[Discussion] Roberto Luongo Trade Thread (Keep all discussion here)

[L'Orange]

King of es should have his own pinned thread.. Whenever you feel like arguing with him you just go to the KOE thread and say what's on your mind about the Canucks. The king then finds potential reasons your wrong and you can argue till the lockout ends if you want

[King of the ES]

you are arguing that they should have sold low - and you're in denial - and in the next few lines you acknowledge that his value in fact increased - making all your whining about projected lost value moot, and a contradiction, as usual.

[King of the ES]

Surprise, King, you completely 'missed' their point / deleted that part, and substituted a devolved version in your own words.

[oldnews]

No, I am saying that we should've sold NOT AS HIGH. There's a big difference. We still gain by making the trade, but we don't go for every last ounce of value that we could possibly have squeezed out of it - at a cost of possibly jeopardizing our relationship with the goalie that we have now (which happened).

You're correct that Luongo's easily the best goalie available, but who needs/wants a goalie? Looking at the teams, I'd list them as:

-Florida

-Washington

-Toronto

-Long Island

-Chicago

-Edmonton

-Columbus

That's 8 teams, by my calculation, who don't have a firm starter in place. And then, you've gotta think, that most all of them have a reasonable excuse for why they shouldn't acquire Luongo, in the form of either a good prospect, or a young guy that they're not giving up on:

-Florida (Markstrom)

-Washington (Holtby)

-Toronto (Reimer)

-Chicago (Crawford)

-Edmonton (Dubnyk)

-Columbus (Mason)

Only the Islanders, that I can see, are a team without another goalie that they may instead prefer to run with, but what are the odds that you place on Lou accepting a trade to Bridgeport? It doesn't matter that Lou's the best goalie, there just aren't a lot of buyers for that position.

If you disagree, let's hear some reasons. The other angle that could work is if a 3rd team is brought in, for a 3-way deal. So, for example, SJ wants Luongo, so they acquire him and send Niemi to Columbus, and we get back whatever from whichever team. But 2 teams making a deal is rare enough, so this would be a long shot.

And from the list that I've produced, I can't see Luongo waiving his NTC for the BJs, the Islanders, the Oilers, or the Leafs, shrinking the realistic market even further.

[King of the ES]

Your head remains firmly planted in the sand.

1 goalie - 8 teams, reasonable excuses, and, uh, whatever.

I can't see - that part stands out.

Wait and see.

Been here done that King.

[L'Orange]

Been here, seen this, indeed. An obvious lack of capacity to debate, as you've shown multiple times.

But hey, you've still got the ability to squeal "GO CANUCKZZ GOOOO!" with the best of 'em. Just make sure to have the mop nearby to clean up all the drool on the floor after your battle cry.

[Barry_Wilkins]

You're correct that Luongo's easily the best goalie available, but who needs/wants a goalie? Looking at the teams, I'd list them as:

-Florida

-Washington

-Toronto

-Long Island

-Chicago

-Edmonton

-Columbus

That's 8 teams, by my calculation, who don't have a firm starter in place. And then, you've gotta think, that most all of them have a reasonable excuse for why they shouldn't acquire Luongo, in the form of either a good prospect, or a young guy that they're not giving up on:

-Florida (Markstrom)

-Washington (Holtby)

-Toronto (Reimer)

-Chicago (Crawford)

-Edmonton (Dubnyk)

-Columbus (Mason)

Only the Islanders, that I can see, are a team without another goalie that they may instead prefer to run with, but what are the odds that you place on Lou accepting a trade to Bridgeport? It doesn't matter that Lou's the best goalie, there just aren't a lot of buyers for that position.

If you disagree, let's hear some reasons.

[elvis15]

So long as you guys keep feeding the fire, he'll keep fanning the flames. Recognize when you're arguing over the internet with someone who won't change their mind no matter how many logical arguments you shove in his face, and you'll be better off.

Heck, this thread will even be better off as there might be some reasonable discussion on any information that comes up, like Botchford's /topic/333538-rumoursreports-roberto-luongo-trade-thread-keep-all-news-here/page__st__30#entry10914680">recent article about the mystery team(s) that added their hats in the ring just prior to the lockout. Who knows if it's true, or to what extent the interest was, but at least it's something to discuss rather than watching you all argue back and forth with KotES.

[Barry_Wilkins]

So long as you guys keep feeding the fire, he'll keep fanning the flames. Recognize when you're arguing over the internet with someone who won't change their mind no matter how many logical arguments you shove in his face, and you'll be better off.

