• 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

Basically the big talk is that Luongo is heading to Toronto, so I would be happy with a deal along the lines of :

Luongo and Sauve for perhaps Bozak, Franson, and MacArthur.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand your rationale but a number of those teams are under serious pressure to win now. Lui gives them that opportunity.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well played.

Oh, but Garrison has only had one (or two) good years hahaha!!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What other goalies do really doesn't have anything to do with whether or not Luongo himself is "declining".

And even if last year were to be considered a "decline" (despite the fact his numbers are average or better) - it represents one season - to repeat - I think it's ridiculous to consider one year of slight variance to be evidence of decline.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doesn't really matter to me whether you've said something before - clearly it wasn't considered authoritative the first time. You may think it is logical to assume that because a deal including Bjugstad has not been done, that it will not happen.

I'm not stuck on Bjugstad, particularly after drafting a couple promising centers, but I don't find your logic convincing - nor do I generally consider it credible when posters tell me what GMs will or will not do. GMs negotiate - they add and subtract pieces. You simply don't know what Tallon is thinking.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here, it has already come out that Gillis want's Bjugstad and Tallon won't do it, again that's why the deal hasn't gone through it is because Tallon won't give us Bjugstad, if they were willing too it would have been done along time ago and I will prove it too you.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter how many times you write this flawed logic... it doesn't make it any more true.

The idea that that Bjugstad is untouchable is ridiculous... it is a matter of price and whether we are willing to pay that. It is also a matter of what the new CBA looks like and how that affects Luongo's contract and/or the ability to retain salary or cap space in a trade.

I think both sides have been more than happy to wait to see what the new rules will be.

The Booth trade apparently took over 6 months to complete, so the "it would have been done a long time ago" argument is literally just crap you are making up.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did... but the question is did you? The stories YOU linked explain why YOU are wrong!!

Shall I quote directly from them for you as you seem to not be able to follow a logical argument?

"Many people have speculated that the hold up in the deal is that Canucks General Manager Mike Gillis is demanding that the Panthers include their 2010 first round draft pick, Nick Bjugstad, as part of the deal. Florida, so far, is unwilling to part with the University of Minnesota forward and we find ourselves at the crossroads."

"Gillis can sit back and wait for the Panthers to come to him on this. With or without Luongo, his team can still end the regular season No. 1 in the Western Conference as they have the last two seasons. His team isn't the one with the need"

"Dale Tallon may love what Bjugstad brings to his organization, but does he love it more than a significantly improved chance to make the playoffs for the second consecutive season? That's what Gillis is counting on, and he's no dummy. This is the guy who artificially drove up Cody Hodgson's trade value with favorable zone starts for weeks in an effort to work a more advantageous deal for himself."

So... the links you provided not only suggest that a deal hasn't been made SO FAR, they indicate that Gillis puts himself in a better position to wait and let Florida blink first. They also give an example (beyond the Booth one I gave you already) which shows that trades take some time to develop, and the GM's job is to make it happen when you can get the best deal.... for the Canucks that was likely NOT July, and it may not be until mid season.

That entirely blows your argument of "it would have happened already" out of the water even without the added uncertainty over the results of the CBA negotiations which almost certainly hampered any Luongo trade.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically the big talk is that Luongo is heading to Toronto, so I would be happy with a deal along the lines of :

Luongo and Sauve for perhaps Bozak, Franson, and MacArthur.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

really this didn't prove I was wrong, it backed-up that what I said was true and forced you to change your arguement.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not change my argument, I simply pointed out the massive logic failure in yours. There are many reasons why a possible trade between Florida and Vancouver didn't happen earlier, the links you pointed out actually explain this fairly in depth.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here, it has already come out that Gillis want's Bjugstad and Tallon won't do it, again that's why the deal hasn't gone through it is because Tallon won't give us Bjugstad, if they were willing too it would have been done along time ago and I will prove it too you.

http://thehockeywrit...orida-panthers/

Heck there's a thread on it right here on CDC.

/topic/333917-why-is-mike-gillis-demanding-nick-bjugstad-from-the-florida-panthers/">http://forum.canucks...orida-panthers/

Then there is this other one.

http://ca.sports.yah...59038--nhl.html

That clearly states in it

So as you can see, what I have been saying is true. We want Bjugstad, they won't give him to us. The only pieces really aren't an issue at all, it's just that simple.

Okay, everyone knows (unless your a moron) there is absolutely 0% chance that Hall, Eberle, RNH, Yakupov, Schultz and probably Klefbom won't be in the deal (if they are as interested as you think)

So what do they have? What else can they give us that would appease us and make enough sense to trade him to a team inside our division that we have traditionally been rivals with to a certain extent.

