Canucks_Hockey_101 Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 Burke is not trading a corner stone player for an aging over paid goalie. Luongo will bring a decent return, but no blue chip prospect. Think along the lines of Prospect + Draft pick + bottom six player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 For a young blue chip goalie goalie though... You know? Schneider for Reilly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 Burke is not trading a corner stone player for an aging over paid goalie. Luongo will bring a decent return, but no blue chip prospect. Think along the lines of Prospect + Draft pick + bottom six player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_Hockey_101 Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 Leafs won't trade Reilly, Canucks won't trade Schneider for Reilly. Hence why this trade will not happen. Ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 I do like the fact that you said "Canucks won't trade Schneider for"... At the very least, one must be open to the idea that either goaltender could be moved in light of the right pieces offered. As it stands today, Schneider is much more movable than Luongo. Good on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 Terrible comparison, but anyways Luongo is still a much better player than Lecavalier with a much better contract. You say the 2 years extra makes it even, but 5.2 for a star goalie, Who's contract will end when he retires is much better than 7.5 or whatever it is for a mediocre 2nd liner (And I'm being generous). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 2011/2012 season: Magnus Svensson-Paajarvi: GP: 41 G: 2 P:8 PPG: 0.195 Zack Kassian: GP: 44 G: 4 P: 10 PPG: 0.227 Very similar stats. If I were to pick a player based on style of play (based on Canucks needs), Kassian is my guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 I doubt either team has any interest in trading Lecavalier for Kassian? I guess the idea here at CDC is to pretend that Paajarvi's rookie year just didn't happen? Given the choice, I as well would probably choose Kassian, based solely on intrigue/potential. But that's not relevant to the debate. The debate is who to go after from Edmonton, should Luongo be dealt there. And it's quite the contradiction for CDCers to scoff at the notion of trading Kassian for Lecavalier, while also scoffing at the notion of trading Luongo for Paajarvi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 As it stands today, Schneider is much more movable than Luongo. Good on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 If Kesler and Hamhuis were healthy; we probably win the cup! And this year we got nowhere as Kesler was injured much sooner. Assuming he returns to health the 1C is not an issue! But we are missing a bonafide stud on D where our by committee approach wa further behind without Erhoff. Is Garrison, who brings a different element, enough? I believe the Lou trade needs a blu chip D man and a forward prospect? I agree with this. But I also think Kesler would be a 1st line center on alot of teams. This kind of was what was happening in 2010 when Malhotra was freeing up Kesler to play a more offensive role. A healthy Malhotra might have been all the difference in winning the cup. So my suggestion would be to find a great third line center if you cant find that 1A. Add that 1D and it wont matter who is in net weither it be Shnieds or Luo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bookie Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 Turris is interesting to bring up. I'd be surprised if Gillis didn't attempt a Hodgson/Turris trade given the circumstances at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiDeN Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 King, why do I bother replying to you with more than one line? You ignore me in favor of one line replies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riviera82 Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 VAN J.R. Umberger (playoff beastmode) Ryan Murray (Top D prospect, 2nd overall, 2012) CBJ Schneider Ballard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riviera82 Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 I do like the fact that you said "Canucks won't trade Schneider for"... At the very least, one must be open to the idea that either goaltender could be moved in light of the right pieces offered. As it stands today, Schneider is much more movable than Luongo. Good on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 King, why do I bother replying to you with more than one line? You ignore me in favor of one line replies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_Hockey_101 Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 Is the playoff beast Umberger going to score a double hat trick when Luongo has one of his off-night's? If not then no thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf47 Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 Speak in absolute terms if you will. Fortunately, outside of a few fanatics, it's business as usual and business dictates weighing all options. If there is a deal for Schneider then it's a deal for Schneider. If it's a deal for Luongo then it's a deal for Luongo. If both are staying then both are staying. Blame Luongo all you want and unquestionably praise the one whose deeds are few if you will. Individualizing you anger and hurting perhaps the only man who could bring you absolute joy as a Canucks fan, winning a Cup assures this team cannot succeed. You chose the road of unconditional hate while expecting success. Careful what you wish for, might weigh options instead of running blindly into a wall. Honestly, that Cup wasn't for us. WE were the sideshow. A city full of some of the hungriest fans in the World gelled together to create a spirit of appartenance and thanks to CBC and Don Cherry, even Canada rooted for them. The Canucks were as isolated as the city is. If you're going to blame Luongo for whatever, make sure you pass the blame to Burrows, Rome, Kesler and Hamhuis for their own reasons too. As for last years against L.A. if you cannot see a 16-4 run speaking for itself, then you are indeed entirely blind to reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
komodo1970 Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 Honestly, It's become really tough to get a read on what this team needs. The lockout has put an interesting twist on what should be traded for. As the lockout carries on, Kesler is going to be able to return healthy, as will all ailing players on the roster. A fully healthy Kesler may be what that second line needs. He can get back to the grinding, in your face style that makes him so effective. Add to it the fact that a prospect like Jensen is really proving himself to be more and more NHL ready. Honestly, I see Jensen being an important part of our top lines very soon, maybe as soon as next season. My question is; Could this thought stall MGs need to cut a deal for a second line winger or does should he still seek to solidify that second line? I feel our bottom six still needs some tweaking. In my mind, the third line provides the crossover link between then offensive lines and the grinders. They should be able to put up decent numbers offensively, but still provide an edge in grit. The fourth line is your grinding, in your face line, that pins down opponents and can take care of business when it comes to keeping the opponent honest. A player that can be moved up the line up when an opponent gets too aggressive with our stars. LaPierre somewhat filled this role, but was hesitant to really get his nose dirty. I think this role is going to belong to Kassian. I believe he is going to be the beast MG has been looking for. He's putting up decent numbers and is putting opponents on their butts on a regular basis. Defensively, we've just signed Garrison. If he can continue his offensive output of last season, our defense is gonna be a juggernaut. As I see it, one of our few weaknesses lies in the lack of a stay at home defenseman. The one, who's sole job is looking after the front of our net, allowing our goalie to see the puck at all times. The problem is that both our goalies are worth far more then a 5th or sixth defenseman. So what else do we want? I think it may be wisest to wait and let the season (when there is one) unfold. Let our needs reveal themselves and then make a move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 In addition, in terms of marketability, there are 60 top-six center spots, and only 30 starting goalie spots. So the demand for Lecavalier probably would be a lot higher than what it currently is for Luongo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 I watched the Russia Canada Super Series game tonight at the Pacific Coliseum and Rielly looked unreal, a lot more noticeable than Yakupov. Murray looked good too but Rielly stood out. Gillis has to find a way to pick him up. Lu, Shroeder, Sauve, 2nd For Rielly and Connolly (cap dump that can fill centre) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.