Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

[Discussion] Roberto Luongo Trade Thread 3.0


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
3002 replies to this topic

#2971 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,781 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 02 January 2013 - 08:57 PM

Phaneuf is a momentum chaging d-man, whether it is in a good way or a bad way, and will likely go and to try and make the big play.
Hamhuis is a steady presence who, for the most part, will make the safe play on both ends of the ice.

With Team Canada likely having d-men such as Keith, Letang, Doughty, Pietrangelo, and Weber, who are all fairly dependable on both ends of the ice, an impact player like Phaneuf might actually be more desirable to them.
For the Canucks, I would rather have Hamhis as a steadying presence to allow Bieksa to sort of do his own thing.

Honestly, I think both guys are pretty darn even in terms of their ability, it's just that they play very different styles. It would be interesting to see how Phaneuf would fair on a decent team, which he has never really had the luxury of except his early years in Calgary, where he was arguably one of the leagues better d-men.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2972 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,275 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 02 January 2013 - 09:01 PM

And what you omit the play that you referenced was the good fortune of the puck bouncing over the Leaf player's stick in front of the net, and going towards an area of zero coverage which allowed Hansen room to gain momentum in speed over Phaneuf, who was coming from the other side of the ice.

This is a hockey game, where there are millions of different events that take place that affect any play you can think of. Didn't think that you'd resort to random events to try and defend Hamhuis, but, again, not very surprising, considering your admitted bias towards all things Canucks.

Ridiculous is right.


The difference between Hamhius and Phaneuf is a legitimate #1 and a very infrequent trip vs entirely consistent brain cramps, a couple extra million a year, failures to captain a team into the playoffs, and declining production...

Edited by oldnews, 02 January 2013 - 09:02 PM.

  • 0

#2973 WiDeN

WiDeN

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,751 posts
  • Joined: 08-December 06

Posted 02 January 2013 - 09:02 PM

How do you think Hamhuis' numbers would be if he were a Maple Leaf for the past 2 or 3 seasons?

That depends on how much better I think the leafs would have done had he been there.

I think that he is definitely more of the type of D man they could have used. He may not be the "game breaker", but he almost never craps the bed. The leafs needed a guy to solidify their backend, and Phaneuf hasn't done that. If Phaneuf had a guy like Hamhuis to play with, then he would be a heck of a lot more effective. But, I think that Hamhuis would have really helped the Leafs' forwards by making the right play 95% of the time. That's just a big guess, but so is anything at this point.

Dan's relative corsi (Relative to the average shot for/shots against of the team) was 10.17 last year, and 13.64 the year before. He was a lot better that the average on a VERY good defense. (We will call this "Better than good")

Dion's relative corsi was 3.3 last year, and -1.5 the year before. He was a little bit better, and a little bit worse than the average on a non-playoff poop of a defense.

Comparison: Mark Streit on the non-playoff Islanders managed 10.5 and 4.8 the year before. If Phaneuf was more of a blessing than a burden, then he would have a better relative corsi regardless of how the team performs.

Edited by WiDeN, 02 January 2013 - 09:08 PM.

  • 3

V a n c o u v e r C a n u c k s

Posted Image
2 0 14 S t a n l e y C u p C h a m p i o n s


#2974 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,275 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 02 January 2013 - 10:30 PM

That depends on how much better I think the leafs would have done had he been there.

I think that he is definitely more of the type of D man they could have used. He may not be the "game breaker", but he almost never craps the bed. The leafs needed a guy to solidify their backend, and Phaneuf hasn't done that. If Phaneuf had a guy like Hamhuis to play with, then he would be a heck of a lot more effective. But, I think that Hamhuis would have really helped the Leafs' forwards by making the right play 95% of the time. That's just a big guess, but so is anything at this point.

