal. I highly doubt they'd get the Philly first in addition to JVR. It would likely be a prospect like Bourdon or Marshall, though that might be overkill from the Flyers POV. It may be a deal like JVR + Philly 2010 1st for Luongo + Vanc 2010 2nd. This should equate to somewhere around 10-15 spots in the draft by swapping picks. I can see Vanc asking for something like this but if Holmgren is really impressed with JVR's progress in the AHL during the season he may refuse to give up JVR. If that's the case then a return of something like Philly 1st + Bourdon/Marshall + Nodl (he should be on the flyers full time next season and would be a young roster player going the other way) is probably what it would be. I'm trying to base this on what the very very best, most elite deadline deal players have been moved for in the past. Hossa and Forsberg are the best (and probably ONLY2) players that we can use as a comparison for what Luongo may bring in deadline deal. Oh, I forgot, they Flyers will have to clear cap space to make it work so whomever we get this off season will have to be signed to a deal WITHOUT a NTC/NMC and he will have to be going back the other way to make the numbers work. Also, the Flyers will have to be under the cap all season long and not have any LTIR that eats up any cap cusion we could be building up by being under the cap.

That's an aweful lot that has to go perfectly right for Luongo to be traded to Philly IMO. I'm not holding my breath.

phlocky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 04:04 PM
  #118
JojoTheWhale
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 144
vCash: 500
Please keep in mind when reading this that I'm trying to help sum things up, not antagonize anyone.

I hope we can all agree that Philadelphia isn't going to move Carter or Richards. Forget what their value is, they're not getting traded short of a massive overpayment. Giroux is another subject entirely, but a kid with that type of talent, on that contract, in this team's cap constraints, just isn't going to be moved. Timonen isn't getting moved either, because any defenseman they'd trade him for is untouchable by their respective teams. The Flyers still have to give significant salary back to fit Luongo into their cap. Therefore, Luongo can not feasibly be traded to the Flyers unless either Briere or some combination of Lupul and Carle/Jones are in the deal STRICTLY FOR SALARY CAP PURPOSES. This has absolutely nothing to do with value. If you can't make the dollars work, you can't do the deal. Deals with a contingency upon being able to move other players for no cap hit are almost impossible to pull off. Note here that I'm not saying Vancouver should do anything like what I'm stating the deal would have to be, just that it's the only way it's feasible from a Flyers' point of view.

In short, there's no deal to be made that makes sense for both teams. Just walk away.

JojoTheWhale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 04:05 PM
  #119
Saren
Multi Pass!
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Fhloston Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,088
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloutierForVezina View Post
Could you do something like:

Van
Luongo
1st 2010 (Conditional on luongo not resigning longterm)

Philly
Carter
VanRiemsdyk

Would philly bite on that? I don't think they really want to move carter but they're going to be in some major salary cap trouble if they don't move away someone big by 2010-2011, and carter is due for a big salary increase the following year.
If it came to that, I'd rather give them our first this year, so that if we absolutely blow next year we can be in the running for T-Hall. (Vancouver fan opinion)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine View Post
No they wouldn't.

Luongo makes more than Carter and may want an increase in salary so how does he help us out of our cap jam? We need a goalie, but we can't get us further into a cap jam.
We could take Jones from you, seeing as how his contract would expire next year anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by phlocky View Post
There is one and only 1 scenario where I can see Van trading Luongo and it is as follows:

First, Luongo has to go unsigned to an extension through the next season. Second, Van has to be out of the playoff hunt before the trade deadline. Third (now this is ONLY specifically for him being traded to Philly), Philly has to have serious questions about their current goalie situation at that time.

If all of those 3 things happen then I could see Luongo getting dealt to Philly. With Philly in the playoff hunt next year (and assumption necessary under the premiss that they would seek to add Luongo as their goalie for a playoff run) then it is unlikely they would be trading any of the significant pieces that are making them competative for that season. That means that guys like Carter, Giroux, Richards, Parent, Coburn and Carle are off limits. JVR will probably still be in the minors so he'll likley be the center piece of the deal. Just so that everyone understands, JVR is FAR FAR superior to anything that came the Flyers way in the Forsberg trade so I doubt that Vanc gets much more than JVR in a deal. I highly doubt they'd get the Philly first in addition to JVR. It would likely be a prospect like Bourdon or Marshall, though that might be overkill from the Flyers POV. It may be a deal like JVR + Philly 2010 1st for Luongo + Vanc 2010 2nd. This should equate to somewhere around 10-15 spots in the draft by swapping picks. I can see Vanc asking for something like this but if Holmgren is really impressed with JVR's progress in the AHL during the season he may refuse to give up JVR. If that's the case then a return of something like Philly 1st + Bourdon/Marshall + Nodl (he should be on the flyers full time next season and would be a young roster player going the other way) is probably what it would be. I'm trying to base this on what the very very best, most elite deadline deal players have been moved for in the past. Hossa and Forsberg are the best (and probably ONLY2) players that we can use as a comparison for what Luongo may bring in deadline deal. Oh, I forgot, they Flyers will have to clear cap space to make it work so whomever we get this off season will have to be signed to a deal WITHOUT a NTC/NMC and he will have to be going back the other way to make the numbers work. Also, the Flyers will have to be under the cap all season long and not have any LTIR that eats up any cap cusion we could be building up by being under the cap.

