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

#2221 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,953 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 24 September 2012 - 10:25 AM

But that would've been totally irrational. Veteran team, Cup-ready, trading their starting goaltender and putting in a rookie. Makes no sense.

Kinda like what's happening now, except on a more macro-level (Schneider's not a rookie, per se, though he will be a rookie starter if/when this season commences).

Looking at it from a buy low/sell high perspective, IMO the time to trade Luongo would have been trade deadline 2011. Prior to that season Schneider still would have been a gamble and wouldn't have garnered a great return. Sure we would have received something useful, but I sincerely doubt it would have been greater than what we'll wind up getting for Lu this year.

So, trade deadline 2011 - Canucks are well on their way to the best regular season in franchise history, and we trade our starting goaltender? That makes no sense.


Surprise, King, you completely 'missed' their point / deleted that part, and substituted a devolved version in your own words.
  • 1

#2222 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 24 September 2012 - 10:35 AM

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


That is a great idea. Instead of KoES spreading his bipolar rants all over regular threads, he could be relegated to one dark, murky corner of the CDC. King's Corner.
  • 1
Posted Image

#2223 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 24 September 2012 - 10:58 AM

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.


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 evidently know nothing about markets - uh, yes, it is a pitiful goaltender's market, in the sense that Luongo stands alone as far and away the most valuable asset available (which is why suitors are doing their best not to pay through the nose) - a pitiful market in which to be a buyer, and therefore the PERFECT TIME TO BE A SELLER.


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.
  • 0

#2224 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 24 September 2012 - 11:00 AM

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


Their point just agrees with mine - what's your point?
  • 0

#2225 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,953 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 24 September 2012 - 11:07 AM

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.


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.
  • 0

#2226 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 24 September 2012 - 11:19 AM

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.


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.
  • 0

#2227 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 24 September 2012 - 12:04 PM

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.


Why wouldn't oldnews cheer for his team? Not everyone on the CDC is a bitter, insipid, needling, negative nelly. What is the drool statement referring to? Some people love hockey and their team. They support the team. They cheer for the team.

And then there's you. Someone who has a plethora of ideas/opinions on how badly the Canucks have screwed up, how arrogant Gillis is, how much the rest of the league doesn't want a proven starting goalie.

Every post you make is a negative, ham-fisted, sorely mistaken rant. What was once entertaining has become annoying. You can't handle the fact that other posters see through your tired schtick. Can you do me a kindness, King? Go away.

Edited by Canuck-a-nuck, 24 September 2012 - 12:04 PM.

  • 4
Posted Image

#2228 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,469 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 24 September 2012 - 01:55 PM

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.


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.
  • 1

#2229 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,345 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 24 September 2012 - 01:58 PM

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 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.
  • 0

schroedersig2_by_elvis15-d5szksn.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#2230 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,469 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 24 September 2012 - 02:23 PM

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 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.


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.
  • 0

#2231 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,345 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 24 September 2012 - 02:40 PM

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.

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.

Edited by elvis15, 24 September 2012 - 02:42 PM.

  • 0

schroedersig2_by_elvis15-d5szksn.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#2232 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,469 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 24 September 2012 - 02:52 PM

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.
  • 0

#2233 PLOGUE

PLOGUE

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,946 posts
  • Joined: 07-August 03

Posted 24 September 2012 - 03:09 PM

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

Van

Alzner, 1st

Was

Luongo, Raymond

DONE

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.
  • 0
QUOTE (ephysdad @ Oct 26 2008, 09:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Or then of course there's always the Ferry

Also,
I'm putting together a list of the criteria to be a "real" Canuck's fan. So far I have this:

1. I cheer for the Canucks, whatever happens.
2. I never say anything bad about the Canucks.
3. I know the difference between "real" fans and posers just by how they post on the CDC or where they sit at GM Place.
4. I wouldn't dream of leaving a game before it ended, even if it meant missing a train, ferry or a threesome with the wife and her hot best friend?
5. I make 10+ posts a day and I have over 10,000 posts on the CDC, so my Canuck "street-cred" is huge. Go away noob!
6. No one F's with me. I train in MMA. I'm really tough. I'll curb stomp yo' donkey.
7. I make a tonne of $$$$.
8. I'm witty.
9. If it meant missing a game, I wouldn't study for a midterm.
10. I roll with a guy who has a wicked car.
11. I like to post "source?" a lot.