It would be: Hemsky, Paajarvi (maybe), Gagner, maybe Smid or some other scraps. There isn't really anything there that interests me that much, we can get something better from Toronto.

By how do you know that they can do that in the next CBA? They are just assuming they can bury him which they may not be able too.

And No Gardiner isn't he's 22, he was arguablly there best defensemen last year, he is already a top 4 guy on most teams and his potential seems endless, not to mention his great skillset, those types of defensemen don't come around alot and he isn't going anywhere, Burke has already stated that so yes I do have credibility in that since it has already come from the Horse's mouth.

Gardiner isn't going anywhere, cap dump or not That's the bottom line.

And Connolly is actually still a good player, it's not his fault they were dumb enough to give him that much $$ but he can still be a good 2nd line center like he was before. (not that I want him but I'm just saying)

This part of your post made you seem like you really have no clue what you are talking about.

And yes I do, Edmonton has young star's like Hall, Eberle and RNH who score and are already capable of carrying there team offensively.

Florida has None. They have good prospects but no good young stars, Huberdeau, Howden, Bjugstad and the rest of them aren't at the point where they can carry a team like Hall, Eberle, and RNH can.

And none of those players you mentioned from Florida are star players.

As for the rest of it, you seem to missing the point of my post. Veteran players (Kuba, Flieschmann, Bergenhiem, Upshall, Jovo So-on) will be moving out and there young player's will be moving in, do you think those young player's will be able of carrying that team to the playoffs, highly unlikely, they will be like Edmonton is now.

Maybe right now Florida is better cause of all the players they signed for there quick fix, but once those guys move out and there young players move in, it won't even be close. Edmonton might even be better than them next year, who knows there young guys got better and they added players, whereas Florida lost a big piece in Garrison.

I said Dubnyk was Edmonton's starter going forward not Khabiblulin, and Dub is in his prime. So really Florida needs the goalie more, since niether Theodore and Clemmensen are starters, they managed to hold to the fort last year, but who knows if they will be able to again.

And again your missing the point, the point of Florida getting Luongo isn't to build the roster they currently have into a contender, it is so that when there young player's enter the line-up, and they begin to develop into key players that can carry the team (which they won't be right away) they will need someone to help carry the team until they are capable of doing so.

And you are underestimating Edmonton's prospects infact they have better one's than Florida, Klefbom is a better prospect than Petrovic, Musil is just as good as any other D prospect they have, they have Marincin, they now have Schultz (who would probably be the equivalent of Kulikov), they have Tuebert, they have Petry. Then for forwards they have Hamilton, Pitlick, Reider and more.

So yes Edmonton does have a stable of young blueliners. You just don't know about them.

I think overall you just missed the point of my post, and your not quite as informed as you think.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know your right, I was all over the place, Im just having that kind of a day today, but I will clarify myself right now.

Perhaps your richest comment of all is that you are going to do better in a deal with Toronto - by taking what exactly? You're arguing that Mr Everything, Jake Gardiner is an untouchable - and that you'd take a Connolly cap dump to get him. No thanks - but really - what exactly are you going to get from Toronto that is better than Florida and Edmonton have to offer?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know your right, I was all over the place, Im just having that kind of a day today, but I will clarify myself right now.

I would take a cap dump to get him but I dont think we would anyways, so to be honest, I'm not really seriously think about that as someone we might get, I just wanted to state that it would take atleast that probably more since they covet him highly, highly enough that he wont be coming here.

I would like Grabo & Bozak as I said in my proposal but I dont think that they will give up Grabo, so maybe Bozak + 1st + ? That would be nice.

To be 100% honest im not sure yet what exactly I want from Toronto but for the most part I wouldn't mind getting any of there players (aside from the cap dumps)

Now yes Edmonton doesn't really have anything that I want, and yes I think they do have better defensemen prospects than Florida but that doesn't mean I want them.

I never said I wanted any of those Dmen, I just said that I thought they were better. I hope that kinda clears that cloud up.

So since they won't give us: Schultz, Hall, Eberle, RNH, Yakupov, and Probably not Klefbom either, what else does that leave us? They won't give us Whitney, I dont really want Hemsky or Gagner, Paajarvi I wouldn't mind but not alone, and I doubt they would give us him either, and we can't just get all prospects like Musil and Rieder, we need something else that can make an impact right away or atleast sooner in my opinion.

What do you consider a young star player?

You think Huberbeau is a young star yet he hasn't played an NHL game.

To me a young star is some like: Hall, Eberle, E.Kane, Skinner, Couture, Landeskog, maybe even throw RNH in there. exc.

Huberbeau will probably be a star, but he isn't one right now. Gudbranson isn't a star, Kulikov is a good player for sure but he isn't a star either.

So with that being said, I dont see any young star's on there team do you? maybe you just classify young star differently.