Dan's relative corsi (Relative to the average shot for/shots against of the team) was 10.17 last year, and 13.64 the year before. He was a lot better that the average on a VERY good defense. (We will call this "Better than good")

Dion's relative corsi was 3.3 last year, and -1.5 the year before. He was a little bit better, and a little bit worse than the average on a non-playoff poop of a defense.

Comparison: Mark Streit on the non-playoff Islanders managed 10.5 and 4.8 the year before. If Phaneuf was more of a blessing than a burden, then he would have a better relative corsi regardless of how the team performs.


Hamhius manages this strong positive relative corsi despite the fact that he gets a majority of defensive zone starts, and obviously plays a shut down role against other team's top lines - which only make his corsi, his outstanding plus/minus and his 37 points that much more impressive.
I think the fact that even on CDC a balance of people don't consider him a #1 and don't think he's a realistic Olympic blueliner only goes to show that he is among the most under-rated defenseman in the NHL.
I doubt it'll be lost on Yzerman though.

Edited by oldnews, 02 January 2013 - 10:45 PM.

  • 3

#2975 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,217 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:21 AM

You're clearly not being objective, which is not all that surprising, being the self-professed homer that you are. It was a critical error on Hamhuis' part that DID, like it or not, lead directly to the end of the season.

I can at least admit that Phaneuf did not look good at all on that highlight that you showed. You, though, are resorting to excuse-making on Hamhus' part ("he was tripped" - right), for a play that was basically as ugly as when Kopitar owned Raymond.


Okay so like I said before, one bad play for Hamhuis vs tons of bad plays for Phaneuf, the stats back it up too.

And why are you slamming Raymond? Aren't you one of the guys on his bandwagon?

How do you think Hamhuis' numbers would be if he were a Maple Leaf for the past 2 or 3 seasons?


Better than Dion's, his calming, reliable, safe, consistent, 2 way style is something the leafs really really really could have used, and that is something Dion hasn't managed to bring.

And what you omit the play that you referenced was the good fortune of the puck bouncing over the Leaf player's stick in front of the net, and going towards an area of zero coverage which allowed Hansen room to gain momentum in speed over Phaneuf, who was coming from the other side of the ice.


Actually Phaneuf made a bad read on the play, for some reason it took him forever to get across to the other side (He left when the puck was at the top of the circle rather than leaving eariler and potentially holding it in) and rather than backing off toward his zone into the center he tried to beat Hansen in a race for the puck which he will never win. I doubt Hamhuis makes that play.
  • 0

zackass.png


#2976 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 03 January 2013 - 06:02 AM

Okay so like I said before, one bad play for Hamhuis vs tons of bad plays for Phaneuf, the stats back it up too.


Yes, Smashian. That's the only bad play that Dan Hamhuis has ever made, in his entire earthly existence.
  • 0

#2977 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,217 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 03 January 2013 - 06:09 AM

Yes, Smashian. That's the only bad play that Dan Hamhuis has ever made, in his entire earthly existence.


Twist it however you want, Phaneuf still makes way more bad plays than Hamhuis.

Hamhuis > Phaneuf
  • 0

zackass.png


#2978 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 03 January 2013 - 06:21 AM

Twist it however you want, Phaneuf still makes way more bad plays than Hamhuis.


He also scores more goals, gets more points, hits more frequently and harder, runs the PP better, has a far better shot, is far more nasty to play against, bigger, younger...
  • 0

#2979 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,217 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 03 January 2013 - 06:34 AM

He also scores more goals, gets more points, hits more frequently and harder, runs the PP better, has a far better shot, is far more nasty to play against, bigger, younger...


Hamhuis also has a way high +/-, is way more reliable, is a much better skater, a much smarter player, makes much better plays, much better PKer, much better shot blocker, much better skater, can play the PP, much better in all situations, a much higher career +/- and finishes much higher in Norris Trophy votes since he has been at his best. He also is at a better cap # and is better in the community (from a character standpoint)

Hamhuis > Phaneuf

Glad you actually expressed what you think Phaneuf does well though, rather than gluing your eyes to the stat sheet like normal, although I guess in this case the stat sheet doesn't favour you much.