Heck, this thread will even be better off as there might be some reasonable discussion on any information that comes up, like Botchford's /topic/333538-rumoursreports-roberto-luongo-trade-thread-keep-all-news-here/page__st__30#entry10914680">recent article about the mystery team(s) that added their hats in the ring just prior to the lockout. Who knows if it's true, or to what extent the interest was, but at least it's something to discuss rather than watching you all argue back and forth with KotES.

[elvis15]

I've always been puzzled by the frequent pleas to "do not feed the trolls". Most of us realize what King of the BS is up to. Any actual news on Luongo will get discussed whatever K of the BS says or doesn't say. But his constant posting, and reactions from it, in lieu of the dead (and probably LONG dead) days and months of a hockey lockout is a source of entertainment, nothing more, nothing less. No one's going to convince him of the error of his ways, and he's certainly not convincing anyone with his constantly shifting nonsense, either.

[Barry_Wilkins]

I get your point, and I'm in sympathy with it to some extent. But the anti-ES brigade actually make some good points that otherwise might not come up were it not for his clumsy prodding. I realize it gets personal at times, but then that's up to the mods to delete posts etc. I just see it as a chance for entertaining one-sided debate in which some good points are occasionally made.

As to that Botchford article you linked -- well, it's Botchford. A lot of hypothetical K of the BS stuff. Hyperbole sells papers, though, so likewise, I think he knows what he's doing with that approach.

Aside from that article's point -- that Lu would hate to go into an environment of seat-of-the-pants goalie instruction -- I think Lu's greater hesitancy about TO might involve their atrocious team, and more importantly, their slim chances that they'll improve enough in his last 8 years of his career to have even a sniff at the Stanley Cup there.

I don't argue with the strictures Luongo will put on where he wants to be traded, but aside from TO and Columbus, there are quite a few teams that need a star goalie that I could see Luongo eventuallly waiving his no-trade to accomodate.

[Plaguez]

Yuck, you want en ex Hawk? I'll take the first though.

Van

Alzner, 1st

Was

Luongo, Raymond

DONE

[L'Orange]

FLA (Markstrom) - The guy is probably two, even three years away from a potential job with the big club. He's high on the league-wide goalie prospects list, but there's a reason that some ranking systems won't include goalies at all. The position is a minefield when it comes to how well or how poorly prospects, even the best ones, pan out. And even when one gets more or less established with the bigs, goalies' performances are volatile, especially so amongst younger ones. Having a Luongo is a rare luxury: You know what you're getting since he's been consistently good or great his entire, long career. Comparing him to Markstrom is laughable, and Florida would be insane to pass up on a chance to acquire Lu just because they want to gamble on putting all their eggs in the Markstrom basket.

WAS (Holtby) - A more developed Markstrom, but essentially he's been great for two playoff rounds. You're the guy who said it's a risk to stay with a goalie who's played less than 50 games in a season, and now you think that Washington is home and clear because of his great, short run? The NHL is intriguing for its long list of goalies who've played well out of the gate, even for a year, only to crash and burn when handed the #1 job long term. Which brings us to your next choice of of goalies whose teams "may instead prefer to run with". (I love how you constantly couch your arguments in equivocation, as if hedging somehow proves your point.)

TOR (Reimer) - He's a good example of what I meant in my last paragraph. Starts with a bang, the Tor media has a group orgasm about his long-term saviour prospects, then he tanks when teams find out his weaknesses and when he has to maintain his consistency over a long string of games. Even spotting him with the other TO dud last year didn't take any pressure off Reimer. He's no different from a lot of young, inexperienced goalies in the league who just aren't very good in a career context. TO would love to have Lu, and only a fool or a troll would say otherwise.

CHI (Crawford) - Another fascinating study as a logical extension of Markstrom, Holtby, and Reimer. Crawford has more experience, and performed well in his first season, especially so since his performance wasn't hidden as much as others (Smith, Rinne) because of Chicago's up-tempo style. But there we go again -- last year, he came back to earth in a big way, with many patches of spotty performance. Chicago had some significant injuries throughout the year, but Crawford played poorly many nights even with their big guns all playing. I'm sure they're quite concerned going into next season wondering which Crawford will show up.

EDM (Dubnyk) - Not much to discuss here. If you think that Edmonton would be making straight up comparisons between Luongo and Dubnyk, then I guess you think Tambellini has a steady supply of kick-azz reefer. Edmonton's defense is porous enough. They'd do a lot better with a Grant Fuhr philosophy -- investing in a star goalie so they can win the many 8-5 shooting gallery games.

