• Announcements

    • StealthNuck

      Forum-specific Rules   07/11/2017

      These are board specific rules for the Trades and Rumors forum designed to provide organization and a better experience for everyone. Please review these rules before posting new threads. 
        THREAD ETIQUETTE   1. Please search for an existing thread before posting. This forum can be very fast moving, so it's understandable if redundant threads are inadvertently posted. In such a case, please use the report feature to request removal of redundant threads.    2. Provide a clearly identifiable topic title so that users can readily understand the content. The title should include any and all teams involved, as well as player names or other personnel involved as appropriate.   3. All trades, signings, rumors 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. Moderators may remove low-quality threads in favour of high-quality threads. 

      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 items that don't fit into the above categories, affix an appropriate label of your choice such as [NEWS], [ARTICLE] or [MISC].   4. When the status of a thread changes a new thread can be created. The new thread should reflect the change and help focus the discussion on current events. e.g. Someone may create a new thread when a rumor becomes a trades. The old thread will be locked by the moderating team.    5. Do not misrepresent the contents of your thread or post false trades or rumors. Trolling will result in a permanent suspension. 

      SOURCES   The following source types are considered INVALID. 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
      Additionally, certain sources may be be blacklisted due to poor credentials, clear traffic-mongering etc. Blacklisted sources will be posted here. 
      Thank you for your co-operation and please PM the Administrator or Moderators if you have any questions, concerns or suggestions regarding this forum.

Archived

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

Templeton Peck

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

Recommended Posts

There is some months old 'speculation'/pipe dreams out of Toronto/Dreger that they are going to manage to unload Komisarek and acquire Luongo - this takes it to a whole new level of dumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're one of "those guys" eh? It's almost as if people around here like to discredit Toronto just to fit in.

What about Carter Ashton, Tyler Bozak, Cody Franson, Nazem Kadri, Joe Colborne, Tyler Biggs, Matt Finn, Jerry D'amigo, Matt Frattin, Brad Ross, Nicolas Deschamps, Greg Mckegg, and then include draft picks into the mix and Toronto still has NOTHING??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's be realistic, I would say 99.673% of trade rumors are different degrees of educated speculation.

Dreger leaks info GM's intend to leak.

Burke wanted FLA and whatever other team to know how low his offer was to keep a bidding war from developing.

Exact some thing can be said about Tallon and his reluctance to give up prospects.

Gillis also played the game by mentioning that there are many teams interested and he was in no rush.

It a game, a slow borring game!

Who will be the first to bend over?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I take it you're one of "those guys" who is willing to settle for Burkie's table scraps and 'B' prospects (isn't lumping people into categories fun?).

If it makes you feel better, I believe that Calgary has a craptier prospect pool than your precious Leafs. So rest easy because your mediocrity will still be better than whatever roster the Flames will be able to cobble together.

As far as I'm concerned Tman, there is no player on the Leaf roster right now that Burkie will trade and who will push us over the top, and there is no player aside from Riley who has any sort of stellar future potential in their system. Sorry to say it and dash your hopes.

You're going to have to take your Leaf glasses off for a bit here.

Carter Ashton will not amount to anything. Merely suggesting him as a candidate for Luongo is absurd. I'm fairly confident in that assessment. Same goes for Mckegg.

Then you have young Matt Finn, and Brad Ross. Both haven't played pro hockey. Brad Ross played on a stacked Winterhawks team so I'll reserve my judgement on him once I've seen him play in a more reasonable lineup. Finn just got drafted.

Bozak, Frattin, and Franson aren't prospects anymore in the traditional sense (age). I think even "people like you" would agree with me on that. Franson would be a depth D man on the Canucks in all likelyhood and Bozak might slot in for Kesler at the beginning of the season but then what? Is he the capable 3rd line center the Canucks have been looking for?

Kadri and Colborne are huge projects. Kadri isn't the savior of the Leafs, and Colborne is just another big body who hasn't put all the tools together. We have one of those already.

And so we're left with Biggs, D'amigo, and Deschamps. All still cutting their teeth in the minors.