And congrats on the prediction BTW, Canada played like Sh*t, USA totally earned that win. And do you like my new and improved Sig?

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 03 January 2013 - 06:35 AM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#2980 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,344 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 03 January 2013 - 06:34 AM

He also scores more goals, gets more points, hits more frequently and harder, runs the PP better, has a far better shot, is far more nasty to play against, bigger, younger...

Offense doesn't mean anything if you can't play defense. Hamhuis is far more superior in the defensive zone than Phaneuf and Hammer can put up just as many points as Phaneuf can.
  • 0

In my eyes drouin is overrated he can score in the qmjhl but did nothing in last two gold medal games that canada lost. Fox will be better pro than him talk to me in five yrs

Gaudreau has one NHL goal whereas all your "prized" prospects have none.

   ryan kesler is going to the chicago blackhawks ...       quote me on it


#2981 RUPERTKBD

RUPERTKBD

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,409 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 03 January 2013 - 08:14 AM

He also scores more goals, gets more points, hits more frequently and harder, runs the PP better, has a far better shot, is far more nasty to play against, bigger, younger...


I think my main problem with Dion is that while he was in Calgary, he seemed to start to believe all the hype about being one of the league's biggest hitters a bit too much. I remember watching him on several occasions, go for the big hit in a situation that didn't warrant it, leaving himself out of position and his defense partner "cleaning up the mess", as it were.

I won't get into the Dion vs. Hamhuis argument though, because I believe they're two different animals. In fact, I think that the last few seasons have shown that Hammer is quite adept at being the "cover" guy. Bieksa has been able to do more hitting and freewheeling since he's been paired with Hamhuis, precisely because Hammer is so good at covering his back.

I agree with you that Phaneuf is probably the better offensive player, but I think Hamhuis has the edge in his own end.

Edited by RUPERTKBD, 03 January 2013 - 08:15 AM.

  • 0
Orland Kurtenbach and Dennis Kearns had just been torched 8-1 by the Habs, but they still took time to come out to meet us, some fellow BC boys who were playing hockey in Montreal. THAT"S what being a Canuck is!

#2982 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 818 posts
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 03 January 2013 - 09:27 AM

To Toronto: Luongo

To Van: Phaneuf


Hamhuis/Phaneuf+healthy canucks = cup
  • 0

#2983 D-Money

D-Money

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,935 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 03 January 2013 - 12:12 PM

To Toronto: Luongo

To Van:   Phaneuf


Hamhuis/Phaneuf+healthy canucks = cup


I was pumping that trade months ago. I think Hammer would cover for Phaneuf nicely, and allow him to shine (Bieksa is sort of the poor-man's Phaneuf, and they work great).

However, with the cap going down, I don't know how we could fit him.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2984 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,162 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 03 January 2013 - 12:48 PM

I was pumping that trade months ago. I think Hammer would cover for Phaneuf nicely, and allow him to shine (Bieksa is sort of the poor-man's Phaneuf, and they work great).

However, with the cap going down, I don't know how we could fit him.

Maybe we buy him out? Or there's the other suggestion of bringing back Komisarek to sweeten the deal for the Leafs so we can buy him out instead of them having to.

EDIT: for the sarcasm impaired, that was sarcasm.

Edited by elvis15, 03 January 2013 - 12:50 PM.

  • 2

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#2985 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,195 posts
  • Joined: 05-November 12

Posted 03 January 2013 - 12:57 PM

Offense doesn't mean anything if you can't play defense. Hamhuis is far more superior in the defensive zone than Phaneuf and Hammer can put up just as many points as Phaneuf can.


Offense means everything when a team can't score in the playoffs. Whether one likes him or not, a Canucks team with Phaneuf on it is immensely better than a team without him on it.

I would tend to think that the opposition would not intimidate and take as many liberties against the Canucks as they do if Phaneuf would be on the team.