That's an aweful lot that has to go perfectly right for Luongo to be traded to Philly IMO. I'm not holding my breath.
If that order of circumstances occurred, Vancouver wouldn't look to trade with Philly then. We'd find someone else, because if you're taking Luongo away, a 1st/blue chip prospect is a minimum regardless of his contract.

Saren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 04:06 PM
  #120
phlocky
Registered User
 
phlocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 16 View Post
What about Giroux + JVR for a signed Luongo? Is that close value-wise? I know, cap-space will be a problem for this deal.
If Luongo is signed you guys would just keep him and deal Schneider. You won't get nearly as much as you would for Luongo but overall you're team would be better with Luongo and whatever you get for Schneider vs Schneider and whatever you get for Luongo.

phlocky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 04:07 PM
  #121
CloutierForVezina
Registered User
 
CloutierForVezina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,379
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine View Post
No they wouldn't.

Luongo makes more than Carter and may want an increase in salary so how does he help us out of our cap jam? We need a goalie, but we can't get us further into a cap jam.
Fair enough, philly has a lot of salary commited in the next few years.

Would you say that philly has no interest in luongo then? Would the manuevering needed to fit him under the cap be worth it long term?

CloutierForVezina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 04:11 PM
  #122
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,909
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloutierForVezina View Post
Fair enough, philly has a lot of salary commited in the next few years.

Would you say that philly has no interest in luongo then? Would the manuevering needed to fit him under the cap be worth it long term?
I mean you never know since they are apparently interested in Jaybo who would be another large cap hit, but it seems like there were be too much maneuvering to fit in someone like Luongo. He's due a raise just as the cap is set to go down.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 04:11 PM
  #123
JojoTheWhale
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 144
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloutierForVezina View Post
Would you say that philly has no interest in luongo then? Would the manuevering needed to fit him under the cap be worth it long term?
They would have an interest because he's a significant upgrade to Biron, but Vancouver (or its fans, in this case) seems unwilling to take on contracts in return. I'm not saying the actual team would agree or disagree with that stance, but it's what makes the entire deal a non-starter. My best guess is that they'd have legitimate talks and never come to any sort of agreement if the Vancouver front office sentiments are echoed by the fanbase here.

JojoTheWhale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 04:13 PM
  #124
phlocky
Registered User
 
phlocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeon View Post
If it came to that, I'd rather give them our first this year, so that if we absolutely blow next year we can be in the running for T-Hall. (Vancouver fan opinion)



We could take Jones from you, seeing as how his contract would expire next year anyway.



If that order of circumstances occurred, Vancouver wouldn't look to trade with Philly then. We'd find someone else, because if you're taking Luongo away, a 1st/blue chip prospect is a minimum regardless of his contract.

After next season we'd have Coburn and Parent needing extension (among others but those are the 2 most significant) with n significant money coming off the books. We'd almost NEED for the player going the other way to be Carle, not Jones.


Also, to the part you just added, I don't think that the other poster was saying that Lupul + Carle/Jones or Briere would be the center pieces or the entire deal, I think he was just stating that for the money to work these players MUST be included. To them I think you'd be adding in others to the deal. If it's Carle and Lupul, they are quality young players who are still getting better each year so the Philiiy 1st or a quality (though NOT blue chip) prospect would e included (say Marshall of Bourdon)

phlocky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2009, 04:20 PM
  #125
phlocky
Registered User
 
phlocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloutierForVezina View Post
Fair enough, philly has a lot of salary commited in the next few years.

Would you say that philly has no interest in luongo then? Would the manuevering needed to fit him under the cap be worth it long term?
Of course Philly has interest in Luongo, it would just be damned tough to make it work. With us having Carter, Richards and Giroux as young centers I think that if we could get Briere to waive his NMC and Vanc was willing to take him AND Luongo agreed to an extension in Philly then I think we'd be willing to include JVR as a main piece in the deal. I can't see how Luongo would be worth Briere (he doesn't have negative value but you could always sign your departing UFA's without giving up anything so Briere doesn't hold very much value as a trading piece), JVR and a 1st but maybe a young roster player like Nodl (he'll be a decent roster player next season for us or you if he's traded) and a prospect like either Marshall or Bourdon (both still progressing like they will be quality 2nd paring dmen in a few years, different types of dmen depending upon your need), and maybe a late pick.

phlocky 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 01:10 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.