COL (Mason) - A no-brainer. Defines the highs and lows of goalie performance. Columbus has put on a brave face concerning its decisions on Mason's future. Of course they do. It doesn't serve them in any prospective trade discussions to trash the guy in the media. But they'd dump him in a Sami Salo slapshot split-second if they could work out a reasonable deal for Luongo (though I concede that i doubt Lu would want to go there -- however, that's not the point of this particular argument.)

Luongo is a huge upgrade for all these teams, with the possible exception of Chicago. And you've missed a few other teams, as well, Tampa (a prime Luongo destination) among them, what with the unproven Lindback their latest "saviour".

So no, GMs of these teams will only "run with" their status quos if they, and Gillis, can't come up with a mutually satisfying package to get Luongo. It has nothing to do with their "preference" with the shaky incumbents they have now.

[Pears]

So, let me get this right. One person thinks a top ten starting goalie with good numbers in his career is worth a 3rd liner and a late pick, while another thinks he isn't even worth that much?

People are way under valuing Luongo. Plain and simple he can be and will be a difference maker on any team he joins. At least Gillis knows that and is proceeding accordingly. If it was up to CDC, there would be a horrible trade already made and ppl calling for Gillis' job already.

You don't trade a difference maker for plugs. Gillis will be getting a great return or nothing. I like what he is doing. The market for a top goalie is only going to get better and a trade deadline deal might be the best one to make. Desperate teams overpay out the rear.

[King of the ES]

FLA (Markstrom) - The guy is probably two, even three years away from a potential job with the big club. He's high on the league-wide goalie prospects list, but there's a reason that some ranking systems won't include goalies at all. The position is a minefield when it comes to how well or how poorly prospects, even the best ones, pan out. And even when one gets more or less established with the bigs, goalies' performances are volatile, especially so amongst younger ones. Having a Luongo is a rare luxury: You know what you're getting since he's been consistently good or great his entire, long career. Comparing him to Markstrom is laughable, and Florida would be insane to pass up on a chance to acquire Lu just because they want to gamble on putting all their eggs in the Markstrom basket.

[elvis15]

I get your point, and I'm in sympathy with it to some extent. But the anti-ES brigade actually make some good points that otherwise might not come up were it not for his clumsy prodding. I realize it gets personal at times, but then that's up to the mods to delete posts etc. I just see it as a chance for entertaining one-sided debate in which some good points are occasionally made.

As to that Botchford article you linked -- well, it's Botchford. A lot of hypothetical K of the BS stuff. Hyperbole sells papers, though, so likewise, I think he knows what he's doing with that approach.

Aside from that article's point -- that Lu would hate to go into an environment of seat-of-the-pants goalie instruction -- I think Lu's greater hesitancy about TO might involve their atrocious team, and more importantly, their slim chances that they'll improve enough in his last 8 years of his career to have even a sniff at the Stanley Cup there.

I don't argue with the strictures Luongo will put on where he wants to be traded, but aside from TO and Columbus, there are quite a few teams that need a star goalie that I could see Luongo eventuallly waiving his no-trade to accomodate.

[King of the ES]

That's my point though, why bother even acknowledging him if that's the case. Instead what happens is the thread becomes a useless drivel machine and any information that does get posted quickly gets overlooked and pushed back three pages while a couple of people get their entertainment value by responding to him.

You guys might have some interesting information that comes up as a result but most of it results in name calling and bickering, or people repeating the same points over and over again (proof positive people are trying to convince him still). This is one of the few instances I'd support starting a new thread and letting the old one die so the rest of us don't have to read through it to enjoy a discussion.

I will say that I thought Bure and King arguing in the other thread made me laugh to no end, until it got shut down (and rightly so) by the mods, but we should leave some threads where we can have intelligent discussions though.

[oldnews]

Been here, seen this, indeed. An obvious lack of capacity to debate, as you've shown multiple times.

But hey, you've still got the ability to squeal "GO CANUCKZZ GOOOO!" with the best of 'em. Just make sure to have the mop nearby to clean up all the drool on the floor after your battle cry.

[Barry_Wilkins]

You're forgetting about the other factors. Florida has no money. I'm sure that the idea of a goalie with a lot of upside on an ELC intrigues them. Markstrom was the 31st overall pick in '08, put up ridiculous numbers in the AHL, and was also very, very good in his 7 NHL games played last year. He might not be as far off as you think.

[smurf47]

In case you haven't noticed, there's been more intelligent hockey speak/debate on this thread than practically anything else on this site. So why don't you stop trying to be a policeman and go hang out in the Frankie Corrado hype thread if this is bothering you. Nobody asked for nor cares about your opinion on board etiquette.

I have a different take than most, and that's all it is. That's fine. People want to slam me, go ahead, I can take it. The results will speak for themselves when they're shown.