He's a big body who will make you pay for your sins against his brothers.

Toronto needs Schneider bad.
  • 0

#2986 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:06 PM

To Toronto: Luongo

To Van: Phaneuf


Toronto would quickly decline.
  • 0

#2987 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,414 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:09 PM

To Toronto: Luongo

To Van: Phaneuf


Hamhuis/Phaneuf+healthy canucks = cup

2013-2014
Hamhuis-Phaneuf
Garisson-Bieksa
Veteran-Tanev

Ballard traded for a prospect/pick, Edler's rights traded. Might want to sign a veteran d-man for the 3rd pairing rather than having a guy like Corrado or Connauton shoulder the load.

Edited by playboi19, 03 January 2013 - 01:10 PM.

  • 0

Subbancopy.jpg


#2988 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,195 posts
  • Joined: 05-November 12

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:20 PM

2013-2014
Hamhuis-Phaneuf
Garisson-Bieksa
Veteran-Tanev

Ballard traded for a prospect/pick, Edler's rights traded. Might want to sign a veteran d-man for the 3rd pairing rather than having a guy like Corrado or Connauton shoulder the load.


Can't really argue that this defense isn't better than the current Canucks defense. Bieksa at his rightful place: GARRISON - BIEKSA could be deadly, Phaneuf covered by Hamhuis, he could do some very serious damage.

I love the idea.

Keep Luongo and get a high octane offensive player for Edler and suddenly, we have a team again.

CBJ
Edler
1st

VAN
Umberger (playoff beast)
Murray

  • 0

#2989 Strawberries

Strawberries

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,563 posts
  • Joined: 24-February 09

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:36 PM

Hamhuis has a higher overall in nhl 13 omgz lololololol end thread/ but seriously dion sucks

Edited by ReaperCrew, 03 January 2013 - 01:42 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#2990 Strawberries

Strawberries

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,563 posts
  • Joined: 24-February 09

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:36 PM

Can't really argue that this defense isn't better than the current Canucks defense. Bieksa at his rightful place: GARRISON - BIEKSA could be deadly, Phaneuf covered by Hamhuis, he could do some very serious damage.

I love the idea.

Keep Luongo and get a high octane offensive player for Edler and suddenly, we have a team again.

CBJ
Edler
1st

VAN
Umberger (playoff beast)
Murray


Hell no, i would wan't a way better player than rj for edler
  • 0
Posted Image

#2991 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,948 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 10

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:57 PM

Offense means everything when a team can't score in the playoffs. Whether one likes him or not, a Canucks team with Phaneuf on it is immensely better than a team without him on it.

I would tend to think that the opposition would not intimidate and take as many liberties against the Canucks as they do if Phaneuf would be on the team.

He's a big body who will make you pay for your sins against his brothers.

Toronto needs Schneider bad.

and Luongo has to improve his game over last year or you have a great team with (based on last year) an average goalie !!
  • 0

#2992 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 818 posts
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 03 January 2013 - 02:04 PM

Toronto would quickly decline.


So throw in connaughton or corrado or whatever suits Burkies taste.
  • 0

#2993 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,195 posts
  • Joined: 05-November 12

Posted 03 January 2013 - 02:26 PM

and Luongo has to improve his game over last year or you have a great team with (based on last year) an average goalie !!


No he's not. Luongo is not an "average" goalie. He's proven over YEARS. Schneider is a backup rookie at this point.

Found this for you, which perfecrly explains my concerns and which you fail to recognize as a potential outcome:


Vancouver Sun Sports Blogs
One lingering concern about keeping Cory Schneider

With the news that Roberto Luongo has reportedly requested a trade — he’s even willing to waive his no-trade clause for it! – it seems that we have already been given an answer as to which of the Canucks’ two very good goaltenders will be traded this offseason. But I have to admit that I do have one big concern about keeping Cory Schneider rather than Luongo. The issue is fairly simple: there have been a lot of young goaltenders in the NHL that have experienced tremendous success in their first full season in the league, then faltered badly afterwards.


