Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Optimistic View


  • Please log in to reply
67 replies to this topic

#31 Day one

Day one

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 767 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 07

Posted 16 August 2012 - 07:44 PM

- We still have Luongo as a bargaining chip.  I say keep him unless MG gets something that helps our team.  Those who said just salary dump him are not seeing what Luongo could is actually worth.  I think it's great to hold out a bit into the season and watch some teams struggle with goaltenders and then when they look around for other possibilities, we have their missing piece.  
     and later on if we are struggling in any of these positions then we can use Luongo to upgrade.  And if we aren't struggling at all then perhaps we continue to split minutes with Schneider. Again I said PERHAPS... 


I suspect that the way to get a good return for Lou at this point will be to actually play him in hopes of showcasing that he is still capable of being a cup-contending goaltender. Split duties perhaps? But I have no doubts that the fans will rain down on him and otherwise further ensure that they do everything they can to aid in his devaluation. And meanwhile let's hope that a Lou whose heart is no longer in Vancouver can perform. A Lou sitting on the bench will be virtually untradable.

That should produce some comments.

Edited by Day one, 16 August 2012 - 07:45 PM.

  • 0

#32 Wilbur

Wilbur

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,136 posts
  • Joined: 02-December 03

Posted 16 August 2012 - 08:12 PM

Teams in "good" shape don't win Cups. Great teams do. We're not cup worthy as we are now.

Heh, what shape were the Kings in August of last year? Or January?

Really, all you can do is prepare as best you can. The Canucks are one of the best teams in the league and, barring disaster, will be in the mix come next April. That's not to say there aren't improvements that the team can make internally or through trades/signings. But those don't always come easy. Some fans here don't seem to get that...Gillis can't sign ALL the desirable free agents, and what he may offer in a trade may not be as good as some other teams offer. Gillis will make the moves to improve this team when he can.
  • 1

#33 nadz4life

nadz4life

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • Joined: 22-January 12

Posted 16 August 2012 - 08:24 PM

I love u
Dude really? I have been a fan for 35 years and have seen some terrible Canucks teams over that time, all had heart but some terrible teams.

Nowadays, I see all the posts by teenagers, spoiled brats who think just because mommy gave them a medal for coming in last they get what they want, and when they don't they have a temper tantrum, which is pretty much how you are acting. "I want a cup, you suck if you don't get one for me" attitude.

No team in any major sport can win their championship consistently anymore, cap rules, player movement, etc limits that, therefore, all you can ask for is a team that is competitive and has a chance to win.

For the last 4 years the Canucks have been a top 5 favorite to win. For the last 2 years they have been a top 3 favorite and have won the president's trophy, along with a Stanley Cup final appearance.

I am not sure what team you are watching, but if having a team that is considered to be a favorite for the last 4 years isn't enough for you, well go ask mommy for another ribbon kid.

Wake up and quit whining, we have a great shot, and really what it comes down to is our team performing with cohesiveness and effort at the right time, and having some luck, and minimal key injuries. That's how Boston won, that's how LA won. We have enough talent, the key is chemistry and timing and getting on a run, nothing else, there is no magic bullet for this team.

Given our experience, talent, depth that's all it is. Hunger, Heart, Chemistry, Effort, Timing.


  • 0

#34 BombaySeven

BombaySeven

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 12

Posted 16 August 2012 - 08:51 PM

I'll tell you it's really refreshing to see a thread filled with support and positivity towards the team we all cheer for as apposed to the whining/bitchig/complaining posts that most of this forum is filled with.. Feels like there are some quality Canucks fans out there.
  • 0

#35 gabar

gabar

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts
  • Joined: 29-August 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 09:34 PM

Does Luongo wants to be a back up? I dont think so.
  • 0

#36 BombaySeven

BombaySeven

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 12

Posted 16 August 2012 - 09:49 PM

Does Luongo wants to be a back up? I dont think so.


is it up to Luongo? I dont think so.
  • 0

#37 Wilbur

Wilbur

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,136 posts
  • Joined: 02-December 03

Posted 16 August 2012 - 10:50 PM

I'll tell you it's really refreshing to see a thread filled with support and positivity towards the team we all cheer for as apposed to the whining/bitchig/complaining posts that most of this forum is filled with.. Feels like there are some quality Canucks fans out there.