No, there are still going to be some veterans, but they are going to want to but all there young players in the line-up and that requires alot/some of the veterans leaving, they are still going to have some but they aren't going to hold down there young players, after all they did rebuild to get them all.

Doug McLean explains it will with this Quote "I think you are going to see a major turn over in florida in the next couple of years, were your going to see some veteran guys move out and Huberbeau and the young guys coming into the line-up"

And that's all I ment by it, there still going to have some veterans but when those young guys are ready they are going to bring them in and they may not bring the same level of play as the veterans did.

And like I said before, Good Prospects aren't star players.

I think Edmonton does have better D prospects to be honest. They actually have alot: Schultz, Marincin, Musil, Klefbom, Tuebert, Gernat are better than Matheson, Petrovic, Robak and who ever else they have. So I stand by that.

And I don't like the Oilers, not by any stretch.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, well we disagree on Gardiner. I wouldn't take a cap dump to get him - I wouldn't accept him alone in a deal for Luongo - and I wouldn't be interested period, given the signing of Garrison. I see him as a role/third pairing blueliner in Vancouver - he is not going to push Hamhius or Edler out of the top four - he is not particularly physical, not a terribly strong player without the puck, not going to move anyone from the front of the net... Who would be his partner? He would need a right handed guy who would be capable of doing the heavy lifting physically and in his own end. Who would that be? To me Gardiner equals a misfit where the Canucks needs are concerned - don't need another left side guy - and not willing to pay the gross over-valuation. And Connolly is softer than anyone on the Canucks roster (yes, Raymond included) - another misfit for the third line center role. That would be a gawd awful deal.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Toronto makes the most sense.

Lu, Sauve and a 3rd

For

JVR and Franson

Makes sense for both sides. Canucks gain a right handed dman and a power forward with tremendous upside. Burke gets a pick, a prospect and a starting goalie. He saves grace with the fans because all he really gave up was Schenn and Lebda for those pieces.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disgaree, Gardiner's best strength is his skating, he's more phyiscal then you think even though his strong suit is puck moving, passing and offense.

I'm not particularly interested cause we won't get him, regardless of what we think it really doesn't matter cause we wont get him anyways. And I disagree on Connolly too, everyone thinks he is soft, maybe he isn't the most durable player but he was out killing penalites when he shouldnt have been.

I dont want him by any means but he could still be the 2nd line center he once was.

The deal is more thought out then this part of your response.

- Grabovski has never played on the 1st line, they plan to try JVR there, and last year Bozak and Connolly split time there, Grabo never really played on that line.

- Grabovski can play wing, so he would be on the 2nd line (and he is the perfect fit for that line btw) and Bozak would be centering the 3rd line.

- They have enough forward depth that they would still have a solid forward group, Connolly continues to play in the top 6, and plays on the 2nd line in Grabo's spot, Lombardi takes the 3rd line role.

Here's how that line-up would work:

Lupul- JVR - Kessel

Kulemin - Connolly - McArthur

Kadri - Lombardi - Frattin

I do understand that they wouldn't give Grabo, so there is really no reason to go over/argue about this more past that.

So you say my offer is weak (Which was Bozak + 1st + another thing) yet you propose in principal basicly the exact same thing.

And you are underestimating Bozak, he's a 50 points player (47 to be exact) he plays a two-way game, good on faceoffs, good offensive abililty, goes to the tough areas, and can relied on in tight situations.

The additional pieces will likely be a good prospect and either a pick or additional prospect in that deal. As we both seem to think.

Your so hypocritical.

There is no chance Eberle, absolutely 0, there's a better chance we get Gardiner (which is still none).

And Horcoff isn't a cap dump for them he is actually an important part of there team, he's there captain, there best two way forward and his production is important, they probably wouldn't give him up.

All I have to say about this is if you think there is even the slightest chance we will get Eberle, go ask Oiler fans what they think about that.

I never said Schultz was untouchable I just said they wouldn't trade him to us for Luongo. If we offered Kesler, Edler or Schneider they might include him in the deal, but not Luongo.

And they just signed him and after that fiasco they went through to get him, how bad would that look if they traded him before he even plays for them, Lowe's Rep would go down and they would lose alot of credibility, and they would have an even harder time getting UFA's (and it's not like they have an easy time already).

And no Kulikov wouldn't Ryan Whitney is better than him right now, maybe eventually but right now Whitney is better imo.

Actually there's alot who would, and they one's who wouldn't would probably get fired.

If Edmonton offered any of these:

Hall for Gudbranson

Eberle for Gudbranson

RNH for Gudbranson

They would be stupid not to take it, especially the first two.

You may think I am underrating Florida, but you are seriously underrating Edmonton.

0

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.