WiDeN Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Actually, the Jesus story is the biggest propaganda scheme ever put on paper. Taken by Rome, this pagan figure is the symbol of individualism and resides in the New Testament whereas the Old Testament is really a How to Grow Your Fields For Dummies book. Jesus is? UNPROVEN. Might as well stick with PROVEN Luongo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riviera82 Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Actually, the Jesus story is the biggest propaganda scheme ever put on paper. Taken by Rome, this pagan figure is the symbol of individualism and resides in the New Testament whereas the Old Testament is really a How to Grow Your Fields For Dummies book. Jesus is? UNPROVEN. Might as well stick with PROVEN Luongo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_Hockey_101 Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Not sure you ought to be poking fun at people's religious beliefs. BTW, the only thing that Luongo has really PROVEN is that he's a good regular season goalie who cant handle playoff pressure with any regularity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 You have faith in our GM for rejecting a young defenceman that would likely be a mainstay on our back-end for the next many, many years, yet you're hoping for Nick Bjugstad and Alex Petrovic, both of whom will likely be in the AHL for multiple years, before making the NHL, assuming they ever do? If what you're saying is true (I haven't heard Botchford's backtrack, but you could well be right), I think it'll wind up being a mistake by Gillis. Schenn offers both immediate help and legitimate upside. It'll be tough to get a deal elsewhere with both of those elements - your proposal, oldnews, doesn't offer immediate help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_Hockey_101 Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Not sure you ought to be poking fun at people's religious beliefs. BTW, the only thing that Luongo has really PROVEN is that he's a good regular season goalie who cant handle playoff pressure with any regularity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Get real canuck fans Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 It is true King. Here's another reference from Botchford. "But if it was going to happen Friday, the Leafs needed to offer an asset better than Luke Schenn to land the expensive, star netminder." http://www.vanhockey...on-luongo-deal/ He has also conceded elsewhere that Gillis, not Luongo rejected the deal - I've already quoted that for you. Schenn can't skate King - that's a fairly big weak spot in today's NHL. My proposal would have helped the Canucks immediately - aside from putting two great prospects in the stable (and I've said this before, my proposal came before the draft - Gaunce may alter the interest in Bjugstad, but I'd still like to see Petrovic as a secondary piece if dealing with Florida) - that proposal puts $5.3 million in cap space in the bank immediately. If you think that doesn't help, think again. It creates room to make other deals - and a lot more flexibility in terms of who you deal with to add a 2nd line RW etc - a guy could be added at the deadline from an also-ran for futures - it gives the Canucks more options in terms of being able to trade young assets and more types of assets to offer - a whole lot of unforeseen possibilities open up (none of which apply during a lockout) - so yeah, it would have helped immediately. Also, you left out the Upshall part - which satisfies the "cap dump" aspect of sweetening the deal - and who is a hell of a two-way, gritty, versatile forward who can and has played RW - if he's healthy, he's a great asset, if not, his cap hit doesn't apply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Schenn can't skate King - that's a fairly big weak spot in today's NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_Hockey_101 Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 A lot of d-men of his ilk can't skate. Adam Foote couldn't skate, Willie Mitchell can't skate. And again, you can't forget his age. He's roughly 3 months older than Cody Hodgson. 10 months older than Jordan Schroeder. It might feel like he's been around forever, but he's still got a long, long career ahead of him. And his numbers have gotten better every year. Cap space is an OK benefit, but it does need to be used for it to be a benefit. So it potentially would help us now, but you're gaining roughly the same in cap space with Schenn as you would with Upshall. And then with Upshall, there's the issue of a guy earning $3.5M likely playing on the bottom six. Not ideal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf47 Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 This was a ruse. The axis. (featuring Riviera82, smurf47 and King of the ES) Vs. The Allies. Live on CDC. "Dare to disagree" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiDeN Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 A lot of d-men of his ilk can't skate. Adam Foote couldn't skate, Willie Mitchell can't skate. And again, you can't forget his age. He's roughly 3 months older than Cody Hodgson. 10 months older than Jordan Schroeder. It might feel like he's been around forever, but he's still got a long, long career ahead of him. And his numbers have gotten better every year. Cap space is an OK benefit, but it does need to be used for it to be a benefit. So it potentially would help us now, but you're gaining roughly the same in cap space with Schenn as you would with Upshall. And then with Upshall, there's the issue of a guy earning $3.5M likely playing on the bottom six. Not ideal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf47 Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 If he makes our 3rd line dangerous and functional, then I have absolutely no problem with that at all. As someone else said, it's guys like Upshall playing in the bottom 6 that allows the top6 to do what it's supposed to do. Also, assuming he would have some time on special teams, he would be earning his salary there too. I agree with that statement, and I agree with Canucks brass in that assessment. I was under the impression that King acknowledges this fact, but disagrees with management. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 You have faith in our GM for rejecting a young defenceman that would likely be a mainstay on our back-end for the next many, many years, yet you're hoping for Nick Bjugstad and Alex Petrovic, both of whom will likely be in the AHL for multiple years, before making the NHL, assuming they ever do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_Hockey_101 Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Its hard for a lot of people to lose Lou, and thats easily understood, but, it appears we are having a changing of the guard in net. I believe Schneider is the way to go but there is no guarentee he will succeed. He is a calculated risk but based on positive input. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 If he makes our 3rd line dangerous and functional, then I have absolutely no problem with that at all. As someone else said, it's guys like Upshall playing in the bottom 6 that allows the top6 to do what it's supposed to do. Also, assuming he would have some time on special teams, he would be earning his salary there too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 Well according to Brian Burke he has. So I trust what he says over either of our personal opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 Now smurf47, you have impressed me. By referring to uncertainty, you are effectively recognizing the risk. Good work in assessing both sides of the equation with few words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 ...when it suits your argument, you trust him, yes. He's said many times that he "doesn't do" lifetime contracts. But he must just be posturing, in those instances, because it's Roberto freakin' Luongo, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_Hockey_101 Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 Yeah, what a revelation... The risk is obvious and apparent, which is why I've said all along that Gillis messed up by not trading Schneider at some point along the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riviera82 Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 Not sure where I poked fun at people's religious beliefs... It is merely my opinion on the matter. Luongo has proven capable enough to bring a team to a Stanley Cup Final. Unfortunately, by the time the Canucks got there, they were decimated while Boston was relatively injury free. If you cannot get that into your head, that's not my problem. Not even Detroit, New Jersey or Colorado; the three juggernaughts of the nineties, could recover from their Cup appearances in time to show up on top the next playoff year. L.A. and again New Jersey will suffer the same fate this year; they will barely make it past the second round and that is if they do. Blame Luongo all you want and ignore the other aspects of the game. It's like saying Moby Dick is a good whale book. As for the series against L.A., 16-4 should be imprinted in your mind; a rarely seen feat. And even if the Canucks would have won that series, they would have been so smashed up that they wouldn't get too far after that. A team with a difficulty to score in the playoffs and they go in without their leading scorer Daniel? If you want to blame someone, don't blame Luongo; blame Keith. Resumption of play will hold many surprises; none better than a healthy goaltending controversy. If you cannot handle that, that's not my problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiDeN Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 If guys like that are so valuable, why do we keep getting rid of them? Hodgson, Wellwood, Bernier, Grabner, Torres... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.