So in truth I never suggested the Leafs had "NOTHING". I'm just saying they don't have anything right now to help us, and the only player who we could use as a cornerstone of this franchise moving forward is most likely Riley. And that's the bottom line. We can draft our own D'amigos and Mckeggs.

By the way I realize you probably aren't a Leafs fan. I'm just messin'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I take it you're one of "those guys" who is willing to settle for Burkie's table scraps and 'B' prospects (isn't lumping people into categories fun?).

If it makes you feel better, I believe that Calgary has a craptier prospect pool than your precious Leafs. So rest easy because your mediocrity will still be better than whatever roster the Flames will be able to cobble together.

As far as I'm concerned Tman, there is no player on the Leaf roster right now that Burkie will trade and who will push us over the top, and there is no player aside from Riley who has any sort of stellar future potential in their system. Sorry to say it and dash your hopes.

You're going to have to take your Leaf glasses off for a bit here.

Carter Ashton will not amount to anything. Merely suggesting him as a candidate for Luongo is absurd. I'm fairly confident in that assessment. Same goes for Mckegg.

Then you have young Matt Finn, and Brad Ross. Both haven't played pro hockey. Brad Ross played on a stacked Winterhawks team so I'll reserve my judgement on him once I've seen him play in a more reasonable lineup. Finn just got drafted.

Bozak, Frattin, and Franson aren't prospects anymore in the traditional sense (age). I think even "people like you" would agree with me on that. Franson would be a depth D man on the Canucks in all likelyhood and Bozak might slot in for Kesler at the beginning of the season but then what? Is he the capable 3rd line center the Canucks have been looking for?

Kadri and Colborne are huge projects. Kadri isn't the savior of the Leafs, and Colborne is just another big body who hasn't put all the tools together. We have one of those already.

And so we're left with Biggs, D'amigo, and Deschamps. All still cutting their teeth in the minors.

So in truth I never suggested the Leafs had "NOTHING". I'm just saying they don't have anything right now to help us, and the only player who we could use as a cornerstone of this franchise moving forward is most likely Riley. And that's the bottom line. We can draft our own D'amigos and Mckeggs.

By the way I realize you probably aren't a Leafs fan. I'm just messin'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point I was trying to make is that people will be like trade Luongo for Bjugstad straight up! Then someone could suggest Luongo for Franson, Colborne/Bozak, and a pick (which actually helps us with a third line center and depth on defense) and then everybody laughs and says we want to win now, how does that push us over the top with all that "leaf garbage"

Well how does Bjugstad help us win now, or push us over the top? I would love to have Bjugstad don't get me wrong, and you're right I am not a leafs fan in any way, but I just find peoples comments ironic sometimes.

Florida had a solid season from Theodore and Clemmensen, and still have Markstrom waiting in the wings. Tampa has Lindback, and just drafted Vasilevski, Washington has Holtby and Neuvirth. Who's to say all these teams aren't content with starting the season with what they have before deciding to make a move? If any of their goaltending presents itself as a problem they are not likely to do anything about it for at least 3/4 months into the season. Any of these teams could just say screw this at the asking price for Luongo and play our bluff, knowing that as soon as the season starts we are at more of a disadvantage.

Toronto therefore is really the only desperate team, and if it turns out to be our only option something like Franson, Colborne, 1st would be a good return regardless of the "leaf haters" here. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's be realistic, I would say 99.673% of trade rumors are different degrees of educated speculation.

Dreger leaks info GM's intend to leak.

Burke wanted FLA and whatever other team to know how low his offer was to keep a bidding war from developing.

Exact some thing can be said about Tallon and his reluctance to give up prospects.

Gillis also played the game by mentioning that there are many teams interested and he was in no rush.

It a game, a slow borring game!

Who will be the first to bend over?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point I was trying to make is that people will be like trade Luongo for Bjugstad straight up! Then someone could suggest Luongo for Franson, Colborne/Bozak, and a pick (which actually helps us with a third line center and depth on defense) and then everybody laughs and says we want to win now, how does that push us over the top with all that "leaf garbage"

Well how does Bjugstad help us win now, or push us over the top? I would love to have Bjugstad don't get me wrong, and you're right I am not a leafs fan in any way, but I just find peoples comments ironic sometimes.

