Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Discussion] Roberto Luongo Trade Thread 3.0


Recommended Posts

Right, because I disagree with some of the moves that the GM makes, I'm "not a fan". Uh huh.

Show me where it says that to be a fan, you need to blindly support any move that the GM makes, ever, you need to love any player who wears the jersey, etc. That's just a dumb take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know what's really dumb king? That you are head cheerleader in the Jay Feaster fan club - and at the same time, are here whining ceaselessly about the job Gillis is doing.

So which one is it? Are you actually a frustrated Leafs fan or a frustrated Flames fan, here to project your hopelessness?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know what's really dumb king? That you are head cheerleader in the Jay Feaster fan club - and at the same time, are here whining ceaselessly about the job Gillis is doing.

So which one is it? Are you actually a frustrated Leafs fan or a frustrated Flames fan, here to project your hopelessness?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you ever heard of sarcasm? That sounds like a pretty facetious line, to me. They're popping champagne because they got paid a king's ransom, is what it is. You've still not come close to convincing me that Jason Garrison is somehow "worth" what he got paid, while Wideman's contract is a huge albatross. Neither are great, but Garrison's carries it with it FAR, FAR, FAR more risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And again, if someone doesn't have the pom-poms out whenever the Vancouver Canucks and whoever is their GM makes a move, THEY ARE SOMEHOW DEEMED "NOT A FAN"!

I'm deemed a Calgary Flames/Jay Feaster fan because I'm questioning how you can think that the Jason Garrison contract was so great, while the Dennis Wideman contract was so bad. It makes no sense. The one who's had a far more noteworthy career, and is not much older, is the bad one. That is not logical. And you can't defend it, besides Muppet retorts and/or "YOU'RE NOT A REAL CANUCK FAN!" witch-hunt behaviour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Calgary was as terrible as some of you guys claim they were last year, they must of been really lucky to of finished 5 points out of the playoffs. So lucky to have 247 man games missed which was good enough for 6th highest in the league. Only Pits had more injuries and still made the playoffs. They had a very tough season and had a legit shot to make the 8th seed, adding 1 legit top 6 forward (Hudler- I don't care who he played with last season he is still a top 6 guy), 2 potential top 6 guys in Cervenka and Baertschi and Wideman, who yes is overpaid and mostly offensive but is a proven NHLer who will score goals and improve the powerplay.

The flames have improved from last year and are generally a hardworking grinding team with great goaltending. The biggest weakness last year was injuries and lack of scoring which one is luck and the other they addressed IMO.

Also I think Garrison is total risk, he is being billed as a reliable shutdown guy with a great shot.....kinda like Ballard was being billed minus the great shot but with offensive abilities. He could also turn out to be like Bieksa who got a late start in the NHL but turned out to be one of our best dman over the last few season. No guarantees either way as he just does not have enough experience in the NHL to know for sure. To be claiming that he was signed to a good contract is a little premature, I think was a calculated risk by Gillis who I do trust but its a risk all the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd sure take him on the Canucks, wouldn't you? I'd certainly take Bouwmeester if Calgary's considering dumping him. Heck, they can have Ballard, Booth, Malhotra...there's a fair share of trash on this team that they can take off of our hands, if they want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Calgary was as terrible as some of you guys claim they were last year, they must of been really lucky to of finished 5 points out of the playoffs. So lucky to have 247 man games missed which was good enough for 6th highest in the league. Only Pits had more injuries and still made the playoffs. They had a very tough season and had a legit shot to make the 8th seed, adding 1 legit top 6 forward (Hudler- I don't care who he played with last season he is still a top 6 guy), 2 potential top 6 guys in Cervenka and Baertschi and Wideman, who yes is overpaid and mostly offensive but is a proven NHLer who will score goals and improve the powerplay.

The flames have improved from last year and are generally a hardworking grinding team with great goaltending. The biggest weakness last year was injuries and lack of scoring which one is luck and the other they addressed IMO.