(Graig Abel, Getty Images)

There are a couple big names recently that fall into that category: Andrew Raycroft won the Calder trophy as rookie of the year in 2004 for the Boston Bruins after posting a .926 save percentage and a 2.05 goals against average. After that stellar first season, he didn’t post a save percentage about .900 until he was a backup in Vancouver in 2009-10. He is currently playing for the Texas Stars of the AHL, though he did play 10 games in Dallas this season.

Steve Mason also won the Calder in his rookie year and was nominated for the Vezina, as he helped lead the Columbus Blue Jackets to their first ever playoff berth with a .916 SV% and a 2.29 GAA. His next two seasons, his save percentage dropped to .901 and the Blue Jackets finished last in the NHL this season.

Vesa Toskala posted a stellar .930 SV% and a 2.06 GAA as a backup in San Jose in the 2003-04 season. A couple years later, he was the punch line to every joke about the Maple Leafs.

In the 90s, there was Jim Carey. In Carey’s sophomore season, his first as a number one goaltender, he won the Vezina trophy as the NHL’s best goaltender with a .906 SV% and a 2.26 GAA. A little over a year later, he was in the AHL. A couple years after that and he had retired from professional hockey.

There are a lot of one-hit wonders in the goaltending fraternity. At one point, Steve Penney was the next Ken Dryden. Blaine Lacher was a rookie sensation for the Bruins, then plummeted out of sight the next year. I wish I could be certain that Cory Schneider won’t join their ranks. I’m confident and optimistic that he won’t collapse in the same way and there are many positive indicators that he won’t do so, but I can’t be certain.

There are, of course, many goaltenders who had fantastic seasons as rookies or sophomores and went on to have excellent careers. Take Roberto Luongo, for instance. In his first season as a full-time starter, he posted a .920 SV% and 2.44 GAA with the Florida Panthers. In his next 10 NHL seasons, he didn’t falter from that early promise, never posting a save percentage lower than .913 and never once having his goals against average reach 3.00.

This past season, in fact, his numbers are nearly identical to that first year with the panthers: .919 SV% and a 2.41 GAA. While Luongo sometimes struggles with his consistency from game-to-game, from season-to-season he was the model of consistency. Keeping Luongo rather than Schneider is the safe, conservative option.

There is risk in keeping Schneider, who still has only 76 NHL games under his belt, but the potential reward is huge.


(Andrew D. Bernstein, Getty Images)

Schneider, to put it simply, was better than Luongo this year, posting an incredible .937 SV% and a 1.96 GAA, finishing second and third, respectively, in those two categories among eligible goaltenders. In his three games in the playoffs, he performed even better than expected, allowing just one goal in regulation in each game.

Those are absolutely superb numbers and it’s completely understandable that the Canucks would want to hang on to Schneider and trade Luongo. If Schneider can continue to perform at this level consistently, he won’t just be a great goaltender; he’ll be among the best goaltenders in the league.

But I just can’t shake this nagging concern that he might falter once he gets a number one job, just like other promising young goaltenders.

My theory (though it’s not unique) for why this occurs has to do with the “book” on a goaltender. NHL players and coaches meticulously prepare for each game, studying film and breaking down their opponent. For a team’s number one goaltender, you scout his weaknesses, so you know what to target.

For instance, the book on Luongo might be to try to beat him high over the shoulder early, then, if successful, go for the five-hole, hoping he’ll stay on his feet a fraction of a second longer to compensate for the puck beating him high earlier. If you can do that, you’ll get in his head. That seemed to be the gameplan of the Bruins in last year’s Stanley Cup Final. If you can’t beat him early, however, he’ll settle in and shut you down.

That’s simplified, but it’s an example of how teams and shooters will think in terms of targeting a goalie’s weaknesses. On Pekka Rinne, you don’t shoot glove side, because he’ll swallow everything up. On Tim Thomas, you want to shoot low on the pads so he’ll give up rebounds. On Marc-Andre Fleury, you want to sort of direct your shot vaguely towards the net.

