• 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

Recommended Posts

Luongo to Toronto:

To: Toronto

Roberto Luongo, Chris Tanev, and Kyle Okposo

To: Brooklyn

Nikolai Kulemin, Keith Ballard, Mason Raymond +3rd Pick from TO and Van

To Vancouver:

Josh Bailey, Jake Gardiner +2nd round pick from Brooklyn and Toronto.

2nd deal: The Flip

To Anaheim; Jake Gardiner and Brooklyn + TO's 2nd round picks.

To Vancouver: Luca Sbisa and Anaheim's 1st round pick.

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows

Booth-Kesler-Kassian

Higgins-Bailey-Hansen

Malhotra-Lappierre-Pinnozotto

Hamhuis-Bieksa

Edler-Garrison

Sbisa-Alberts/K-Conn

Schneider

Lack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol. No, it's the new slogan to respond to anything ES says. Like when he says Dubnyk is a good goalie, or Paajarvi is the next Gretzky, you just say:

IT'S THE PLAYOFFS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Luongo to Toronto:

To: Toronto

Roberto Luongo, Chris Tanev, and Kyle Okposo

To: Brooklyn

Nikolai Kulemin, Keith Ballard, Mason Raymond +3rd Pick from TO and Van

To Vancouver:

Josh Bailey, Jake Gardiner +2nd round pick from Brooklyn and Toronto.

2nd deal: The Flip

To Anaheim; Jake Gardiner and Brooklyn + TO's 2nd round picks.

To Vancouver: Luca Sbisa and Anaheim's 1st round pick.

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows

Booth-Kesler-Kassian

Higgins-Bailey-Hansen

Malhotra-Lappierre-Pinnozotto

Hamhuis-Bieksa

Edler-Garrison

Sbisa-Alberts/K-Conn

Schneider

Lack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Luongo, Tanev, Raymond and Ballard

for

Gardiner and Bailey

Luo for Gardiner straight up is more than enough, the picks cancel out, and Tanev, Raymond and Ballard for Bailiey is...

imo a big overpayment.

How about we forget about Gardiner,

send Luongo to Toronto

who cares what Toronto gives the Isles

and send Okposo and Bailey here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I read correctly, I'm not sure you read correctly, or where you read that - that version seems like a slight revision. Hodgson's beef against the organization - at least the final beef (aside from the prior issues around his handling during his back issues) - started months before the trade deadline and had little or nothing to do with Kesler's injury, and ironically, Hodgson had only a few months in the NHL under his belt at the time.

If you go back and read Tony Gallagher raking up an ice-time controversy,

I think the Canucks are really playing with fire. In fact, I know they’re playing with fire with this business of what they’re doing to Hodgson. They may not have to accede to demands to be traded, if in fact they come, but you don’t want to be messing around.

Once a player starts doing that, starts asking, if you’ve gotta say no, then you’re starting to really sour the relationship and I don’t think they want to go there. They are perilously close to that kind of situation. I mean, if I had been Cody’s agent I would have been asking long ago. They have been way more than patient.

And if you read Hodgson's agent Ritch Winter's uber-pedantic 6400 word response to PITB's take on the 'controversy', you will find that Winters objected to nothing that Gallagher said - apparently the 'controversy' had everything to do with the handlers' dissatisfaction that the rookie was getting only 13/14 minutes of ice time a game. But the idea that he would be more effective than Kesler or take the 2nd line role was not specified.

Tony Gallagher implied that it was an atrocity that Hodgson wasn't given more minutes, whether they came from the top two centers, or the combination of Malhotra/Lapierre, who, as everyone knows, carry the defensive load for Vancouver, enabling the top guys to play to their strengths. IMO there really was nowhere to usurp these minutes, and Hodgson was already being optimized. I don't buy the pump and dump stories - I think you simply pump your player regardless, and Vigneault, despite his reputation, did a fairly solid job of that.