I think a lot of the negativity is just a coping mechanism for a lot of fans so they don't get too upset if/when the Canucks don't win.

We all want to have the correct answer in life. This can carry over to being a fan where: correct = cheering for the team that wins.

Now, we're all Canuck fans here, even the negative ones. The negative ones just want to be correct in saying that the Canucks won't win the Stanley Cup, that way they look smart by being right. And really, it is the safe bet. If you start each year by saying "The Canucks are going to lose" you'll probably be right and look smarter than all those that got there hopes up. They're no less of a fan for cheering this way, it's not as if they're cheering for another team. Even though waiting for the Canucks inevitable demise is a less enjoyable way to journey through a season, don't doubt for a second that these fans are watching every game and cheering every goal.

Anyway, there will be that one year they're wrong B)
  • 0

#38 winacup

winacup

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 241 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 12

Posted 16 August 2012 - 11:10 PM

There's a lot of positive on this team right now. I don't fell we are as good as our 10-11 team at the moment, but a blockbuster Luongo trade could change that in an instant. We learned in 2011 what it takes to win a cup. I don't think we have that right now.

we learned nothing in 2011. if we had we would have hoisted the cup this year instead of the kings.
  • 0
Posted Image

#39 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,944 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 17 August 2012 - 04:30 AM

I agree, but we are just marginally better than 11/12.

Garrison > Salo
Kassian < Hodgson (certainly as of the current time, maybe someday soon Kass?)

But... Kass and Garrison is a good improvement in physical match ups balancing > More size and speed. So yeah we're a bit ahead.

As for 10/11 > Torres / Malhotra start of year version) blows away Lappy / Higgins as our current best 3rd line tandem. Edler matched Erhoff's offense, but not his ability to help rush the puck up ice under pressure. Yip, better that year.

I feel we are not as good as 10-11 but better than 11-12


  • 0

#40 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,150 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 17 August 2012 - 04:40 AM

As Gillis has said, there's no rush, and he could change his mind at any point if something comes up where he needs the cap space.


Well,what Gillis says and what the reality truly is are two separate worlds.
  • 0

#41 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,150 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 17 August 2012 - 04:50 AM

is it up to Luongo? I dont think so.


Apparently,it is totally up to Luo.

He immediately stated it was unacceptable(after LA game 5) and is 'moving on'.

Gillis has to walk a fine line here.Makes for great theatre to see how Mike walks this tightrope.
  • 0

#42 enterin

enterin

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 945 posts
  • Joined: 20-August 07

Posted 17 August 2012 - 08:41 AM

I suspect that the way to get a good return for Lou at this point will be to actually play him in hopes of showcasing that he is still capable of being a cup-contending goaltender. Split duties perhaps? But I have no doubts that the fans will rain down on him and otherwise further ensure that they do everything they can to aid in his devaluation. And meanwhile let's hope that a Lou whose heart is no longer in Vancouver can perform. A Lou sitting on the bench will be virtually untradable.

That should produce some comments.


First of all I like Lu but his heart was not here and neither is his families. It is in florida doesnt anyone get it ....
That is why Vancouver management felt he needs to move on, the only reason is to help him to be closer to his wife and children which in return should also help the franchise....
  • 0

#43 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 17 August 2012 - 09:21 AM

I agree for sure but just getting rid of a quality number 1 goalie and not getting something that's gunna help us in return is a waste if u ask me.


Well, that's what's going to happen, so you better wake up and accept it. Mike Gillis has backed himself into a corner, by not dealing with this goaltending situation earlier (like - in 2010 or 2011), and now he's in a terrible bargaining position, holding a goalie who has asked out publicly and who has control over where he ends up. Well played, Mike.

