• Announcements

    • StealthNuck

      Forum-specific Rules   07/11/2017

      These are board specific rules for the Trades and Rumors forum designed to provide organization and a better experience for everyone. Please review these rules before posting new threads. 
        THREAD ETIQUETTE   1. Please search for an existing thread before posting. This forum can be very fast moving, so it's understandable if redundant threads are inadvertently posted. In such a case, please use the report feature to request removal of redundant threads.    2. Provide a clearly identifiable topic title so that users can readily understand the content. The title should include any and all teams involved, as well as player names or other personnel involved as appropriate.   3. All trades, signings, rumors and other news MUST include a linkable source. Simply posting the name of the source is not enough. Effort should also be made to copy and paste the full article, or at the very least the relevant portion of text from the source to the first post of the thread. Moderators may remove low-quality threads in favour of high-quality threads. 

      Affixed to the front of your title should be a label that identifies the type of transaction that is taking place. For all trades use [TRADE]. For all signings use [SIGNING]. For all waiver-wire transactions use [WAIVERS]. For all rumours use [RUMOUR].
      For articles or news items that don't fit into the above categories, affix an appropriate label of your choice such as [NEWS], [ARTICLE] or [MISC].   4. When the status of a thread changes a new thread can be created. The new thread should reflect the change and help focus the discussion on current events. e.g. Someone may create a new thread when a rumor becomes a trades. The old thread will be locked by the moderating team.    5. Do not misrepresent the contents of your thread or post false trades or rumors. Trolling will result in a permanent suspension. 

      SOURCES   The following source types are considered INVALID. Any links to posts or threads on other message boards Any links to personal blogs Any news heard on the radio that does not have a link to an audio vault or podcast Any news seen on television that does not have a link to online video Any news spread by word of mouth
      Additionally, certain sources may be be blacklisted due to poor credentials, clear traffic-mongering etc. Blacklisted sources will be posted here. 
      Thank you for your co-operation and please PM the Administrator or Moderators if you have any questions, concerns or suggestions regarding this forum.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Templeton Peck

[Discussion] Roberto Luongo Trade Thread 3.0

3,003 posts in this topic

Bozak for Luongo? Wow...

1. Agree Bozak is a good 3rd liner. Fills the void for when Manny leaves, and Lappy can take 4th.

2. Giving up an All Star Goalie, with actually a reasonable cap hit contract relative to other top ten goalies although a long contract for a 3rd liner is ridiculous.

3. Bozak stock is rising because he played on a line with Lupul who was having a career year before he got hurt and Kessel. He was the beneficiary of some very talented wingers. That being said, can he play the role of a Morrison between a Bert and Naslund, sure...but still not enough.

4. Kadri is junk, he's a bust and going no where in the NHL - as I have said prior. 3 yr pro, offensive center, drafted 6th overall, and can't crack a lineup of one of the worst teams in the league in need of an offensive center? Says enough.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Luongo to Luong Island - where it all began...

for Okposo and Pokka (we need a young Finnish blueliner in the system to fill the Sami void).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Staal deal happened at the draft, which coincidentally is one of the two times I suggested Luongo could be dealt if not before the season. That was a completely different situation, and really bears no resemblance other than the fact they are both stars. RFA vs. long contract, Staal knew where he wanted to sign, and so on...

It's funny, that's what he said he would do from the beginning, because he's not worried about having two awesome goaltenders, especially possibly heading in to a compressed season. It's a good problem to have when you're playing 4 games a week. He has time on his side.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though it does appear, that Luongo made his own bed and management finds itself at a crossroads between making a choice between two goaltenders; one on a hefty, anchoring contract and getting up there in age, and the other, young, poised and on a seemingly perfect contract, no one from Canucks management has stated anything regarding a choice between Luongo and Schneider.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's fair point but it doesn't mean you give him up for scraps then. We can win with both goalies splitting the season. Our team is strong, it can make a run as is if we're healthy, you don't trade away assets for nothing and expect to win long term.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has Schneider left for Switzerland yet...

What would happen if he injures himself..type groin injury..then what ....do we still trade Lou or what....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really completely different. Was Shero under any obligation to trade him to the Hurricanes? Nope. He was not obligated to trade him at all. What he did, though, was work in the background so that he could accommodate his player, and also not make it an ordeal. Luongo has already turned into an ordeal. This "nice problem to have" crap is so wrong. You say that he has time on his side - I'll ask again in what direction you think Luongo's value will go if he plays this entire season as our backup.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's most likely, but I'd be surprised to hear any rational person say it's 100% that Luongo goes.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, he couldn't sign him, so he would have had to take a star player to arbitration, or face an offer sheet from Carolina, so yeah, his hand was forced.

In a condensed season, he wouldn't be our backup at all. He would likely be splitting games pretty even. I have no more evidence that he won't go down in value than you do that he will. But, I guarantee he will be playing more than a typical backup.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then find me a 1st source quote (management) reported by a second source (media) that states management has decided to go with Schneder over Luongo.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has Schneider left for Switzerland yet...

What would happen if he injures himself..type groin injury..then what ....do we still trade Lou or what....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Luongo is on the trade block, so, through reasonable deduction, the job belongs to the other goalie, thus, Schneider. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it might be safe to say its a freaking duck. I'll rephrase my statement to satisfy your annal view. Its APPEARANT, that management has chosen Schneider over Lou, because, they are obviously trying to trade Lou, with nary a rumour about a Schneider trade. Now, stick your pen where the sun don;t shine.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waste of time. You don't get it. It is not about whether Luongo or Schneider being traded. It's about you spreading falsified facts; no one in management has stated specifically (go on record) that the Canucks have decided to go with Schneider over Luongo. You're not going to prove anything in this world by using the duck analogy. Science would be dead by now. FACTS smurf47. FACTS. Not common deduction, no analogy, no side steps. FACTS. You cannot prove it, you cannot discuss it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But they have. Mike Gillis has spoken pretty openly about it on the radio. And a quick Google search found the below article, which offers a bit of confirmation.

Gillis did acknowledge that before the lockout he talked with several teams about trading the 33-year-old goaltender. Luongo lost his first-string status during the playoffs to Cory Schneider, who has since signed a three-year contract with the Canucks.

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/10/19/roberto-luongo-to-leafs-deal-not-done-mike-gillis

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the alternative? Hold out for a superstar that will never be offered?

In what direction do you think Luongo's value would go as a trade piece if he's atrophying away on our bench?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there's a season,

Hold out till trade deadline.....I suspect more than the above mentioned could be aquired in a trade for Lu when they are on hhe outside looking in again for a playoff spot......assuming the leafs are the only suitors.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waste of time. You don't get it. It is not about whether Luongo or Schneider being traded. It's about you spreading falsified facts; no one in management has stated specifically (go on record) that the Canucks have decided to go with Schneider over Luongo. You're not going to prove anything in this world by using the duck analogy. Science would be dead by now. FACTS smurf47. FACTS. Not common deduction, no analogy, no side steps. FACTS. You cannot prove it, you cannot discuss it.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.