#2234 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 24 September 2012 - 03:18 PM

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.


Superb post. Thorough and well written.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2235 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,938 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 24 September 2012 - 03:25 PM

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.

If I'm not mistaken Karl Alzner was on Washington's top pair with Mike Green, was he not? If we traded Luongo for Alzner+, we would be having a very capable top 4 defenceman playing on our bottom pair if we traded Ballard or Tanev (or both).
  • 0

In my eyes drouin is overrated he can score in the qmjhl but did nothing in last two gold medal games that canada lost. Fox will be better pro than him talk to me in five yrs

Gaudreau has one NHL goal whereas all your "prized" prospects have none.

   ryan kesler is going to the chicago blackhawks ...       quote me on it


#2236 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 24 September 2012 - 03:51 PM

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.


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.

And even then, would Florida care? Are they that motivated to win, right now? Probably not. Given their youth, it would probably be ideal for Markstrom to grow with their core. A backup/Schneider-esque role to Clemmensen over the next two seasons would probably be most ideal for them.

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.)


The two teams are in different stages. Washington barely made the playoffs last year, and are pretty entrenched in a downturn, while the Canucks have won two straight President's Trophy's and have a core that's a lot older than Washington's.

Holtby is unproven, yes. But maybe they'd rather take the gamble and see what they've got. Reasonable, no?

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.


Again, I remind you who their GM is. How many consecutive years were people bickering about Dan Cloutier while he was here? Brian Burke is one stubborn SOB, and he has publicly defended Reimer in nearly identical ways that he used to do with Cloutier. I don't doubt that they'd like to have him, but I'm not sure that Luongo would go there, for one, and I'm not sure that Burke is prepared to give up very much to get him, for two.

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.


He was awful last year, without a doubt. The worst statistical starting goalie in the NHL, if I'm not mistaken. But we all saw him in the 2011 playoffs, and he was remarkable, definitely the best goalie in the series. Again, my only point in all of these teams that I bring up is that they all have reasonable objections to getting a guy like Luongo.

Personally, based on what I saw in 2011, I think Crawford has the potential to bounce back.

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.


Wait - first thing first, I'm not "straight-up comparing" Luongo to any of these guys. He's obviously the better goaltender than any of them. Each team needs to be evaluated in context.

With Edmonton, they drafted him 14th overall in 2004. The last two years have been pretty promising, too, especially when you consider how bad their record was (having a .914 SVP in front of Edmonton - impressive). I'm just saying that they might want to give him a shot while the team should be in a better position to win games and be consistently competitive.

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.)


Past Calder winner...10-shutout season...24 years old...lots of reasons to not give up on him.

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".


Regarding Tampa, I don't think they would've acquired Lindback if they weren't prepared to give him a shot as the starter. Rumor has it that they really wanted Schneider, actually, but Gillis was unwilling to move him.

And I'm not saying that Luongo isn't a huge upgrade to these other goalies; I'm saying that they all have decent arguments against his acquisition. I think that some of you are forgetting the impact that will be had on whatever organization takes Luongo. This is a 10-YEAR COMMITMENT, which will probably alter all aspects of the team, strategically. This will be an acquisition that really, really changes a franchise's landscape. If he goes to Florida, Markstrom probably has to be traded. If he goes to Toronto, Reimer probably is no longer in their future. Etc., etc.
  • 0

#2237 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,345 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 24 September 2012 - 03:52 PM

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.

