Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

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


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
2402 replies to this topic

#2101 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 18 September 2012 - 11:23 AM

Boils down to what our best guesses are for the future. Many believe Lu has something to prove and will be a Vezina candidate again. I say he should have wanted to prove himself this year after letting himself and the team down in the finals but had a poor season.
Some think Cory will not be able to handle the #1 spot and Canucks be lucky to make the playoffs. With the other teams in our division getting stronger the chances of us winning the Presidents Trophy is very slim with either Lu or Cory. I think Cory will play at elite level and be a Vezina candidate in the very near future, and will give the Cancuks much more CONSISTENT playoff goaltending than Lu has given us for the last 5 years.
Cory will give us solid playoff goaltending like last year for the next 10 years(not under 2 good but just very solid play), I do not think Lu will gave us solid playoff goaltending since 06-07 and the wheels have fell off his bus and he will only get worse.


I agree with most everything here. In no way am I saying that Cory Schneider is a bad goalie; I'm a huge fan. He's good. Might be better than Luongo right now. But I think that for this team, in this stage, the logical move would've been to trade Schneider a long time ago (for a pretty penny), and focus on Luongo.

My problem this whole time is the position that Mike Gillis has put us in. We're being forced to move someone, which is not ideal, ever. And basically, we're being forced to move someone because our GM didn't deal with the obvious two-goalie problem that we had to eventually deal with. And yes, I know, Luongo's never publicly said that he wants a trade, but it is obvious to everyone involved, and to every hockey fan on earth, that he is getting moved.

Say what you want about Schneider and his future playoff performances, but they're really empty words, because he hasn't been there yet. Did you, or anybody else, foresee Luongo's epic playoff failures when he was acquired by Florida? Of course not.
  • 1

#2102 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 18 September 2012 - 11:29 AM

Vinny's been captain for so long and Gillis likes leadership, he's won the Cup before AND only two seasons ago he was able to elevate his game in the playoffs to over 1 p.p.g.; with the talented group around, who's to say he can't do so again?


Nope. Too acclimated to the Florida lifestyle. Had the chance to go home to Montreal a few years ago, didn't want to. IMO, that's a pretty major red flag. To me, it says that Vinny is quite content with making a ton of money and not having to deal with any of the media scrutiny and the added pressure to go along with it. Tampa Bay missing the playoffs this past year should've been totally unacceptable, but it happened. Embarrassing, really, with that roster.

I don't think the leadership that you're looking for can be found in Lecavalier, quite frankly.
  • 0

#2103 WiDeN

WiDeN

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,751 posts
  • Joined: 08-December 06

Posted 18 September 2012 - 11:40 AM

I'm not saying that at all - but nice inference.

The point is that it's possible. Every conceivable event has a probability. For you all to just assume that Schneider's numbers would hold up under a 65-game workload, in his rookie season as a starter, is very optimistic (though that appears to be the name of the game around here - certainly the most optimistic sports fans who's team has never won a championship).

That's a crap way to analyze. The world might end before a new CBA is written, so how should we plan for that?

Why is it more probable that Schneider will change his trajectory by taking a nose dive once he starts more games than it is that Luongo will play well in the playoffs after not playing so well in his last two series?

Luongo has not been this stellar elite amazing goalie that we were promised in the playoffs. So why is it more likely that he will now than it is that Schneider will continue to play great and consistent.

Schneider is not in the same position as Chris Mason and the Blue Jackets were in, and you are making it seem like he is.

I'd love to hear you pitch some of your ideas to Gillis and Gilman, because apparently they are also "optimistic sports fans".

Also, should we be pessimistic because we have never won a cup? No, we should be objective.
  • 1

V a n c o u v e r C a n u c k s

Posted Image
2 0 14 S t a n l e y C u p C h a m p i o n s


#2104 Blömqvist

Blömqvist

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,402 posts
  • Joined: 03-October 09

Posted 18 September 2012 - 11:46 AM

My problem this whole time is the position that Mike Gillis has put us in. We're being forced to move someone, which is not ideal, ever. And basically, we're being forced to move someone because our GM didn't deal with the obvious two-goalie problem that we had to eventually deal with. And yes, I know, Luongo's never publicly said that he wants a trade, but it is obvious to everyone involved, and to every hockey fan on earth, that he is getting moved.


