nuck nit Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 is it up to Luongo? I dont think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enterin Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BombaySeven Posted August 17, 2012 Author Share Posted August 17, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 we learned nothing in 2011. if we had we would have hoisted the cup this year instead of the kings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 .. cart before horse me thinks .. neither MG, nor you, are Nostradamus .. well, MG doesn't claim to be, at least .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rollieo Del Fuego Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BombaySeven Posted August 17, 2012 Author Share Posted August 17, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 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 .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BombaySeven Posted August 17, 2012 Author Share Posted August 17, 2012 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BombaySeven Posted August 17, 2012 Author Share Posted August 17, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 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 .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danaimo Posted August 18, 2012 Share Posted August 18, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted August 18, 2012 Share Posted August 18, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.