Fair enough, but I get tired of reading through the 4 paragraph long complain/loud noises posts either started by KoftES or in response to him much quicker than the one liner people who contribute little or nothing to a discussion. Usually, I at least have a look at a longer post to see if it's interesting at all, but I've found myself skipping most of them that are linked in any way to that discussion.
  • 0

schroedersig2_by_elvis15-d5szksn.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#2238 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 24 September 2012 - 03:54 PM

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.


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.
  • 1

#2239 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,953 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 24 September 2012 - 05:28 PM

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.


Not exactly your best post but I have to hand it to you - you are relentless - relentlessly wrong - but relentless nevertheless. I personally also find your arguments entertaining when they rise above annoying - even if they are filled with denial, contradictions, backtracking, evasiveness, etc. In isolation, you actually manage to come up with a point or two, and to your credit, most of what you are arguing, albeit in a whiny and negative form, is slightly more clever input than what the typical troll offers. Elvis may think he has found some high ground in trying to intervene - ironically with talk of the exothermic this or whatever qualities of that off-topic sidetrack (although also entertaining, not any more relevant) - or pretenses of higher etiquette - apparently he finds it inappropriate to argue/'bicker' too much about Luongo in a hockey thread that regards Luongo. Personally I find that kind of smug and self-righteous. Unfortunately sometimes we dip below polite niceties on CDC. Got it. However, if a person seeks polite talk about something other than hockey and Luongo, clearly this is the wrong place to look, and if they seek news only, and don't want to wade through opinions that they find unsavory, ditto.

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 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.


Ironically, that was actually one of the subjects of debate/bickering between two of your prime offenders, KoES and myself. If you haven't read that - fair enough - I sympathize to a small extent, but then again, I don't much care about girl equations or Harvard essays, but I don't bother to go on for numerous posts complaining about their irrelevance. King is here, he wants to argue, he is enthusiastic about it and he elicits responses. If you don't want to engage you don't have to. Moreover there is a feature in your profile called "Ignore preferences" which you are free to use. Personally, I don't particularly value your attempts to moderate any more than you don't value the arguing/bickering.

Hockey - a game where shat disturbers like Darcy Tucker, Dale Hunter, Matthew Barnaby, Esa Tikkanen, Claude Lemieux and the like are valued because they piss people off.

Edited by oldnews, 24 September 2012 - 06:38 PM.

  • 1

#2240 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,469 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 24 September 2012 - 05:40 PM

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.


Completely disagree on the first argument here. The cap has only gone in one direction for many years -- up, up, up. That means, in FLA's case, their cap floor also goes up. By some accounts, not factoring in impossible-to-know new CBA projections, the team cap floor could be $54 million. Budget constricting teams like Florida are becoming squeezed to meet the expanding cap. And remember that it was considerably lower when Florida panicked before, trading for Campbell's $7 million per. At the time, most were scratching their heads. But when you need to throw around money, even if you don't want to, you're liable to have to overpay for players who aren't key pieces for your future. Two years ago, they had to do more of the same for multiple players. If you're gonna spend the dough, may as well take on a player that makes sense. As for Lu's contract length -- Salary floor will most likely keep going up, considering the NHL's revenue growth. That 5.3 million will look even better in 3-5 years.

As to Markstrom, again it's all hope. 7 games? Remember my arguments vis-a-vis Holtby and Reimer? At least the latter two have been in the fire a bit longer.

And even then, would Florida care? Are they that motivated to win, right now? Probably not. Given their youth, it would probably be ideal for Markstrom to grow with their core. A backup/Schneider-esque role to Clemmensen over the next two seasons would probably be most ideal for them.


Yes, they're motivated to win, because they need the money that even a first round gate would provide. And as we've seen with playoffs, especially last year, even if you hit the #8 seed, you can go four rounds. I'm sure LA's owners, AND Florida's last year, would trade a possible benefit down the road for 9 more sold-out gates in Apr-May-June.

As for growing with the core, Luongo would be there for another 6-8 years. Lots of growing with the skaters in front of him in that time.The two teams are in different stages. Washington barely made the playoffs last year, and are pretty entrenched in a downturn, while the Canucks have won two straight President's Trophy's and have a core that's a lot older than Washington's.