Agreed. Now we're forced to move Luongo and get a relatively bad return. Had Gillis moved Schneider and possibly Hodgson or others in a package a couple of years ago (Stanley Cup run?) we could have gotten a good, quality player.

Wasn't it once speculated that Schneider alone could have fetched Jeff Carter?
And this past January there was a rumour of Schneider, Raymond, Ballard, and possibly a draft pick for Cory Perry?
  • 0

Every pizza is a personal pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.


#2105 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,562 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 12:22 PM

schneider + the talented canucks skaters will get us into the playoffs where schneider will perform consistently better than luongo.


100% agree.
If a less talented Canucks team than this can make the playoffs every year with Dan Cloutier as their starter, there is no reason we cant do the same with Schneider now. The same goes for the playoffs, no other goalie I can think of implodes on an annual basis like Luongo does, once again, advantage Schneider.
  • 0

#2106 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,562 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 12:30 PM

Seems much more likely that Lu will give us the same playoff goaltending or worse that he has gave us the last 4 playoffs, which is not good enough.
Cory's numbers will likely get a bit worse as well and drop a few points, but the gap between him and Lu will continue to grow, with Cory being better than Lu now in my opinion.
3 years ago Cory struggled in his 1st few starts while Lu was at an elite level,,,2 years ago he was the backup to Lu and was almost at Lu's level but Lu was certainly better.
Cory was much better than Lu last season, and I feel after Lu's collapsing in the SCF his ego took a huge hit and will not recover and lead to him going from Vezina finalist to very average at best.
Outside of Vancouver nobody is going to remember his 2 shutouts because all they will remember is TT outplaying Lu by miles and Lu's epic meltdowns in Boston.
Boils down to what our best guesses are for the future. Many believe Lu has something to prove and will be a Vezina candidate again. I say he should have wanted to prove himself this year after letting himself and the team down in the finals but had a poor season.
Some think Cory will not be able to handle the #1 spot and Canucks be lucky to make the playoffs. With the other teams in our division getting stronger the chances of us winning the Presidents Trophy is very slim with either Lu or Cory. I think Cory will play at elite level and be a Vezina candidate in the very near future, and will give the Cancuks much more CONSISTENT playoff goaltending than Lu has given us for the last 5 years.
Cory will give us solid playoff goaltending like last year for the next 10 years(not under 2 good but just very solid play), I do not think Lu will gave us solid playoff goaltending since 06-07 and the wheels have fell off his bus and he will only get worse.


This is about as accurate as a post can get.
  • 0

#2107 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,562 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 12:36 PM

I agree with most everything here. In no way am I saying that Cory Schneider is a bad goalie; I'm a huge fan. He's good. Might be better than Luongo right now. But I think that for this team, in this stage, the logical move would've been to trade Schneider a long time ago (for a pretty penny), and focus on Luongo.

My problem this whole time is the position that Mike Gillis has put us in. We're being forced to move someone, which is not ideal, ever. And basically, we're being forced to move someone because our GM didn't deal with the obvious two-goalie problem that we had to eventually deal with. And yes, I know, Luongo's never publicly said that he wants a trade, but it is obvious to everyone involved, and to every hockey fan on earth, that he is getting moved.

Say what you want about Schneider and his future playoff performances, but they're really empty words, because he hasn't been there yet. Did you, or anybody else, foresee Luongo's epic playoff failures when he was acquired by Florida? Of course not.


Definitely didn't predict this would happen every year, that's for sure. And if we were to hang on to Luongo instead of Schneider there would really be no reason to think it wouldn't happen again.
  • 0

#2108 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 18 September 2012 - 12:50 PM

Why is it more probable that Schneider will change his trajectory by taking a nose dive once he starts more games than it is that Luongo will play well in the playoffs after not playing so well in his last two series?

Luongo has not been this stellar elite amazing goalie that we were promised in the playoffs. So why is it more likely that he will now than it is that Schneider will continue to play great and consistent.


I've never said that either outcome is more probable, but nobody is considering the possibility that maybe Schneider becomes the starter and just doesn't play as good as we've expected him to, based on these last two years as our backup.