And you're crazy if you think that we're best off by "holding onto him". Why? You really want > $9M of our cap allocated to our goalies? And besides, how exactly do you think that 33 year-old Roberto Luongo's value is going to increase by being our backup? I call out everyone with this question, who claim that Gillis should just hold on to him, and nobody has an answer. Why? Because his value will not increase. The end. Trade him now. Gillis needs to pay the piper on this one.
  • 1

#44 BombaySeven

BombaySeven

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 12

Posted 17 August 2012 - 09:42 AM

Well, that's what's going to happen, so you better wake up and accept it. Mike Gillis has backed himself into a corner, by not dealing with this goaltending situation earlier (like - in 2010 or 2011), and now he's in a terrible bargaining position, holding a goalie who has asked out publicly and who has control over where he ends up. Well played, Mike.

And you're crazy if you think that we're best off by "holding onto him". Why? You really want > $9M of our cap allocated to our goalies? And besides, how exactly do you think that 33 year-old Roberto Luongo's value is going to increase by being our backup? I call out everyone with this question, who claim that Gillis should just hold on to him, and nobody has an answer. Why? Because his value will not increase. The end. Trade him now. Gillis needs to pay the piper on this one.


I understand what your saying and in some ways you're right.. What I'm trying to say is that yes there is no way we can keep both of them in the long term.. WE SHOULD TRADE LUONGO THIS YEAR.  But we don't have to force it right now in the summer for next to nothing.. Schneider's value continued to go up as a backup so why can't luongo continue to prove that he is an elite goalie as a backup to Schneider. If every 3 games luongo got 1 start and played great why wouldn't his trade value stay the same or increase.. Especially if other teams goalie situations are in the pooper.  I just think it is beneficial to not rush a Luongo trade especially with the team we have.. We arent struggling (on paper) and I would rather let the season start, then find out what our real weaknesses are as apposed to everyone just guessing what they are in the summer and everyone just wanting an end to the luongo trade already.  I think it's up to both MG and Luongo where he is landed not just one of them... So I think they have a good enough relationship to help each other and do what is best for both.
  • 0

#45 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 17 August 2012 - 09:50 AM

I understand what your saying and in some ways you're right.. What I'm trying to say is that yes there is no way we can keep both of them in the long term.. WE SHOULD TRADE LUONGO THIS YEAR. But we don't have to force it right now in the summer for next to nothing.. Schneider's value continued to go up as a backup so why can't luongo continue to prove that he is an elite goalie as a backup to Schneider. If every 3 games luongo got 1 start and played great why wouldn't his trade value stay the same or increase.. Especially if other teams goalie situations are in the pooper. I just think it is beneficial to not rush a Luongo trade especially with the team we have.. We arent struggling (on paper) and I would rather let the season start, then find out what our real weaknesses are as apposed to everyone just guessing what they are in the summer and everyone just wanting an end to the luongo trade already. I think it's up to both MG and Luongo where he is landed not just one of them... So I think they have a good enough relationship to help each other and do what is best for both.


Conveniently, you've failed to answer my question.

If there's no urgency in trading Luongo due to the current yield, EXPLAIN TO ME HOW 33 YEAR-OLD ROBERTO LUONGO'S VALUE WILL APPRECIATE AS OUR BACKUP.
  • 0

#46 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,027 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 17 August 2012 - 09:54 AM

we learned nothing in 2011. if we had we would have hoisted the cup this year instead of the kings.


"WE"??? .. I for one tried to tell em how to get er done but did they listen?? .. NO!!! .. so speak for yourself, laddie .. :rolleyes:
  • 0
"To Thine Own Self Be True"

#47 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,027 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 17 August 2012 - 09:57 AM

Well, that's what's going to happen, so you better wake up and accept it. Mike Gillis has backed himself into a corner, by not dealing with this goaltending situation earlier (like - in 2010 or 2011), and now he's in a terrible bargaining position, holding a goalie who has asked out publicly and who has control over where he ends up. Well played, Mike.

And you're crazy if you think that we're best off by "holding onto him". Why? You really want > $9M of our cap allocated to our goalies? And besides, how exactly do you think that 33 year-old Roberto Luongo's value is going to increase by being our backup? I call out everyone with this question, who claim that Gillis should just hold on to him, and nobody has an answer. Why? Because his value will not increase. The end. Trade him now. Gillis needs to pay the piper on this one.