King of the ES --Holtby is unproven, yes. But maybe they'd rather take the gamble and see what they've got. Reasonable, no? --

A downturn, you say, yet they went farther in the playoffs last year than in their Ovie "glory" days. Holtby getting hot at the right time just cements the fact that goaltending is crucial, especially in the playoffs. People pick on Semin's and Ovechkin's lack of effort in past playoffs, but their goaltending also let them down. Backstrom had a puzzling season. If he gets back on track, even with the improvements other teams have made in their division ( it's a soft grouping), they'll be formidable. Having Luongo as a 65 game starter (over an unproven Holtby in the long season slog) could certainly boost Washington's chances of doing something special in a conference not exactly rife with powerhouses (NYR excepted), especially since Crosby's one hit away from another long layoff.



Again, I remind you who their GM is. How many consecutive years were people bickering about Dan Cloutier while he was here? Brian Burke is one stubborn SOB, and he has publicly defended Reimer in nearly identical ways that he used to do with Cloutier. I don't doubt that they'd like to have him, but I'm not sure that Luongo would go there, for one, and I'm not sure that Burke is prepared to give up very much to get him, for two.


First off, it's ridiculous to compare Reimer with Cloutier. As much as people on CDC love to ridicule and bash Cloutier, I'd wager that many of them never saw the long service Cloutier gave us during his stay here. Probably the infamous centre ice playoff gaffe has a lot to do with it. But Cloutier had many good regular season years. (I agree he was less than sensational in the post-season.) Reimer hasn't even had ONE full solid season yet. And in fact, he's regressed badly.

You must be kidding with putting any stock in Burke's defense of Reimer. Burke, as a lawyer, is an intelligent and practised liar. Everything he says is for his own perceived benefit with how it goes down. Just like Columbus with Mason, Burke isn't going to dump on Reimer if he's looking to replace him. Doesn't help with trade value. Burke has a loooooong history of supporting players and even coaches, pugnaciously so, only to release or trade them when the right deal came along.

As to Luongo not wanting to go there: (1) pure conjecture, and (2) not relevant. This discussion hinges on who would want him, not which or how many team(s) Lu wants to waive the deal to go to.



He was awful last year, without a doubt. The worst statistical starting goalie in the NHL, if I'm not mistaken. But we all saw him in the 2011 playoffs, and he was remarkable, definitely the best goalie in the series. Again, my only point in all of these teams that I bring up is that they all have reasonable objections to getting a guy like Luongo.

Personally, based on what I saw in 2011, I think Crawford has the potential to bounce back.


Right, and I agree he could bounce back, but don't you find it troubling that a 2nd year goalie could regress so much? Playoffs in 2011 noted, but he was even worse than his regular season 2011-2012 in last season's playoff against Phoenix. Smith was lights out, and Crawford stunk up the joint, especially in the quick overtime handouts.





Wait - first thing first, I'm not "straight-up comparing" Luongo to any of these guys. He's obviously the better goaltender than any of them. Each team needs to be evaluated in context.

With Edmonton, they drafted him 14th overall in 2004. The last two years have been pretty promising, too, especially when you consider how bad their record was (having a .914 SVP in front of Edmonton - impressive). I'm just saying that they might want to give him a shot while the team should be in a better position to win games and be consistently competitive.


Lots of teams draft higher than 14 overall and end up with a dud. Meaningless argument. At least Dubnyk has been seeing action, though. I watched quite a few Edm games last year just because their offense was exciting with their young stars in the making. He's big and covers a lot of net, but at least in the games I saw, he didn't make many "keep us in the game" saves. I know their terrible defense plays into this, but he also didn't bail them out many times, either.

As Edmonton improves with their young guns, they'll need a first rate goalie. Dubnyk's role now is negligible since Edmonton is still several years away, at least, from competing in any meaningful way. But if I were Tambellini, I wouldn't be too enthused about a Dubnyk as your starter when every regular season game actually means something.



Past Calder winner...10-shutout season...24 years old...lots of reasons to not give up on him.