If you think that the job of a starting goaltender is easier than that of a backup goaltender, you are nuts. This is Vancouver. Schneider's going to become the first target of abuse when he plays a bad game, which will happen. People will clamor for Luongo to come back if there's any sign of weakness. Say what you want, but it's almost impossible for this to not affect a guy's psyche. And with the division improving, the Oilers and the Wild getting better, the Flames being a major wild card, and with our guys (quite frankly) getting older, there are a lot of things converging with this team that could lead to an epic disaster if this season ever takes off.

I'm the only one saying it, but it's a possibility. And maybe a stronger one than what you might think.

Edited by King of the ES, 18 September 2012 - 12:51 PM.

  • 0

#2109 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,133 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 01:45 PM

Say what you want about Schneider and his future playoff performances, but they're really empty words, because he hasn't been there yet. Did you, or anybody else, foresee Luongo's epic playoff failures when he was acquired by Florida? Of course not.


Well KoES - you're looking 20/20 in hindsight at them now, and you're still going on and on that Gillis should have moved Schneider and kept Luongo? With this team and this window blah blah... to what purpose? Epic playoff failures? Give it up. Gillis made the right decision and you're floundering around in contradictions trying to claim otherwise.
  • 1

#2110 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,133 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:00 PM

Is that like a lot of Canuck fans on this board, who think that every year it's "the" year? Same results for 42 years, no?

=/-...not indicative that Dan Hamhuis is a better player than Dion Phaneuf (which, IMO, he is definitely not).

And no, I'm not a Leafs fan. Just a guy who's free of bias.


Another one of your banana sidetracks? You forgot your patented 'I expect that you're clearly one of those people who I think might think blah blah blah..."

This is one of your best yet - that Hamhuis is definitely not a better player than Phaneuf.
That one is very rich in nitrogen - you should use it to fertilize some of your other fruitless arguments.

Let's leave this one to arbitration and see who Stevie Y opts for when it comes time to select team Canada.
  • 0

#2111 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:02 PM

Well KoES - you're looking 20/20 in hindsight at them now, and you're still going on and on that Gillis should have moved Schneider and kept Luongo? With this team and this window blah blah... to what purpose? Epic playoff failures? Give it up. Gillis made the right decision and you're floundering around in contradictions trying to claim otherwise.


Yes and yes.

If Schneider is traded, we still have ol' reliable Louie, and whatever Schneider would've brought us back, which would've been something significant.

If Luongo is traded, we have a first-time starter, and we have probably very little to show for Luongo (if it's a guy like Shawn Matthias, for example, yuck).

Now I'd like to hear from you why Gillis has made the right decision, and why it's a good thing that we're in the situation that we are.
  • 0

#2112 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,133 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:04 PM

People will clamor for Luongo to come back if there's any sign of weakness. Say what you want, but it's almost impossible for this to not affect a guy's psyche. And with the division improving, the Oilers and the Wild getting better, the Flames being a major wild card, and with our guys (quite frankly) getting older, there are a lot of things converging with this team that could lead to an epic disaster if this season ever takes off.


This is you in a "nut-s"hell.
  • 0

#2113 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,133 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:06 PM

Yes and yes.

If Schneider is traded, we still have ol' reliable Louie,


Duh - which one is it? "ol' reliable Louie" or Mr. Epic playoff failures? Flip flop, flip flop.
  • 0

#2114 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:10 PM

This is one of your best yet - that Hamhuis is definitely not a better player than Phaneuf.
That one is very rich in nitrogen - you should use it to fertilize some of your other fruitless arguments.


How's this for fruitless.

Even though Hamhuis has played in 77 more career games, Phaneuf has:
  • More than double the amount of career goals
  • Nearly 100 more total points
He's also been an NHL All-Star 3 times, which is 3 times more than Hamhuis. And let's not forget the numerous bone-crunching, highlight-reel hits that were a regularity when he first broke into the league (the new No-Hitting League has had an adverse effect on Phaneuf's development).

Since "Church Appearances" isn't a measurable amongst NHL players, explain to me exactly on what basis that you think Hamhuis is a better player than Phaneuf.
  • 0

#2115 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,193 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:12 PM

I've never said that either outcome is more probable, but nobody is considering the possibility that maybe Schneider becomes the starter and just doesn't play as good as we've expected him to, based on these last two years as our backup.

