Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * - - - 3 votes

(Vancouver Sun Article) Vigneault ‘Didn't Mean What He Said’ On Luongo Trade Request


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
219 replies to this topic

#211 Banned01

Banned01

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 869 posts
  • Joined: 20-April 10

Posted 02 June 2012 - 09:06 PM

:lol:


A comment based on Bob Mackenzie's comment on TSN of Luo's market being narrower than originally hoped but hey, cut and paste my comments all you want to try and undermine me personally, reality is you do not know what you are talking about here half the time.

#212 Banned01

Banned01

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 869 posts
  • Joined: 20-April 10

Posted 02 June 2012 - 09:07 PM

To spell this out...



UFA (ie cannot be a part of a trade package) - and regardless, ridiculously over-valued...hence...



UFA and ridiculously over-valued....


Maybe a little too sophisticated for you to understand but in these cases it is usually assumed it is the rights to the player before July 1...

Hate to break this simple fact to you but teams own the rights to players right up until July 1.

How do you think the Flames traded for Jbo ? Wow - man you need to get schooled...

Players rights at all levels are tossed into trades all the time, even if the value is slim to none, it is certainly not unheard of and gives a team a week or two to have exclusive conversations with them...

Edited by Banned01, 02 June 2012 - 09:09 PM.


#213 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,146 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 02 June 2012 - 09:10 PM

A comment based on Bob Mackenzie's comment on TSN of Luo's market being narrower than originally hoped but hey, cut and paste my comments all you want to try and undermine me personally, reality is you do not know what you are talking about here half the time.


half the time is twice as often as never ::D
but what is the point of this thread now, the fire sale came and went.

to sum up your contributions
The Canucks can't keep Luongo - blah blah
The Canucks can't trade Luongo - blah blah

Some people prefer to focus on reality, actual information, things GMs, coaches and players say, and the like.
Others prefer to live in their imaginations, "read between the lines" and let their ego run wild speculating.

Edited by oldnews, 02 June 2012 - 09:17 PM.


#214 Banned01

Banned01

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 869 posts
  • Joined: 20-April 10

Posted 02 June 2012 - 09:16 PM

half the time is twice as often as never ::D


They are a lot of solid people here who know hockey, why are you the only one on a mission to respond to me and troll me constantly?

My view is fine, if it wasn't, I would have more than one person on the NHL's biggest message board debating me...

A Luongo trade will be contained by the parameters of the Cap atmosphere - your refusal to consider relative comparisons of what other teams spend total on Goaltending and to present trade proposals and so forth tell me that you talk out of your hat on the topic.

I have said here numerous times that Luo may indeed be traded to Toronto but it will not be for the value many seem to think he will earn.

You yourself have never even put a trade up for him with Toronto, probably because you lack the wherewithal to even make one...

Edited by Banned01, 02 June 2012 - 09:19 PM.


#215 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,146 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 02 June 2012 - 09:47 PM

They are a lot of solid people here who know hockey, why are you the only one on a mission to respond to me and troll me constantly?

My view is fine, if it wasn't, I would have more than one person on the NHL's biggest message board debating me...

A Luongo trade will be contained by the parameters of the Cap atmosphere - your refusal to consider relative comparisons of what other teams spend total on Goaltending and to present trade proposals and so forth tell me that you talk out of your hat on the topic.

I have said here numerous times that Luo may indeed be traded to Toronto but it will not be for the value many seem to think he will earn.

You yourself have never even put a trade up for him with Toronto, probably because you lack the wherewithal to even make one...


Regarding your delusion that I am the only person who disagrees with you, you clearly have a short memory or haven't reviewed this thread. You are probably fortunate that CDC has not brought back the minus - how have you managed to still remain in the red after so long? Regarding "trolling" you, the irony is that you've made a bunch of ridiculous claims obviously completely unaware of what Gillis has said, unaware of what stage these Luongo processes are (which never stops you from puffing up your chest and posturing like you know what you are talking about) - you've made endless posts and comments arguing with my blogs (borderline compulsive really - you keep on keeping on, and always insist that you be responded to, and then you whine that you are being trolled?) - you have argued with practically every post I have ever written regarding your Flames, and you seem on a mission to double your total number of all time posts - in this thread alone.