He was very good. Was being the operative word. If a goalie has four good seasons, then lays an egg, I cut him some slack. If he has one good year, then falls off, I would worry. Word on the street is that opposing teams' scouting (and scouting and analyzing goalies is much better than it used to be) has found out Mason's weaknesses. Can't recall what they were as I don't recall actually watching much of Mason, but there are many ways of looking for goalies' weak points. Go high since he stays low, fake and tuck in from the side, plenty of bodies in front 'cuz he has rebound control issues, shoot from the corners since he cheats to the front, stick side issues, in-his-face 'cuz he gets rattled easily, etc etc etc The point is that if even Luongo is weak in a few of these areas, then certainly an inexperienced Mason can be exploited when the book is finally out on him. (Btw, another reason to keep Schneider -- not too many holes in his game other than puck-handling.)



Regarding Tampa, I don't think they would've acquired Lindback if they weren't prepared to give him a shot as the starter. Rumor has it that they really wanted Schneider, actually, but Gillis was unwilling to move him.


Of course, they'll give him a shot. But, predicated on Luongo still being here until trade deadline, Lindback's body of work could be such that he'll be found unworthy of sticking with him. It's certainly a possibility.

King of the ES --And I'm not saying that Luongo isn't a huge upgrade to these other goalies; I'm saying that they all have decent arguments against his acquisition. I think that some of you are forgetting the impact that will be had on whatever organization takes Luongo. This is a 10-YEAR COMMITMENT, which will probably alter all aspects of the team, strategically. This will be an acquisition that really, really changes a franchise's landscape. If he goes to Florida, Markstrom probably has to be traded. If he goes to Toronto, Reimer probably is no longer in their future. Etc., etc.---end King of the ES


And I'll just remind you that Luongo's talent boost in contrast to the goalies we've discussed far outweight any dollars per/length worries that any new Luongo team will be on the hook for.

As already mentioned, Lu's contract will be a positive on a team like Florida who needs to meet the cap floor.

Another thing: why is the length such a deterrant? You must know by now, since it's been explained to you countless times, that the last years of Lu's contract are essentially meaningless, $1 million or a little more. In addition, there's nothing saying that Luongo wouldn't be traded by that new team sometime in the future, too. Sure, he'd still have the no-trade (or does it get negated completely if he waives it the first time?), but another 6 years of no playoffs on his new team (even in sunny Florida with his family) could make Lu more open to jumping ship again.


edit: damm these limited quote quotas.

Edited by Barry_Wilkins, 24 September 2012 - 05:51 PM.

  • 0

#2241 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,948 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 10

Posted 24 September 2012 - 06:11 PM

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.

Call it a square peg in a round hole and you pretty much sum up your outlook !! There is no debate with you...just same ole !!!
  • 0

#2242 PLOGUE

PLOGUE

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,946 posts
  • Joined: 07-August 03

Posted 24 September 2012 - 06:14 PM

If I'm not mistaken Karl Alzner was on Washington's top pair with Mike Green, was he not? If we traded Luongo for Alzner+, we would be having a very capable top 4 defenceman playing on our bottom pair if we traded Ballard or Tanev (or both).


The trade was Luongo and Raymond for Alzner and 1st. To me a top pairing d-man still doesn't carry the value of an elite goalie. Van fans are too disenchanted with not winning it all to see our own goalie's skill. If he was on any other team we would be convetting Luongo. Alzner for Luongo isn't a good deal. Alzner and a first might be, but including Raymond doesn't make sense.
  • 0
QUOTE (ephysdad @ Oct 26 2008, 09:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Or then of course there's always the Ferry

Also,
I'm putting together a list of the criteria to be a "real" Canuck's fan. So far I have this:

1. I cheer for the Canucks, whatever happens.
2. I never say anything bad about the Canucks.
3. I know the difference between "real" fans and posers just by how they post on the CDC or where they sit at GM Place.
4. I wouldn't dream of leaving a game before it ended, even if it meant missing a train, ferry or a threesome with the wife and her hot best friend?
5. I make 10+ posts a day and I have over 10,000 posts on the CDC, so my Canuck "street-cred" is huge. Go away noob!
6. No one F's with me. I train in MMA. I'm really tough. I'll curb stomp yo' donkey.
7. I make a tonne of $$$$.
8. I'm witty.
9. If it meant missing a game, I wouldn't study for a midterm.
10. I roll with a guy who has a wicked car.
11. I like to post "source?" a lot.