:picard: .. cart before horse me thinks .. neither MG, nor you, are Nostradamus .. well, MG doesn't claim to be, at least ..
  • 0
"To Thine Own Self Be True"

#48 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 17 August 2012 - 09:59 AM

:picard: .. cart before horse me thinks .. neither MG, nor you, are Nostradamus .. well, MG doesn't claim to be, at least ..


Well, then, if I'm wrong, let's hear how it's a good thing, in terms of return, to hold on to Roberto Luongo.

I've been waiting for somebody to answer this question for weeks, it seems, so if you've got an answer, let's hear it.
  • 0

#49 Rollieo Del Fuego

Rollieo Del Fuego

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 786 posts
  • Joined: 24-September 10

Posted 17 August 2012 - 10:26 AM

All we need is for someone to take a quantum leap like Tanev did last year.
One of Kassian, Schroeder, Jensen or Mallet. Chances are it isn't going to happen but you never know.
  • 0

#50 BombaySeven

BombaySeven

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 12

Posted 17 August 2012 - 10:37 AM

Conveniently, you've failed to answer my question.

If there's no urgency in trading Luongo due to the current yield, EXPLAIN TO ME HOW 33 YEAR-OLD ROBERTO LUONGO'S VALUE WILL APPRECIATE AS OUR BACKUP.


The way I see it the price of Luongo increases when the environment changes for the demand of a good starting NHL goaltender... Let's use the maple leafs and panthers as an example... The teams say right now they are happy to start the season with their current starting goalies.. But once the season starts and let's say they drop a few games due to shaky goaltending, the fans will start blaming Tallon and Burke to upgrade the position.. Then they look around the league for a replacement and they see Vancouver with backup Roberto Luongo having a decent season in the starts that he's getting.  Now they need to play by MG's rules because he's the one holding the piece that they NEED.  Thats how his price increases.  Anyways that's just an idea that makes sense to me..
  • 0

#51 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 17 August 2012 - 11:00 AM

The way I see it the price of Luongo increases when the environment changes for the demand of a good starting NHL goaltender... Let's use the maple leafs and panthers as an example... The teams say right now they are happy to start the season with their current starting goalies.. But once the season starts and let's say they drop a few games due to shaky goaltending, the fans will start blaming Tallon and Burke to upgrade the position.. Then they look around the league for a replacement and they see Vancouver with backup Roberto Luongo having a decent season in the starts that he's getting. Now they need to play by MG's rules because he's the one holding the piece that they NEED. Thats how his price increases.


One problem with all of this: you're forgetting that Roberto has CONTROL over where he goes. If a team like Detroit gets off to a bad start, and/or a guy like Jimmy Howard gets injured, Roberto may not want to go there, so he doesn't have to. Speculation is that there was a trade in place which had him going to Toronto, for Schenn, which he vetoed, which tells me that he probably wants to go to either Florida, or Chicago, and he's going to hold a gun to Gillis' head (as he should, really) until he gets exactly what he wants.

So the scenario of "let's see how other team's start off" is a bad strategy.

And even if Florida gets off to a bad start, they may see even less logic in acquiring Luongo. Heck, if they're gonna stink, anyway, may as well stink on the cheap, right? And let's not forget that Florida has that Jakob Markstrom guy who they might feel is just a better fit to grow with their already young team than a mid-30s goaltender.

Seriously, I can't see any scenario where hanging onto Luongo will benefit the Canucks. We need help in too many other places to have over $9M tied up in our goalies, 1 of which has asked publicly for a trade.
  • 0

#52 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,027 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 17 August 2012 - 11:23 AM

Well, then, if I'm wrong, let's hear how it's a good thing, in terms of return, to hold on to Roberto Luongo.

I've been waiting for somebody to answer this question for weeks, it seems, so if you've got an answer, let's hear it.


I never inferred, nor did I state, that hanging onto Luongo is a good thing as far as a return goes .. I was commenting on your assertion that MG should have foreseen Schnieds taking away the #1 position from Luongo back in 2010 .. MG is in a situation where he must work with what he has, in a league that does not know if it will be active this year ..