If you think that the job of a starting goaltender is easier than that of a backup goaltender, you are nuts. This is Vancouver. Schneider's going to become the first target of abuse when he plays a bad game, which will happen. People will clamor for Luongo to come back if there's any sign of weakness. Say what you want, but it's almost impossible for this to not affect a guy's psyche. And with the division improving, the Oilers and the Wild getting better, the Flames being a major wild card, and with our guys (quite frankly) getting older, there are a lot of things converging with this team that could lead to an epic disaster if this season ever takes off.

I'm the only one saying it, but it's a possibility. And maybe a stronger one than what you might think.


I truly believe that above all else you want to see the Canucks fall on their face this season (if it happens). Why? I don't know. Maybe you are a troll of a Leafs fan, or maybe you are just plain bent on seeing Gillis get fired.

Regardless, the Canucks are still, with the present roster, one of the leagues best teams. With the addition of Garrison our defence has become younger and stronger. We still require an addition on forward, which will come with the eventual Luongo trade. Should he be considered trade bait? Personally I think Luongo has been the one player who has allowed the Canucks to take a massive step forward. However, come playoff time he has faltered. The defence in front of him has been less than stellar, but still, he has made some mental errors that, I guess, cost him the starting position.

Were some fans unfair to him? Yes. I supported him throughout though, as have the majority of the Canucks faithful. Your generalizing of a fanbase also doesn't do wonders for your cause. In my experience, people usually make generalized statements when they have nothing better to add to a debate.

The choice to start Cory was a choice that Vigneault made. I don't think too much of AV honestly, but he has a good record. Expect him to be canned if the Canucks don't go far in their next post season push.

However your hatred of Gillis is hilarious. Mike Gillis has made some gaffes as a GM, but that happens. Find me one GM who hasn't made mistakes. You criticize him, but offer no alternate solution. I highly doubt you could pull off the job. Based on your cantakerous verbiage and evasion of answering questions, you prove to be quite flaky.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2116 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:12 PM

Duh - which one is it? "ol' reliable Louie" or Mr. Epic playoff failures? Flip flop, flip flop.


If you read what I wrote, all I did was acknowledge somebody else's assertion of Luongo's playoff failures. The Sedin's, Burrows, Kesler, they've all failed big-time in the playoffs, too, does that mean that they also should all be traded?

My point was that Schneider's not immune to an epic playoff failure himself.
  • 0

#2117 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,193 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:15 PM

How's this for fruitless.

Even though Hamhuis has played in 77 more career games, Phaneuf has:

  • More than double the amount of career goals
  • Nearly 100 more total points
He's also been an NHL All-Star 3 times, which is 3 times more than Hamhuis. And let's not forget the numerous bone-crunching, highlight-reel hits that were a regularity when he first broke into the league (the new No-Hitting League has had an adverse effect on Phaneuf's development).

Since "Church Appearances" isn't a measurable amongst NHL players, explain to me exactly on what basis that you think Hamhuis is a better player than Phaneuf.




And look where all that talent has gotten Phaneuf. His captaincy with the Leafs is a joke. And by fawning all over Dion you prove that you are either a Flames or Leafs fan. Truly sorry about that King.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2118 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,193 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:16 PM

If you read what I wrote, all I did was acknowledge somebody else's assertion of Luongo's playoff failures. The Sedin's, Burrows, Kesler, they've all failed big-time in the playoffs, too, does that mean that they also should all be traded?

My point was that Schneider's not immune to an epic playoff failure himself.


No one is. What exactly are you trying to say here?
  • 0
Posted Image

#2119 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,193 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:18 PM

If you read what I wrote, all I did was acknowledge somebody else's assertion of Luongo's playoff failures. The Sedin's, Burrows, Kesler, they've all failed big-time in the playoffs, too, does that mean that they also should all be traded?

My point was that Schneider's not immune to an epic playoff failure himself.


You tend to say this a lot in your posts, as if posters would just press Quote or Reply without reading the previous post.

Maybe you are afraid people don't want to read your stuff. Not to worry. It is faaar to entertaining to pass up.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2120 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:21 PM

I truly believe that above all else you want to see the Canucks fall on their face this season (if it happens). Why? I don't know. Maybe you are a troll of a Leafs fan, or maybe you are just plain bent on seeing Gillis get fired.


I really don't care about Mike Gillis. His interviews annoy me because he just reeks of condescension and arrogance, but that's his mandate. I call it like I see it and could well be wrong. This Luongo fire-sale could've been entirely avoided.