#2243 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,938 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 24 September 2012 - 06:18 PM

The trade was Luongo and Raymond for Alzner and 1st. To me a top pairing d-man still doesn't carry the value of an elite goalie. Van fans are too disenchanted with not winning it all to see our own goalie's skill. If he was on any other team we would be convetting Luongo. Alzner for Luongo isn't a good deal. Alzner and a first might be, but including Raymond doesn't make sense.

A top pair D man, any day of the week = Luongo, or if you're talking about the Weber, Pietrangelo type > Luongo.
  • 0

In my eyes drouin is overrated he can score in the qmjhl but did nothing in last two gold medal games that canada lost. Fox will be better pro than him talk to me in five yrs

Gaudreau has one NHL goal whereas all your "prized" prospects have none.

   ryan kesler is going to the chicago blackhawks ...       quote me on it


#2244 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 24 September 2012 - 06:43 PM

As to Markstrom, again it's all hope. 7 games? Remember my arguments vis-a-vis Holtby and Reimer? At least the latter two have been in the fire a bit longer.


Yes, of course. But my point is that maybe these teams want to see how they perform in that fire a bit longer.

This whole recent debate started with me and oldnews debating the strength and/or weakness of the goaltending market. He thinks we're in a strong position as the seller of the best goalie available, I think we're in a weak one because there just aren't many buyers.

First off, it's ridiculous to compare Reimer with Cloutier. As much as people on CDC love to ridicule and bash Cloutier, I'd wager that many of them never saw the long service Cloutier gave us during his stay here. Probably the infamous centre ice playoff gaffe has a lot to do with it. But Cloutier had many good regular season years. (I agree he was less than sensational in the post-season.)


First off, I'm only comparing them as Burke proteges, not as goaltenders.

But your Cloutier points are wrong. He was never better than statistically average as a Canuck goalie, and in the playoffs (as you mentioned), he was dreadful. On an otherwise pretty stacked team, that was very fun to watch, he was the clear uncertainty. It's hard to complain, though, because the economics of the game are completely different to what they are today. We were broke, and it was a non-cap environment.

You must be kidding with putting any stock in Burke's defense of Reimer. Burke, as a lawyer, is an intelligent and practised liar. Everything he says is for his own perceived benefit with how it goes down. Just like Columbus with Mason, Burke isn't going to dump on Reimer if he's looking to replace him. Doesn't help with trade value. Burke has a loooooong history of supporting players and even coaches, pugnaciously so, only to release or trade them when the right deal came along.


Where? Who has Burke done this to? Ron Wilson practically needed to quit himself, before finally being let go. Burke is loyal to a fault, that's why I don't doubt that he believes what he says regarding Reimer.

Lots of teams draft higher than 14 overall and end up with a dud. Meaningless argument.


Disagree. They probably still see the potential - two straight respectable years on a horrendous team. He's 26 years old, so his career path will probably be revealed over the next year or two, but it wouldn't surprise me to see Edmonton keen on sticking with him until it becomes clear whether he's a dud or whether he can play.

EDIT: meant to comment about your "length deterrent" point, too. The reason why it's a deterrent is because I'm not sure that Canuck fans are aware of Luongo's perception outside of Vancouver, and that is of a guy who chokes in the big games and who will never win a championship. Acquiring him would probably infuriate an equal amount of local fans as it would thrill them. So the length makes you all that much more "married" to him, and if he were to flop, it's the type of transaction that'd cost a GM his job. In a world of risk-averse GMs with job preservation on their mind, this adds ANOTHER level of complexity to the transaction.

