Tearloch7 Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 Uh-huh. So you're saying that you expect his value to increase while he sits on our bench as a backup? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 Uh-huh. So you're saying that you expect his value to increase while he sits on our bench as a backup? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 You act as if he's not going to play at all. The truth is it's been said that if they are both there they will play for the starter role. Since you've said that Schneider is not necessarily better than Luongo why do you think he will only ever be sitting on the bench as a back up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Ironically, Gillis and Toronto are both referring to the possibility of a deal getting done - which wouldn't be happening if Luongo had vetoed a deal to Toronto, would it? Right - you don't know what you're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Burke and Gillis both have their own interests in mind when talking like this. Burke's fanbase clings to hope, Gillis hopes other GMs hear that he might be close to making a deal with Toronto. You speak so heavily about "assumptions", what about the assumption that you're clearly operating under that you can actually believe any of these bozo's? Did you believe Burke when he spoke of the Burrows/Bieksa for Hedman rumor publicly, or did that not serve your purpose at the time? I'll believe the Toronto rumor when it happens; until then, I'll trust Jason Botchford's word (not mine) a lot more than I'll trust yours, and he said that that Lou vetoed a deal which would've sent him to Toronto for Schenn. And I don't blame him; at the moment, Toronto looks like the Oakland Raiders of the NHL. Stay the hell away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 The only sense you make is in not wishing Toronto on Luongo. The problem with your hot air theory that this is an act, and that Luongo has already vetoed Toronto, is that Burke has no love lost for Gillis - in other words, there's next to no chance that he would collaborate in a scheme that essentially drives Luongo's price up. How exactly does it serve Burke's interest to mislead his fanbase, get their hopes up, and in the end fail to deliver once again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Because the built-in, automatic, fool-proof explanation is that "we are not prepared to mortgage this team's future by giving them the pieces that they required to make this deal. We have strong belief in James Reimer". That's all that Burke really has to say. And he has said, repeatedly, that he believes in Reimer, so he might actually believe it. A "veteran goalie" could be Marty Turco, or someone similar to "mentor" Reimer as his backup. He also recently extended Scrivens, which doesn't send a strong signal towards Luongo's imminent arrival. As for them "conspiring" to create interest, that's obviously not the case. But if someone comes up and asks Mike Gillis if Team X has inquired about Luongo, he's going to answer in the positive, because it benefits him to do that. He gains nothing by lieing, and I believe that the comment was even in response to someone else's tweet, so he didn't go trumpet this to try and gain notoriety. But again, whatever. You think these media guys are scum, I think they're usually pretty well-connected and dialed-in on a local level. It's certainly possible that Lou ends up in Toronto, and that doesn't necessarily even mean that he didn't veto an earlier deal; maybe he's realized that maybe there's so little interest in him around the league that if he wants to start, he might not have a choice. Who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Because the whole world knows that he's getting traded, and because Corey Schneider was signed to a 3-year deal for $12M to be our starter. Sheldon Souray could've been forced to come play for Edmonton a few years back, but they instead chose to bury him in the minors. If Lou's brought back, he won't get much playing time. It even would not surprise me if he were to be just shut down entirely until a move's made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Burke and Gillis both have their own interests in mind when talking like this. Burke's fanbase clings to hope, Gillis hopes other GMs hear that he might be close to making a deal with Toronto. You speak so heavily about "assumptions", what about the assumption that you're clearly operating under that you can actually believe any of these bozo's? Did you believe Burke when he spoke of the Burrows/Bieksa for Hedman rumor publicly, or did that not serve your purpose at the time? I'll believe the Toronto rumor when it happens; until then, I'll trust Jason Botchford's word (not mine) a lot more than I'll trust yours, and he said that that Lou vetoed a deal which would've sent him to Toronto for Schenn. And I don't blame him; at the moment, Toronto looks like the Oakland Raiders of the NHL. Stay the hell away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 I can see Luongo agreeing to a deal to go back home to Montreal. Why would any top tier athlete agree to go to Toronto if they had a choice to go elsewhere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 I can see Luongo agreeing to a deal to go back home to Montreal. Why would any top tier athlete agree to go to Toronto if they had a choice to go elsewhere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 But the free agents are all lining up to play in Torona... How would Canucks fans feel if their big UFA signings this summer were: Keith Aucoin Jay McClement Wall to wall whining. That's all we'd hear. They didn't even get to dream about players like Doan, Garrison or Schultz considering the Laffs... can't really think of anyone that Toronto likely had a realistic chance of signing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 DERP! DERP! backtrack, contradiction strawman backtrack, contradiction strawman DERP! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 They didn't even get to dream about players like Doan, Garrison or Schultz considering the Laffs... can't really think of anyone that Toronto likely had a realistic chance of signing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Seriously, this is pathetic. Is that all you've got? How old are you, 9? Not funny, and very revealing of the lack of depth behind your arguments which you (evidently) CANNOT DEFEND. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Yet you also think that Botchford's assertion that Lou had already vetoed a deal to Toronto is preposterous. If Toronto's in such a sorry state, as you make reference to (and to which I mostly agree), what makes you so sure that 33 year-old Roberto Luongo would be willing to accept a move there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.