Regardless, the Canucks are still, with the present roster, one of the leagues best teams. With the addition of Garrison our defence has become younger and stronger.


I wouldn't be so sure of that. Garrison is not an upgrade on Salo. We're also down Rome, who is/was underrated relative to his cost. This team's record when Salo has been injured, historically, has not been good at all, and he was another unsung hero of this team that will be missed.

I think the Garrison deal stinks, and it's not going to turn out well.

However your hatred of Gillis is hilarious. Mike Gillis has made some gaffes as a GM, but that happens. Find me one GM who hasn't made mistakes. You criticize him, but offer no alternate solution. I highly doubt you could pull off the job. Based on your cantakerous verbiage and evasion of answering questions, you prove to be quite flaky.


Saying that I "hate" him isn't much different than me saying that you "love" him. Do you love him, Canuck-a-nuck?

Have I ever even said that he should be fired? NO! So I don't know what you're talking about. The point of these message boards is for fans to discuss. He's made moved that I disagree with, which causes tens of CDC fanboys to gang up on me. That's fine.

And which question am I evading? Please, ask. I feel I'm in here all day.
  • 0

#2121 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,133 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:27 PM

How's this for fruitless.

Even though Hamhuis has played in 77 more career games, Phaneuf has:

  • More than double the amount of career goals
  • Nearly 100 more total points
He's also been an NHL All-Star 3 times, which is 3 times more than Hamhuis. And let's not forget the numerous bone-crunching, highlight-reel hits that were a regularity when he first broke into the league (the new No-Hitting League has had an adverse effect on Phaneuf's development).

Since "Church Appearances" isn't a measurable amongst NHL players, explain to me exactly on what basis that you think Hamhuis is a better player than Phaneuf.



Dion has more points per game than Weber as well over their careers - who cares? Phaneuf is a pylon. The game is played at two ends of the ice.

Spare me the Phaneuf was a victim of rule changes - the only truth to that is implied; that he can't keep up with the game - yeah, him and the Flames suffered when the NHL started frowning on flagrant clutch and grab hockey - they were no longer subsidized in the garbage/garage NHL that M Lemieux talked about - and the reason Phaneuf hasn't improved is because he came in with the same tools he has now, but his mental game is still a serious weakness that he hasn't improved.

Ignorant comments about Hamhius and church appearances doesn't change anything.

Like I said - I'm happy to let Steve Yzerman arbitrate this one.

Edited by oldnews, 18 September 2012 - 02:36 PM.

  • 0

#2122 CookieCrumbs

CookieCrumbs

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,024 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:32 PM

How's this for fruitless.

Even though Hamhuis has played in 77 more career games, Phaneuf has:

  • More than double the amount of career goals
  • Nearly 100 more total points
He's also been an NHL All-Star 3 times, which is 3 times more than Hamhuis. And let's not forget the numerous bone-crunching, highlight-reel hits that were a regularity when he first broke into the league (the new No-Hitting League has had an adverse effect on Phaneuf's development).

Since "Church Appearances" isn't a measurable amongst NHL players, explain to me exactly on what basis that you think Hamhuis is a better player than Phaneuf.


Careful, some people get upset when hard facts are brought into the discussion.
  • 1

#2123 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,193 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:34 PM

I really don't care about Mike Gillis. His interviews annoy me because he just reeks of condescension and arrogance, but that's his mandate. I call it like I see it and could well be wrong. This Luongo fire-sale could've been entirely avoided.

What Luongo fire sale? Just because you say it, does not make it reality.


I wouldn't be so sure of that. Garrison is not an upgrade on Salo. We're also down Rome, who is/was underrated relative to his cost. This team's record when Salo has been injured, historically, has not been good at all, and he was another unsung hero of this team that will be missed.

I think the Garrison deal stinks, and it's not going to turn out well.

Garrison is ten years younger with zero injuries. Salo is on his last legs. A great player, but his injury history can't be ignored.

Rome? Seriously. The definition of a plug defensman. He is easily replaceable.

Once again KoES, unless you know Marty Mcfly, you don't know how things are going to turn out.



Saying that I "hate" him isn't much different than me saying that you "love" him. Do you love him, Canuck-a-nuck?