I would rather he wait for the best deal he can get .. let's see how long Roberto's ego can handle being a back-up .. maybe his choice of locations will change .. I just find being overly, and negatively, critical about every potential act by MG gets old after awhile .. being optimistic costs you nothing, lessens your stress and makes others want to spend time around you .. B)
  • 0
"To Thine Own Self Be True"

#53 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 17 August 2012 - 11:32 AM

I never inferred, nor did I state, that hanging onto Luongo is a good thing as far as a return goes .. I was commenting on your assertion that MG should have foreseen Schnieds taking away the #1 position from Luongo back in 2010 .. MG is in a situation where he must work with what he has, in a league that does not know if it will be active this year ..


I did not assert that.

I've been saying that he should've traded SCHNEIDER not long after Luongo signed the lifetime contract. If he did that, we wouldn't be in this mess. Schneider's value was very, very high during and after both his rookie and sophomore NHL seasons. An acceptable return could've easily been had, certainly far better than what we're going to be getting for Luongo, who may still very well be our best option at the starting G position.

I would rather he wait for the best deal he can get .. let's see how long Roberto's ego can handle being a back-up .. maybe his choice of locations will change .. I just find being overly, and negatively, critical about every potential act by MG gets old after awhile .. being optimistic costs you nothing, lessens your stress and makes others want to spend time around you .. B)


And I'll ask you again, how do you expect Luongo's value to increase as our backup? Let's hear it, if it's such a good idea to wait.
  • 0

#54 BombaySeven

BombaySeven

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 12

Posted 17 August 2012 - 11:49 AM

Firstly Schneider's trade value has never been as high as it is now because he continue to prove himself a stud... WHICH is why the Canucks are holding onto him... b/c he seems to have more upside than luongo.  

As for luongo u said he is in control of where he goes which I would agree to to a certain extent but in the scenario of him starting the season with u saying for example jimmy Howard getting injured and they new a goalie, who says luongo wouldn't be thrilled?  We haven't asked him for that so with the potential injuries to other starters why wouldn't Luongos options increase for himself.  

Why would Luongos value depreciate from right now to a month in the season? Because he is a few months older?
  • 0

#55 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,027 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 17 August 2012 - 12:09 PM

I did not assert that.

I've been saying that he should've traded SCHNEIDER not long after Luongo signed the lifetime contract. If he did that, we wouldn't be in this mess. Schneider's value was very, very high during and after both his rookie and sophomore NHL seasons. An acceptable return could've easily been had, certainly far better than what we're going to be getting for Luongo, who may still very well be our best option at the starting G position.



And I'll ask you again, how do you expect Luongo's value to increase as our backup? Let's hear it, if it's such a good idea to wait.


Obtuseness will get you nowhere ,, I never said his value would increase or decrease .. none of us, not even YOU, can say for certain .. and as far as waiting is concerned, I believe MG has no choice but to wait .. time will tell and the sky should not fall anytime soon .. relax, man .. you are gonna blow something important .. and I dinna mean yer credibility .. I mean like an "organ" .. :)
  • 0
"To Thine Own Self Be True"

#56 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 17 August 2012 - 12:54 PM

Firstly Schneider's trade value has never been as high as it is now because he continue to prove himself a stud... WHICH is why the Canucks are holding onto him... b/c he seems to have more upside than luongo.



Really? A 26 year-old having more upside than a 33 year-old. Go figure.

As for luongo u said he is in control of where he goes which I would agree to to a certain extent but in the scenario of him starting the season with u saying for example jimmy Howard getting injured and they new a goalie, who says luongo wouldn't be thrilled?


OK, that's a possibility, I guess, but the very low probability event of Jimmy Howard getting injured still has to occur. Not a lot of goalies get season-ending injuries.

For it to make mathematical sense to wait on this low probability event, the reward from Detroit would have to be SO HUGE, and it wouldn't be, unless you'd somehow expect them to give us Zetterberg for Luongo, which wouldn't happen. So, what's the point?

Why would Luongos value depreciate from right now to a month in the season? Because he is a few months older?