When it comes to rookies and backups, there’s a lot less material to scout and it’s more difficult to develop a book on a particular goaltender. Take a look at the Washington Capitals in the playoffs right now, who just beat the defending champian Boston Bruins with 22-year-old rookie Braden Holtby in net. In the first round, he had a .940 SV% with a 2.00 GAA. The Bruins just couldn’t figure out how to consistently score in that series. They didn’t have a book on Holtby.

They couldn’t even make him flinch.

Second time around, however, coaches and players start to figure a goaltender out. Really, this goes for any player in any position. In a recent “30 Thoughts” column, Elliotte Friedman shared a conversation with Keith Yandle:

Remember talking a year ago with Keith Yandle. He pointed out that you don’t really realize how hard the NHL is until a good coach game-plans against you in a playoff series.

This, more than anything else, is the cause of the dreaded sophomore slump.

Is there a book on Cory Schneider? Do teams have a gameplan for targeting the weak areas of his game? Not yet. But they will. For Roberto Luongo, it doesn’t matter that other teams have a book on him: he continues to put up solid numbers year after year after year.

Will Schneider be able to do the same? I sincerely hope so.

Pass it to Bulis

Edited by Canucks_Hockey_101, 03 January 2013 - 02:28 PM.

  • 1

#2994 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,162 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 03 January 2013 - 02:58 PM

Offense means everything when a team can't score in the playoffs. Whether one likes him or not, a Canucks team with Phaneuf on it is immensely better than a team without him on it.

I would tend to think that the opposition would not intimidate and take as many liberties against the Canucks as they do if Phaneuf would be on the team.

He's a big body who will make you pay for your sins against his brothers.

Toronto needs Schneider bad.

I'd say it most emphatically isn't when he has a $6.5M cap hit in a hockey world where the cap could be $60M next season. Not to mention we'd have to trade away assets to get him when they would be better spent getting younger and cheaper in other areas considering we already have 4 D-men making over $4M and another about to get a raise to that level at least.

You can't just look at it like, "Hey, he's a pretty good player, he'd probably help us." You have to consider what you lose to get him, and what his cap hit does to the rest of your team.

Edited by elvis15, 03 January 2013 - 03:02 PM.

  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#2995 thad

thad

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,189 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 03 January 2013 - 03:05 PM

Toronto will not trade their captain but IF that is on the table, Lu for dion straight up, I would get Burke to hold and see if we can get a blue chip young forward prospect for edler.




  • 0

#2996 D-Money

D-Money

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,935 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 03 January 2013 - 03:16 PM

No he's not. Luongo is not an "average" goalie. He's proven over YEARS. Schneider is a backup rookie at this point.

Found this for you, which perfecrly explains my concerns and which you fail to recognize as a potential outcome:


Vancouver Sun Sports Blogs
One lingering concern about keeping Cory Schneider

With the news that Roberto Luongo has reportedly requested a trade — he's even willing to waive his no-trade clause for it! – it seems that we have already been given an answer as to which of the Canucks' two very good goaltenders will be traded this offseason. But I have to admit that I do have one big concern about keeping Cory Schneider rather than Luongo. The issue is fairly simple: there have been a lot of young goaltenders in the NHL that have experienced tremendous success in their first full season in the league, then faltered badly afterwards.


(Graig Abel, Getty Images)

There are a couple big names recently that fall into that category: Andrew Raycroft won the Calder trophy as rookie of the year in 2004 for the Boston Bruins after posting a .926 save percentage and a 2.05 goals against average. After that stellar first season, he didn't post a save percentage about .900 until he was a backup in Vancouver in 2009-10. He is currently playing for the Texas Stars of the AHL, though he did play 10 games in Dallas this season.