Have I ever even said that he should be fired? NO! So I don't know what you're talking about. The point of these message boards is for fans to discuss. He's made moved that I disagree with, which causes tens of CDC fanboys to gang up on me. That's fine.

And which question am I evading? Please, ask. I feel I'm in here all day.

Your disdain for the man, due to his arrogance(?) isn't neutral. Thanks for explaining what these message boards are for, tips.

What does "I feel I'm in here all day" mean?


Edited by Canuck-a-nuck, 18 September 2012 - 02:39 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#2124 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,193 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:36 PM

Careful, some people get upset when hard facts are brought into the discussion.


Whose upset? This is a Canucks website. We defend our players. Stats junkies like yourself and KoES can crunch numbers all you want, Dan Hamhuis has been able to help his team farther into the post season than Phaneuf ever could or ever will.

Fact.

Edited by Canuck-a-nuck, 18 September 2012 - 02:38 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#2125 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,133 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:43 PM

Whose upset? This is a Canucks website. We defend our players. Stats junkies like yourself and KoES can crunch numbers all you want, Dan Hamhuis has been able to help his team farther into the post season than Phaneuf ever could or ever will.

Fact.


Stats junkies who try to ignore the +29 vs -10 advantage Hamhius had over Phaneuf - that's only a 39 goal differential - not significant at all.
  • 0

#2126 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,471 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:45 PM

Because we're a veteran team, built to win now, and we can't take a risk that Schneider somehow can't carry the load, or can't carry the load enough in his first year or two of being a starter. To think that it'll be a seamless transition from playing 25 - 30 games a year to 60 - 65 is optimistic. "Growing pains" aren't really something that this team can afford to go through, at this point. There's urgency right now if we're serious about winning a Cup.


You overlooked my point which is par for the course.

Why would it matter? According to you, there is little difference between the best and worst goalie in the league. Even if one were to cut you some slack, it's not exactly like there's a huge gulf as between the talents of Brodeur and whoever his ghost backup happens to be this year (which again, according to you, wouldn't mean much since the GAA are within a "narrow" range).

Keep digging that hole, though!
  • 0

#2127 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,471 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:57 PM

I'm not saying that at all - but nice inference.

The point is that it's possible. Every conceivable event has a probability. For you all to just assume that Schneider's numbers would hold up under a 65-game workload, in his rookie season as a starter, is very optimistic (though that appears to be the name of the game around here - certainly the most optimistic sports fans who's team has never won a championship).


Please, please don't leave this thread! This has been the best entertainment since the mega-Bieksa thread.

"It's possible". What, exactly, do you disagree with about my point that it's IMpossible that Schneider could have finished the year with a below .900 GAA if he played an extra 20-25 games? I'm dying to know how you can twist that math in your own mind without becoming a failed amateur Houdini.

I'll repeat, with emphasis. Schneider would have had to have averaged 5 GAA the remaining 20-25 games. That means that when (not if) he lets in 2 one game, he's have to let in 8 goals the next game to square that average up. When he lets in 2 goals a game two games in a row, that means he'd have to let in eleven (11) goals the next game to, again, meet that average. See how this turns from an amusing scenario into an Alice in Wonderland farce? Of course you do! You're not that stupid. You're just a typical troll who loves the attention. And I'm happy to provide it for you, at least for a while.

There's more chance of you winning the 649 lotto two draws in a row with a single combo than for Schneider to give up 5 goals a game on average for an extra 20-25 games last season.
  • 0

#2128 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:58 PM

And look where all that talent has gotten Phaneuf. His captaincy with the Leafs is a joke. And by fawning all over Dion you prove that you are either a Flames or Leafs fan. Truly sorry about that King.


Oh, of course it does. And I bet you'd rather have Manny Malhotra than Jonathan Toews, which doesn't only make you a Canuck fan, it makes you a moron.
  • 1

#2129 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,193 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:58 PM

Stats junkies who try to ignore the +29 vs -10 advantage Hamhius had over Phaneuf - that's only a 39 goal differential - not significant at all.


Well said, oldnews. However they go beyond trying to ignore to actually excelling at ignoring
  • 0
Posted Image

#2130 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:59 PM

Like I said - I'm happy to let Steve Yzerman arbitrate this one.


Dunno, that sounds like a pretty "fruitless" argument to me.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

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.