Florida had a solid season from Theodore and Clemmensen, and still have Markstrom waiting in the wings. Tampa has Lindback, and just drafted Vasilevski, Washington has Holtby and Neuvirth. Who's to say all these teams aren't content with starting the season with what they have before deciding to make a move? If any of their goaltending presents itself as a problem they are not likely to do anything about it for at least 3/4 months into the season. Any of these teams could just say screw this at the asking price for Luongo and play our bluff, knowing that as soon as the season starts we are at more of a disadvantage.

Toronto therefore is really the only desperate team, and if it turns out to be our only option something like Franson, Colborne, 1st would be a good return regardless of the "leaf haters" here. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I was MG I'd call Burke out and say "anymore lowball offers will not be hurd by the TML and untill they are ready to make a reasonable offer then I wont talk to them as theres still many teams interested and I am looking hard at them all which means something might be done quick" Thats should scare Burke a bit into making a better offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you when you say that the Leafs are the most obvious trade partner. Problem is, like I said, their prospect pools isn't as intriguing as Florida's (to me at least).

If they truly are our only option I'd prefer to see Bozak or Frattin coming the other way instead of Franson in the deal you mentioned. Franson, Colborne and a 1st doesn't cut it in my estimation (earlyish-mid first + project forward + 6/7 Dman).

Keep in mind that Lack is the wild card here. If he isn't ready for the show we might need a goalie coming back to us.

I also agree that Bjugstad isn't the player to push us over the top. Nor am I saying that he should be the ONLY piece coming back to us in a trade. I just think he has more upside than most Leaf prospects and would be a nice piece to fit in somewhere in the future. He was a player I was hoping the Canucks would draft that year, however unlikely it was that he would slide to us.

I just don't want Gillis to settle, and I'm glad he is taking his time and standing his ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im glad he's standing his ground too. Look at it this way......

-Tomas Kaberle was apparently worth Joe Colborne and a first round pick than we should get more for Luongo.

-If Francois Beauchemin is worth Jake Gardiner and Jofferey Lupul than Luongo should get us more than that too.

-If relatively unproven Jaroslav Halak is worth two prospects than Luongo should fetch us double.

- If Rick Nash who arguably has a worse contract than Luongo is worth Dubinksy, Anisimov, Erixon, and a 1st than Luongo should get us AT LEAST half of that ( top pick and a prospect)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's painful for me to not bring up the whole than/then thing when it's misused four times in a row, but I'll stick to the hockey stuff. It's easy to declare trade winners a year or two later when someone (Halak, Lupul) seriously overachieves. I don't think it's fair to look back and call it a one-sided trade. In the moment, on paper, most trades are going to satisfy the needs of each side, even if it means dumping salary or getting rid of a problem in the dressing room (Cody).

I think a Luongo trade will be very fair on paper, but it'll be a couple years before we can say who won. If Luongo wins the Cup in another town and our incoming prospects retire in the ECHL, well, that will end up being talked about for a very long time. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry boss, when is the spelling test? :P Anyway, I wasn't declaring any trade "winners or losers" or even saying that they were one sided, but simply trying to guess what the Canucks should hope for in a return based on market value given recent examples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im glad he's standing his ground too. Look at it this way......

-Tomas Kaberle was apparently worth Joe Colborne and a first round pick than we should get more for Luongo.

-If Francois Beauchemin is worth Jake Gardiner and Jofferey Lupul than Luongo should get us more than that too.

-If relatively unproven Jaroslav Halak is worth two prospects than Luongo should fetch us double.

- If Rick Nash who arguably has a worse contract than Luongo is worth Dubinksy, Anisimov, Erixon, and a 1st than Luongo should get us AT LEAST half of that ( top pick and a prospect)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not inconceivable that Florida and Toronto could wind up fighting it out for an 8th seed - so those keep it cheap tactics aren't without a downside for the team that doesn't cut a deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry boss, when is the spelling test? :P Anyway, I wasn't declaring any trade "winners or losers" or even saying that they were one sided, but simply trying to guess what the Canucks should hope for in a return based on market value given recent examples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.