Edited by King of the ES, 24 September 2012 - 06:50 PM.

  • 0

#2245 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,953 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 24 September 2012 - 07:37 PM

This whole recent debate started with me and oldnews debating the strength and/or weakness of the goaltending market. He thinks we're in a strong position as the seller of the best goalie available, I think we're in a weak one because there just aren't many buyers.


I think the factors pretty much even out and in the end the Canucks make a reasonable hockey trade for Luongo - not an earth shattering blockbuster, and not table scraps - a reasonable hockey trade.

I also think you are overselling this 'perception outside Vancouver' thing. It doesn't really matter what some fans perceive - what matters is what Burke/Nonis, Tallon, Lowe, McPhee, etc think, and I doubt their perception is as shallow as stereotypes that fans hold.
But the perception that he is a guy who will never win a championship will only deepen if he winds up in Toronto haha!
On the other hand, he could very well get their sorry asses into the postseason finally. Gawd that would suck. Imagine being largely responsible for enabling Leafs playoff hockey. Would rather dump Luongo for table scraps. ;)
  • 0

#2246 TmanVan

TmanVan

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 613 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 24 September 2012 - 08:16 PM

What I want to know is why has everyone stopped talking about New Jersey? I don't think anyone expects the whole season to be lost due to a lockout, and surely with Brodeur thinking long and hard about calling it quits this summer the chances of him coming back AGAIN next season seem highly unlikely.

If it does end up being a short season, say regular season starting mid december - early january , then the Canucks only have to wait less than 2 months with Lou on the roster before the trade deadline. Now before all the bitter idiots cough..... king of es.... cough come back and say that's stupid New Jersey is broke and can't get anybody in the building as it is why would they get Luongo?? I ask, where would they be without Brodeur or Luongo next year??? The way I look at it they can't afford not to have Luongo if Brodeur retires because being a bottom feeder would put them in an even worse spot financially with no fan support at all.
  • 0

#2247 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,469 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 24 September 2012 - 09:01 PM

What I want to know is why has everyone stopped talking about New Jersey?


Excellent question.

A year ago I thought New Jersey made the most sense. But even aside from salary cap issues (I confess I'm not up to speed on it, though the Kovy contract can't help), the ownership/financial situation there is concerning. Luongo may not want to get mixed up in that kinda off-ice stuff.
  • 0

#2248 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,953 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 24 September 2012 - 09:05 PM

What I want to know is why has everyone stopped talking about New Jersey? I don't think anyone expects the whole season to be lost due to a lockout, and surely with Brodeur thinking long and hard about calling it quits this summer the chances of him coming back AGAIN next season seem highly unlikely.

If it does end up being a short season, say regular season starting mid december - early january , then the Canucks only have to wait less than 2 months with Lou on the roster before the trade deadline. Now before all the bitter idiots cough..... king of es.... cough come back and say that's stupid New Jersey is broke and can't get anybody in the building as it is why would they get Luongo?? I ask, where would they be without Brodeur or Luongo next year??? The way I look at it they can't afford not to have Luongo if Brodeur retires because being a bottom feeder would put them in an even worse spot financially with no fan support at all.


I doesn't appear Brodeur is considering calling it quits.
Martin Brodeur to play in Europe if NHL lockout drags on

Martin Brodeur, New Jersey Devils, NHL, NHLPA | Comments

Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Martin Brodeur said he’s thinking about playing in Europe if the NHL lockout continues through October. (Getty Images)
Martin Brodeur plans to explore playing in Europe if the NHL lockout continues through October, the Devils’ goaltender told TSN’s Pierre LeBrun in an interview.


“I’m going to wait it out until October, when they’re going to start slashing games, and try to have a sense of where it’s going. I know I’m closing doors in Europe now because I’m going to wait a little bit, but I’d like to go somewhere to play by November if I can get an opportunity somewhere. Right now, I have no intention of going because while there’s still lines of communication [between the NHL and NHLPA], it’s still a positive thing.”