Steve Mason also won the Calder in his rookie year and was nominated for the Vezina, as he helped lead the Columbus Blue Jackets to their first ever playoff berth with a .916 SV% and a 2.29 GAA. His next two seasons, his save percentage dropped to .901 and the Blue Jackets finished last in the NHL this season.

Vesa Toskala posted a stellar .930 SV% and a 2.06 GAA as a backup in San Jose in the 2003-04 season. A couple years later, he was the punch line to every joke about the Maple Leafs.

In the 90s, there was Jim Carey. In Carey's sophomore season, his first as a number one goaltender, he won the Vezina trophy as the NHL's best goaltender with a .906 SV% and a 2.26 GAA. A little over a year later, he was in the AHL. A couple years after that and he had retired from professional hockey...



Andrew Raycroft - 5th round pick. Never came close to the GAA or save percentage of his rookie year throughout Junior or the AHL (his GAA in Junior was close to 4). Just a below-average prospect who caught fire in a bottle in his rookie NHL season. The pressure of the Toronto market probably didn't help either.

Steve Mason - 3rd round pick. An above average goaltending prospect who was forced into the NHL after only 141 Junior games and no AHL. Has the skills, just seems that the psychological pressure ended up to much for him. Should have been groomed in the AHL for at least 1 season.

Jim Carey - Decent prospect, but only played 39 collegiate games and 55 AHL games before being thrust into the starter role. Like Mason, too young and not mentally strong enough to handle success so young.

Vesa Toskala - Good prospect, with some very good short stretches of play. Then traded to a god-awful Toronto team with no defense and a million times the pressure of San Jose, and was expected to be their savior. They ruined him. He actually played excellently in his short stint with Calgary, but they didn't give him a REAL shot with Kipper there and a playoff spot within reach.


Cory Schneider, on the other hand, is a 1st round pick that has followed a near-perfect development path. He has earned glowing success at every level (college, AHL, and NHL), fought adversity (took time to adapt to AHL workload), and dominated. He's not some fringe prospect that is surprising everyone and posting better numbers than he did at lower levels. He IS proven. He IS the REAL DEAL.

Edited by D-Money, 03 January 2013 - 03:40 PM.

  • 1
Posted Image

#2997 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,195 posts
  • Joined: 05-November 12

Posted 03 January 2013 - 03:16 PM

I'd say it most emphatically isn't when he has a $6.5M cap hit in a hockey world where the cap could be $60M next season. Not to mention we'd have to trade away assets to get him when they would be better spent getting younger and cheaper in other areas considering we already have 4 D-men making over $4M and another about to get a raise to that level at least.

You can't just look at it like, "Hey, he's a pretty good player, he'd probably help us." You have to consider what you lose to get him, and what his cap hit does to the rest of your team.



Let me rephrase it: a Canucks team with Phaneuf (6.500) on it is immensely better than a team with Ballard (4.200) and Raymond (2.275) (6.475) on it.
  • 0

#2998 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,162 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 03 January 2013 - 03:42 PM

Let me rephrase it: a Canucks team with Phaneuf (6.500) on it is immensely better than a team with Ballard (4.200) and Raymond (2.275) (6.475) on it.

Ok then, I'll rephrase: we can't trade Ballard and Raymond to get Phaneuf, so why would that matter?
  • 1

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#2999 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 03 January 2013 - 04:01 PM

You can't just look at it like, "Hey, he's a pretty good player, he'd probably help us." You have to consider what you lose to get him, and what his cap hit does to the rest of your team.


Good point. Like it or not, there probably won't be many changes to the Canucks until the Sedin's retire. Already married to too many long-term, big-money contracts that are mostly unmoveable.
  • 0

#3000 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,195 posts
  • Joined: 05-November 12

Posted 03 January 2013 - 04:03 PM

Ok then, I'll rephrase: we can't trade Ballard and Raymond to get Phaneuf, so why would that matter?


Not to get Phaneuf, no. But they can certainly come off the books in other deals, yes.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.