LIke I said, I listen to what Gillis, Luongo, Schneider and Schneider's agent have to say on the issue - which is a pretty good starting point, not leaping into wild speculation like you have without paying half-assed attention to the actual context of all their comments.
I have made very clear statements regarding what I personally would like to see and think is realistic - if the Canucks decide to trade Luongo, if Luongo in fact decides he wants to be traded, waives his ntc, and puts Toronto on a list of potential destinations - NONE OF WHICH HAVE BEEN DETERMINED TO DATE - and this thread is not about trade proposals - but to repeat what I have said numerous time in other threads - at the very least, the rights to RFA defenseman Cody Franson, prospect center Joe Colborne, and a conditional pick - this year's 2nd (35th overall), or next year's 1st (likely middle of the pack after Luongo turns Toronto into a playoff team) if the Canucks throw in a depth piece in return. Otherwise, if it were up to me, Toronto is free to gamble on Vokoun, as are Burke and Nonis with their jobs.
I think Columbus will not try to play as many low-ball games at Toronto and would make a better trade partner - depending upon Luongo's flexibility. I don't see Columbus pursuing Luongo unless it is part of a pitch to keep Nash around, and I don't see Luongo being willing to go there if they are clearing house and rebuilding - so their interest is interesting, but would likely depend upon a change of direction from their shopping of Nash - but really, just a bunch of speculation with no real information aside from Lebrun reports that Columbus is "very interested."

Edited by oldnews, 02 June 2012 - 10:28 PM.


#216 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,744 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 03 June 2012 - 04:52 PM

Honest question > why do you like him and how good is Colburne?

Looks like he played with in Camrose just after Raymond and had better numbers, but has taken a lot longer via college etc. What can you tell us?

Regarding your delusion that I am the only person who disagrees with you, you clearly have a short memory or haven't reviewed this thread. You are probably fortunate that CDC has not brought back the minus - how have you managed to still remain in the red after so long? Regarding "trolling" you, the irony is that you've made a bunch of ridiculous claims obviously completely unaware of what Gillis has said, unaware of what stage these Luongo processes are (which never stops you from puffing up your chest and posturing like you know what you are talking about) - you've made endless posts and comments arguing with my blogs (borderline compulsive really - you keep on keeping on, and always insist that you be responded to, and then you whine that you are being trolled?) - you have argued with practically every post I have ever written regarding your Flames, and you seem on a mission to double your total number of all time posts - in this thread alone.

LIke I said, I listen to what Gillis, Luongo, Schneider and Schneider's agent have to say on the issue - which is a pretty good starting point, not leaping into wild speculation like you have without paying half-assed attention to the actual context of all their comments.
I have made very clear statements regarding what I personally would like to see and think is realistic - if the Canucks decide to trade Luongo, if Luongo in fact decides he wants to be traded, waives his ntc, and puts Toronto on a list of potential destinations - NONE OF WHICH HAVE BEEN DETERMINED TO DATE - and this thread is not about trade proposals - but to repeat what I have said numerous time in other threads - at the very least, the rights to RFA defenseman Cody Franson, prospect center Joe Colborne, and a conditional pick - this year's 2nd (35th overall), or next year's 1st (likely middle of the pack after Luongo turns Toronto into a playoff team) if the Canucks throw in a depth piece in return. Otherwise, if it were up to me, Toronto is free to gamble on Vokoun, as are Burke and Nonis with their jobs.
I think Columbus will not try to play as many low-ball games at Toronto and would make a better trade partner - depending upon Luongo's flexibility. I don't see Columbus pursuing Luongo unless it is part of a pitch to keep Nash around, and I don't see Luongo being willing to go there if they are clearing house and rebuilding - so their interest is interesting, but would likely depend upon a change of direction from their shopping of Nash - but really, just a bunch of speculation with no real information aside from Lebrun reports that Columbus is "very interested."


Edited by Canuck Surfer, 03 June 2012 - 04:52 PM.


#217 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,146 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 03 June 2012 - 06:12 PM

Honest question > why do you like him and how good is Colburne?

Looks like he played with in Camrose just after Raymond and had better numbers, but has taken a lot longer via college etc. What can you tell us?


Do you mean why do I like Franson? Franson is a big (6'5"), young (24 year old), right-handed (if Salo doesn't return we only have a pair of RH in our top 8 and our two top prospects are LH as well), has a nice hard shot (can score the odd goal) and offensive upside, skates well, seems like a fairly balanced young guy with a lot of potential, is also a BC boy - I really don't think Nashville would have moved him were it not for Weber, Suter, etc, and I'd like to see how he develops on a team like Vancouver. Could sign him at a more reasonable cap hit than the $3.6 million Schenn who is in my mind a bigger risk. I think Franson is just at that point where he could benefit from a strong partner and might sign for what turns out to be a very sensible cap hit - leaving cap space for a few other guys high on everyone's wish list...
Colborne is also a big (6'5") young center - not far from being NHL ready - good offensive skills (perhaps not top line material but who knows) - I think he'd be a good young prospect, different from Schroeder - in my mind, we have a lot of depth on the blueline and some prospects (Tanev, Connauton, Sauve, Gragnani) same in terms of goaltending (Schneider, Lack and a few guys with a lot of potential) and our wingers (Jensen, Kassian and a few other young players) - adding a big young center in my mind is the type of prospect that makes the most sense - and to be honest, where Toronto is concerned, the options are not endless...(they have a pair of young right wingers in Ashton and Biggs, but I think Colborne being a center, might make the most sense). I tthink I would like to see some cap space retained by acquiring young players, and not much on Toronto's roster (aside from Franson) that I would want to take on...