It'll continue to go lower, because the distraction is going to get bigger and bigger, and the Canucks will start to feel more and more urgency to rid themselves of the problem. The distraction would be so huge, and it'd no doubt affect the teams' play and the locker room's morale.

Of course, when someone is more and more desperate to sell something, then, the buyer is in a far more powerful position. Again, another fundamental market principle.
  • 0

#57 BombaySeven

BombaySeven

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 12

Posted 17 August 2012 - 02:22 PM

Detroit was just one example... Goalie issues happen several times on a yearly basis... So there are many different teams that could possibly want Luongos services that he may want to be apart of... I think it's better to think this way then to think that everyone goaltender position in the NHL is set and unless we offload luongo now we will never be able to get rid of him... 

As for Luongo being a main focus so the team has a hard time focusing and it becomes a ridiculous distraction that makes the team suffer, I don't see that happening because of how Luongo has handled himself... Even when he is mad or wanted a trade he has acted professionally and has got along great with Cory.. An of you are right then take him out of the equation.. Just completely sit him until you trade him.. Like not even as a backup.. Tell him he has a suspension from the team. [even though I don't see that happening]

I don't think people really question what luongo brings to a team it's just how bad teams need it.  I think most teams right now are saying "we are okay we don't NEED that so we will just use what we have and we won't give them what they want".. But if factors (like injuries or heavy underachievement) happen to some teams then he will be a necessity on order for some teams to be successful. 
  • 1

#58 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,027 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 17 August 2012 - 02:27 PM

Bottom line is, for many folks on CDC, it will not matter what we get for Luongo, it will not be enough .. I trust MG to get the best return, and in the meantime, I remain optimistic about our team going forward .. Luongo is an asset whose true value is yet to be established .. once we know, it should keep the "second guessers" and "teeth-gnashers" busy all winter .. sheesh I hope they start their own Forum .. B)
  • 1
"To Thine Own Self Be True"

#59 danaimo

danaimo

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 74 posts
  • Joined: 28-April 12

Posted 17 August 2012 - 05:00 PM

Luongo's value can and almost certainly will increase as time rolls on. I understand the argument about him being here is a distraction, but this coaching staff has demonstrated in the past that they will never allow players to disrupt the locker room ( whether it is Shane O'Brien, Matthew Schneider or dare I say it Cody Hodgson).
As and when teams start playing next season there will be about 8 teams without a genuine starter. These teams are hoping that a young backup will come out of nowhere (TAM, WAS,TOR) or their existing goalie/goalies will be good enough to cut it (CHI, EDM, NYI maybe NJD). I guarantee you that 2 or 3 of these teams will go 3-6-1 or worse in their first 10 games. This will be what drives Luongo's value. The pressure on other teams GMs will be enormous. Remember, Mike Gillis would like to trade Luongo, he does not have to trade Luongo.
  • 1

#60 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 17 August 2012 - 06:09 PM

These teams are hoping that a young backup will come out of nowhere (TAM, WAS,TOR) or their existing goalie/goalies will be good enough to cut it (CHI, EDM, NYI maybe NJD). I guarantee you that 2 or 3 of these teams will go 3-6-1 or worse in their first 10 games. This will be what drives Luongo's value. The pressure on other teams GMs will be enormous.


Does the word "VETO" mean anything to you?

Good luck in getting Lou to accept a trade to a place like Long Island, or New Jersey. Rumor has it that he vetoed Toronto, which is a great city, and some would say that it'd be a logical fit (not sure I totally agree with that one). You don't honestly think that Luongo will say "sure, Mike, I want to be an Islander, please do proceed with this trade", do you? Or have you just forgotten that Luongo holds all the power in where he ends up?

Remember, Mike Gillis would like to trade Luongo, he does not have to trade Luongo.


Um, yeah, he kinda does.

In theory, Quebec could've held on to Eric Lindros for 3 years. The Vancouver Grizzlies could've hung on to Steve Francis for a few years. It doesn't benefit Vancouver at all to keep Luongo, unless you think it's a smart idea to pay your backup goalie $5.2M per year. How do you not see this?

He wants out, because Vancouver has chosen Cory Schneider over him. It's that simple. He DOES have to be traded. You're not being reasonable.
  • 1




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.