IMO, his agent did not necessarily have the most prudent conception of what is in his player's best interests. Winters undoubtedly intended well for Hodgson by pushing for more minutes for his client, but if you read what he published, he goes so far as to put Hodgson in a class with Steven Stamkos. I mean, that's flattering, but get real. If the object is to win a sizable contract for your client when his ELC comes to an end, wouldn't it be more advantageous to wait out a little more development, let the perception that your client is limited by circumstance in Vancouver percolate, show what a team guy he is by respecting the veterans and thriving in his role, and take advantage of the particular situation, which also favoured his client. In Vancouver, opposition teams had to concentrate on shutting down Henrik, and then the 40 goal scoring Selke winner, and then by the time Hodgson hits the ice, he is seeing not only bottom pairings, but also has two outstanding two-way linemates that allowed him to really play to his strengths, and some outstanding centers to learn from. There was nothing pressing him to be ready to step up to pressure filled big minutes against players who face a high quality of competition - nor did he really need to be an NHL developed defensive center, which really is not a criticism as much as it is the reality of being a rookie who is also primarily an offensive center. Winters/Gallagher and Gillis/Vigneault simply could not see eye to eye - I personally don't agree with the push to, imo prematurely, lobby for a greater role for Hodgson. It was divisive, it wasn't terribly realistic, and the optics of it, I think, really hurt Hodgson. I also think Gallagher sunk his teeth into this one so deeply and publicly that the result was to drive a rift into the team that was fairly irreconcilable. I don't see it as exclusively Hodgson's fault, but I also don't see his camp's position as being at all realistic - and it was divisive - at a fairly sensitive time for Vancouver.

I'm not at all disappointed with the way Gillis resolved it - he got the type of prospect almost all of us wanted, at the position of greatest need - and he sent Hodgson to a team where he could play precisely the type of role he wanted.

Not sure why the whining still ensues - the idea that Hodgson was the key to last year's window is more embellishment than a Kesler dive.

I agree with your point that the goaltending situation is nothing resembling that kind of mess. Luongo and Schneider have handled it exceptionally well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol. No, it's the new slogan to respond to anything ES says. Like when he says Dubnyk is a good goalie, or Paajarvi is the next Gretzky, you just say:

IT'S THE PLAYOFFS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Derp.

"Vancouver Canucks defenceman Dan Hamhuis will have surgery early next week and may not be ready for the start of training camp.

Hamhuis left Game 1 of the Stanley Cup Final early in the second period following a hip check from Boston Bruins forward Milan Lucic. It was later discovered that Hamhuis suffered a sports hernia, groin and lower abdomen injury."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Luongo to Toronto:

To: Toronto

Roberto Luongo, Chris Tanev, and Kyle Okposo

To: Brooklyn

Nikolai Kulemin, Keith Ballard, Mason Raymond +3rd Pick from TO and Van

To Vancouver:

Josh Bailey, Jake Gardiner +2nd round pick from Brooklyn and Toronto.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe what WiDeN meant to say was, "You mean players are allowed by their medical staff to play not at 100% because they have a chance at winning the Stanley frick'n Cup even though those trainers and coaches have reputations to uphold?" (see the bold part)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok there, ye who exclaims:

"Hodgson, you look so very pretty!"

You can call the stats "propaganda" if you want. It's funny how some people here love to complain about Vigneault and Gillis, endlessly, yet object so strongly to bringing up Hodgson's corsi stats, his plus/minus, the contexts in which he was successful... So you are in love with Cody Hodgson, and therefore that analysis is 'propaganda' to you... what I referenced were facts like Hodgson, while getting more offensive than defensive zone starts, had a -6.8 relative corsi - while his linemates - Hansen had 40.4% off zone and yet a better rel corsi nevertheless, and Higgins had 46.6% and a positive rel corsi. It makes perfect sense to use a player in situations that serve and take advantage of their strengths. For all the criticisim, in the end AV had been using Hodgson in a very appropriate way, and in as many situations as possible given his strengths. All the whining that he wasn't getting enough ice-time however, were very short sighted.

I also pointed out that Pahlsson, while an obvious shutdown guy, had 6 points in 19 games and a +4 against quality competition, while Hodgson had 8 points in 20 games and a -7 after the trade. People here maintain endlessly what a disaster these deals were, how terrible that decision was going into the playoffs, and yet the reality doesn't reflect anything resembing that. Where is the 'propaganda' exactly? I can see why people who can't let go, can't accept that Hodgson was traded, are so resistant to hockey analysis - it gets in the way of their sentimental fantasies about how important the young player was to the Canucks. He was a rookie - he is not yet a player who can handle the NHL game in his own end of the ice - he has great offensive skills with the puck on his stick - but he is and was not ready to be the force that some people were expecting. It's remarkable how much saviour status was put on his shoulder - he wasn't going to make a difference in last year's playoffs. It was much more likely that, as he did in Buffalo, he'd struggle significantly facing the type of matchups he would have in a series like the Canucks faced against the Kings. I think the real reason people respond so emotionally and defensively to these discussions of Hodgson's actual game is because they had put all their wholesale eggs in this faith that he was The Answer. Give it up folks - you can still love Hodgson all you want, but it's a done deal, and the reasoning behind it, even if there had been no additional controversies, made perfect sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brooklyn would laugh. Both Bailey & Okposo are recent top-10 picks. They'd be getting back a cap disaster, and two inconsistent forwards that have badly fallen out of favour with their fanbases. Not happening.

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.