• Announcements

    • Templeton Peck

      BOARD SPECIFIC RULES   02/05/2016

      These are board specific rules, meant to try to make the Trades and Free Agent Signings forum better for everyone. YOU MUST READ AND ABIDE BY THESE FORUM RULES.

      1. If an event happens, wait a few minutes before posting, in all likelihood, someone has already posted it. We don't want numerous threads on the same event, so please search before posting.

      2. Please provide a clearly identifiable topic title for your thread so that user's can search for and find the appropriate thread easily. The title should include any and all teams involved, as well as player names or other personnel involved as appropriate. This is to help avoid duplicate threads and to make searching easier. For any and all comments, please use the Topic Description box instead of the title.

      Affixed to the front of your title should be a label that identifies the type of transaction that is taking place. For all trades use [TRADE]. For all signings use [SIGNING]. For all waiver-wire transactions use [WAIVERS]. For all rumours use [RUMOUR].
      For articles or news that don't fit into the above categories, affix an appropriately label of your choice such as [NEWS], [ARTICLE] or [MISC].

      3. All trades, signings, rumours and other news MUST include a linkable source. Simply posting the name of the source is not enough. Effort should also be made to copy and paste the full article, or at the very least the relevant portion of text from the source to the first post of the thread.

      The following are NOT considered valid sources: Any links to posts or threads on other message boards Any links to personal blogs Any news heard on the radio that does not have a link to an audio vault or podcast Any news seen on television that does not have a link to online video Any news spread by word of mouth
      Hockeybuzz, Spector's Hockey and The Fourth Period are currently acceptable sources.

      The NHL Line, Brochu is Hockey and NHL Hockey News by saint Pako are currently invalid sources.

      4. Clearly misrepresenting the contents of your thread or posting false Trades/Signings/Acquisitions to send the forum into a frenzy will be taken very seriously and will result in an automatic suspension.

      5. Please put all proposals into the proposals forum and NOT this forum. Proposals found in this forum will be moved or deleted without warning.

      6. Please report any threads or messages that violate these or other board rules to the administrators or moderators() Do not respond by posting spammy messages such as 'IBTL', and 'LOCK AND BAN', or by attacking other users. The report button is located to the bottom left of every post.

      Thank you for your co-operation and please PM one of the Moderators or Administrators if you have any questions, concerns or suggestions regarding this forum.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Everybody Hates Raymond

[Report/Speculation] Neither Florida or Toronto have had meaningful negotiations about Luongo

53 posts in this topic

CDC can't admit that there's a possibility not many/few teams are interested in Luongo.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CDC can't admit that there's a possibility not many/few teams are interested in Luongo.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lebrun:

"Burke declined to talk about specific goalie targets, but it’s clear through conversations I’ve had with other league sources that the Leafs have interest in Luongo, although as of Wednesday morning, I don’t believe there had been any meaningful discussions between Toronto and Vancouver.

It starts with wishy washy speculation, and these other Toronto guys Cox and Dreger (who has conflict of interest written all over his positions) run with it and are merely parroting each other.

No news here - no real sources - just Toronto media playing games.

I personally am glad to see Toronto resorting to this for a number of reasons. The first and foremost being that I don't want them to have Luongo - second, it is weak.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both sides are trying to gain the power and all gillis has to do is hold out.

I'm thinking Burke is trying to play it off like he's not that interested to get gillis to flog him off for barely anything.. Gillis is too smart for that. He will hold out till the right deal comes, if need be right into next season. The longer he holds out the more desperate Toronto and other teams with struggling/underperforming goalies become.. Burke can play it off like he's not interested all he wants but the fact is luongo is the best goalie availible and the price is gonna skyrocket when other goalies start underperforming and showing their true colors. He'd be better off making a solid pitch for him now.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep Luongo!

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree - it's totally sensical to have $9-10 million in cap space tied up in goaltending...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol.

Cdc just can't admit that Lu's value isn't as high as they think it is.

Gardiner and the 5th overall, Lmao.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol.