#218 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,744 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 03 June 2012 - 07:27 PM

Thanx for that!

I'm up on Franson, just did not know about Colburne. To me we need more than Franson as the headline return, after all he was acquired from Nashville for a 2knd rounder. He has holes in his game and is probably a third pair guy, 2knd PP? But the strengths of his game (all which you have listed) are in high demand here, making him a potentially very valuable 3rd pair guy here.

I made a separate post suggesting Franson and Kadri, but really did not know much about him either. To me I was hoping to add another play making prospect to replace CoHo. (I was told I was a ______!). The headline item in the trade was swapping our first for their (5th overall) first pick. I also threw in Tanev, a steady guy who helps all the "guns" on TO, also his size shortcomings are not a concern for them and his puck moving skills an asset. My opinion is that unless Colburne is a blue chip top end prospect, we need more for Lou than just Franson & him?

Do you mean why do I like Franson? Franson is a big (6'5"), young (24 year old), right-handed (if Salo doesn't return we only have a pair of RH in our top 8 and our two top prospects are LH as well), has a nice hard shot (can score the odd goal) and offensive upside, skates well, seems like a fairly balanced young guy with a lot of potential, is also a BC boy - I really don't think Nashville would have moved him were it not for Weber, Suter, etc, and I'd like to see how he develops on a team like Vancouver. Could sign him at a more reasonable cap hit than the $3.6 million Schenn who is in my mind a bigger risk. I think Franson is just at that point where he could benefit from a strong partner and might sign for what turns out to be a very sensible cap hit - leaving cap space for a few other guys high on everyone's wish list...
Colborne is also a big (6'5") young center - not far from being NHL ready - good offensive skills (perhaps not top line material but who knows) - I think he'd be a good young prospect, different from Schroeder - in my mind, we have a lot of depth on the blueline and some prospects (Tanev, Connauton, Sauve, Gragnani) same in terms of goaltending (Schneider, Lack and a few guys with a lot of potential) and our wingers (Jensen, Kassian and a few other young players) - adding a big young center in my mind is the type of prospect that makes the most sense - and to be honest, where Toronto is concerned, the options are not endless...(they have a pair of young right wingers in Ashton and Biggs, but I think Colborne being a center, might make the most sense). I tthink I would like to see some cap space retained by acquiring young players, and not much on Toronto's roster (aside from Franson) that I would want to take on...


Edited by Canuck Surfer, 03 June 2012 - 07:31 PM.


#219 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,146 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 03 June 2012 - 07:39 PM

Thanx for that!

I'm up on Franson, just did not know about Colburne. To me we need more than Franson as the headline return, after all he was acquired from Nashville for a 2knd rounder. He has holes in his game and is probably a third pair guy, 2knd PP? But the strengths of his game (all which you have listed) are in high demand here, making him a potentially very valuable 3rd pair guy here.

I made a separate post suggesting Franson and Kadri, but really did not know much about him either. To me I was hoping to add another play making prospect to replace CoHo. (I was told I was a ______!). The headline item in the trade was swapping our first for their (5th overall) first pick. I also threw in Tanev, a steady guy who helps all the "guns" on TO, also his size shortcomings are not a concern for them and his puck moving skills an asset. My opinion is that unless Colburne is a blue chip top end prospect, we need more for Lou than just Franson & him?


Colborne was a first round pick - who can be sure how good he becomes, but yeah, I think Toronto would need to throw in a 2nd at least, and perhaps if they wanted a depth dman in the deal, next year's first (although odds are Burke won't want to part with that, even if they manage to finish higher and their first isn't quite as valuable. I think Franson would definitely make a solid third pairing guy at this point - the limits to his game are apparently his defensive awareness - but he is still young, a good skater and a big body - those shortcomings to his game could be like those most young guys deal with at the NHL level and particularly exacerbated playing in Toronto (not the best blueline nor goaltending)? I think Schenn certainly has holes in his game as well, and I think I'd rather take a risk on a guy who isn't going to cost 3.6 at this crucial time.
Columbus might make a better trade partner - if we could pry Johansen (a big young center from Vancouver)away, all the better - and it would be sweet to deny Toronto after all the low-ball crap coming out of that town regarding Luongo...

Edited by oldnews, 03 June 2012 - 08:00 PM.


#220 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,146 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 04 June 2012 - 10:30 AM

Add another chip to the deal now that Vokoun is off the market already... :lol:




Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.