This is the fourth lockout Brodeur has seen since he broke into the NHL in 1992 — the league also had lockouts in 1992, 1994 and 2004, when an entire season was canceled.
Earlier this offseason, the 40-year-old Brodeur signed a two-year, $9 million contract to remain with the Devils. He had an eye on the lockout then, accepting the Devils’ offer after they gave him a second year and assuring him that he would have somewhere to play next season.


“At the end of the day, that was foremost the first reason why Lou and I didn’t agree on a one-year deal, because I kept telling him that I needed a guarantee I would play hockey,” said Brodeur. “At my age, if I go through a whole lockout without a contract, it would have been tough for me to sign for the value I thought I was worth. So I debated with Lou a long time. It took more time than I thought it would. But they came around with it. For me, both mentally and physically, it was the most important thing to get that extra year. Because my experience is that when people talk lockout, usually it happens. That’s the feeling that I had. The second year was a safety valve for me.”


  • 0

#2249 Ossi Vaananen

Ossi Vaananen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,808 posts
  • Joined: 25-April 12

Posted 24 September 2012 - 09:12 PM

The trade was Luongo and Raymond for Alzner and 1st. To me a top pairing d-man still doesn't carry the value of an elite goalie. Van fans are too disenchanted with not winning it all to see our own goalie's skill. If he was on any other team we would be convetting Luongo. Alzner for Luongo isn't a good deal. Alzner and a first might be, but including Raymond doesn't make sense.


That elite goalie you're talking about is 33, and will be 43 by the end of his contract. These are factors to consider when trading for anyone. Alzner was a captain for u20 Canada one year, a pretty big accomplishment that puts his name up there with names like Stevens and Neidermeyer. Alzner would be a fantastic return for Luongo alone but adding in a 1st in what is to be a very deep year and we're having our way with Washington. Not to mention we dump Raymond and his cap hit, lets face it he has no intrinsic value anyway. I stand by my proposal.
  • 1

2d7ye0p.jpg

 

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#2250 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,345 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 24 September 2012 - 10:22 PM

What I want to know is why has everyone stopped talking about New Jersey? I don't think anyone expects the whole season to be lost due to a lockout, and surely with Brodeur thinking long and hard about calling it quits this summer the chances of him coming back AGAIN next season seem highly unlikely.

If it does end up being a short season, say regular season starting mid december - early january , then the Canucks only have to wait less than 2 months with Lou on the roster before the trade deadline. Now before all the bitter idiots cough..... king of es.... cough come back and say that's stupid New Jersey is broke and can't get anybody in the building as it is why would they get Luongo?? I ask, where would they be without Brodeur or Luongo next year??? The way I look at it they can't afford not to have Luongo if Brodeur retires because being a bottom feeder would put them in an even worse spot financially with no fan support at all.

Excellent question.

A year ago I thought New Jersey made the most sense. But even aside from salary cap issues (I confess I'm not up to speed on it, though the Kovy contract can't help), the ownership/financial situation there is concerning. Luongo may not want to get mixed up in that kinda off-ice stuff.

As oldnews pointed out, Brodeur's 2 year deal is a bit of a speedbump in that regard. Both he and Hedberg were 35+ UFAs coming into the summer and they both got 2 year deals so the Devils will likely stand pat for now.

Besides, Lu wants to start somewhere still and so does Marty. They're both capable of high workloads so it's not as likely they'd platoon or one would be given the majority of the games, never mind they'd have to stick Hedberg somewhere as I'm not sure that's who we'd want back in a deal.

There are still some questions over what they can afford, and while that's lessened somewhat with Parise gone they will have a bunch of top forwards to re-sign before next season. Guys like Henrique, Zajac and Clarkson are all coming due, although Elias' $6M may be off the books if he retires (no idea if he will though).

It's next summer and during the following season that they'll have some real questions around where their team is going, just not at this point.

Edited by elvis15, 24 September 2012 - 10:24 PM.

  • 0

schroedersig2_by_elvis15-d5szksn.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 





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.