Cdc just can't admit that Lu's value isn't as high as they think it is.

Gardiner and the 5th overall, Lmao.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lebrun:

"Burke declined to talk about specific goalie targets, but it’s clear through conversations I’ve had with other league sources that the Leafs have interest in Luongo, although as of Wednesday morning, I don’t believe there had been any meaningful discussions between Toronto and Vancouver.

It starts with wishy washy speculation, and these other Toronto guys Cox and Dreger (who has conflict of interest written all over his positions) run with it and are merely parroting each other.

No news here - no real sources - just Toronto media playing games.

I personally am glad to see Toronto resorting to this for a number of reasons. The first and foremost being that I don't want them to have Luongo - second, it is weak.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Luongo has 7 consecutive 30+ win seasons, 3 Vezina nominations, years of playoff experience and an olympic gold medal. Gillis should be able to get a good return for him. Even if his contract is a bit long, it's still a lot better than some goalies' contracts and it's on par with many other goalies in the NHL who put up similar numbers.

I've never once thought his value was that high.

I was always hovering around Toronto's 2nd rounder, a prospect and a roster player.

Like:

Franson, Colborne & TOR 2nd

FOR

Luongo, Raymond & Tanev.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All these useless updates to the Luongo rumors =(

Considering all of the needless mouse clicks we have used, I think we should all get a free mouse.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on man get with the program. Dreger already stated that Florida doesn't have enough money to resign Garrison so we have to conclude that they cannot afford Lou, right? If you cannot belieeve these guys (after all they are professionals and have a rep to protect) then who can you believe, Grapes?

These are the same guys who are ruining our game with their nightly inquistions on hits from behind, elbows, late hits.. you know the drift. Burke and Gillis will play them and vice versa. The clock ticks!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bahahahaha.

If Schneider falters, or Luongo chokes, nobody is going to give a DAMN how much we would have had invested in goaltending (if we kept them both).

Schneider is still an unproven goaltender; IDGAF how much you CDC pro scouts jerk off to his lateral movement and HNIC after hours interview. Just because you think he can't fail, because of the unlimited talent you perceive he has, doesn't mean he won't. The man has played like 50 games in his career!

And if Luongo gets shelled, wouldn't having a second goaltender ready to go be amazing?

One more year. You win, you're in. We can trade a goalie during the year, or in the next off-season.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More likely:

Luongo + 2nd 2012 to Toronto

Franson + Colborne + 2nd 2012 (Tor) to Vancouver

Less likely:

Luongo + Ballard + 3rd 2013 to Florida

Bjugstad + Garrison's Negotiating Rights + 3rd 2012 and some sort of cap dump should Florida feel that necessary

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you honestly think a GM would publicly display interest in an elite goaltender like Luo? It was give MG bargaining power, for example, if a player openly asks for a trade it would decrease his trade value versus keeping it on the downlow.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you honestly think a GM would publicly display interest in an elite goaltender like Luo? It was give MG bargaining power, for example, if a player openly asks for a trade it would decrease his trade value versus keeping it on the downlow.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok I'll get with the program.

Luongo to Toronto for Komisarek - straight up.

Sorry, I just can't take Cox or Dreger seriously, certainly not on the Luongo matter.

The Panthers have 40.5 million in contracts at the moment - 30 million dollars of space under the projected cap. Tallon was free to go out and spend 7+ million on Campbell - they made the playoffs - they are a franchise on the upswing - I'm sure Luongo for two young players and a roster player would only add a couple million in cap. I don't think the problem with signing Garrison is a lack of money or cap space - I think he is looking to test the market or go somewhere of choice.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

very incisive stuff there Noheart

Luongo for prospects Bjugstad and Petrovic (or other combination of center/defenseman, Theodore or a forward depending on the current assessment of Lack - feel free to criticize if you can put something in words.

oh that's right, we've been through this before, and you don't bother / resort to the Luongo's contract is unmovable, I don't know much about Luongo's contract line.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.