Also I think Garrison is total risk, he is being billed as a reliable shutdown guy with a great shot.....kinda like Ballard was being billed minus the great shot but with offensive abilities. He could also turn out to be like Bieksa who got a late start in the NHL but turned out to be one of our best dman over the last few season. No guarantees either way as he just does not have enough experience in the NHL to know for sure. To be claiming that he was signed to a good contract is a little premature, I think was a calculated risk by Gillis who I do trust but its a risk all the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saying that you sure would take Bouwmeester, and that you'd give up a handful of our "trash" for him, in addition to maintaining that he is very very good certainly implies that you think he's worth his cap hit - you don't get to separate a guy from his cap hit/contract when you take him king. That's not how things work in the NHL.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jokinen did score 54 points and 61 points during the last two years while making 3 million per season but don't forget this is the same guy who had 107 points over 2 season making with a 5.25 million cap hit. Over 4 years he averages 55.5 points a season on 4.125 million. Not bad but not amazing, it would be even better if he was a better two way guy and better at faceoffs but I agree decent contract for production. I don't mind Jokinen as a player but have never thought as him as a traditional Centre which is what Calgary really needs, so letting him walk and replacing his points by a guy 5 years younger is a move I would be okay with if I was a Calgary fan.

Hudler averaged 46.5 while making an average 1.945 a year over 4 season in the NHL not including his season in KHL in 2010.

Maybe he lives up to his new contract maybe he doesn't, same thing with Jokinen in Winnipeg. I am putting my money on Hudler putting up more points over the next two years than Jokinen does.

Calgary does need a legit Centre and have ever since they lost Gilmour and Nieuwendyk. Backlund and Stajan have a chance if they can emulate hardworking guys like Conroy and Langkow who have had success in the past. Cervenka is a big risk but apperently is a good playmaker and had 52% career faceoff % in KHL and 60% in playoffs but I don't put much faith in KHL stats translating to NHL.

The reason I got into this was because King made the point in the old thread that the nucks will be against stiffer competition in the NW division with Min, Edm and Cal all improving. I agree with this statement and especially in Edm case if we lose a whole season to lock out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After all your naysaying, this is what you come up with? Can you explain how you think this improves Vancouver? Leddy has a little upside, but he also gets pushed around very easily - not exactly what most of us have in mind when it comes to improving the blueline. By the way, your pairings are just plain nonsense - Edler and Hamhius - nope. Garrison on the third pairing - nope (of course you'd think Leddy would belong in the top 4 above him). Both Ballard and Tanev absent - or have you promoted Alberts over one of those guys? I realize you don't think it matters what side a guy plays on, but even disregarding that, you've effectively just mangled the blueline. And evidently you are one of those people imprudent enough to consider Tanev a throw in... Nope.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's Ballard in the deal, Tanev goes to the AHL. If Tanev's in the deal, Ballard is either the 6th/7th D, with Alberts.

It improves our team because we immediately get Nick Leddy, a 21 year-old who had 37 points last year. He becomes the new Christian Ehrhoff. "He gets pushed around very easily" - OK - Tanev doesn't?

Chris Tanev has really not proven anything. Are you aware that in the last 127 games of professional hockey that Chris Tanev has played (AHL & NHL), he has 1 goal? If you're that tiny, you better produce offense, which Chris Tanev has not shown an ability to do - unlike Nick Leddy.

I've taken all of this into account. Frolik did have an atrocious year last season, but he was pretty good the year before, he's shown flashes in the past, and he was very good in the playoffs against us. He's still pretty young, and still has a pretty high ceiling, I would say.

We're not going to get any of the guys that you've suggested.

Montador is included in the original deal because I'm a lot more confident with him on the bottom-pairing than I am with Chris Tanev. He would be a nice addition. Solid player.

If Dale Weise, Guillaume Desbiens, Mike Duco, Byron Bitz, etc., can play on our fourth line, Kyle Beach can, too. And his potential is amazing. A fourth line with both Beach & Kassian on it would be very, very exciting - and no longer a line where careers go to die. And yes, I agree that something would need to be done with either Higgins or Hansen - preferrably Higgins - to make room for this to happen, and for Hansen to move up to the 3rd line.

Well, let's see your proposal.

You're again hinting at a very likely gross overvaluing of Roberto Luongo, who is effectively a cap dump from our perspective, and other team's know this. If Gillis can walk away with Nick Leddy, Michael Frolik, and Kyle Beach, I think he's making out like a bandit, in relation to the value that we'll receive from Luongo by being our backup goaltender.

And how is Leddy not a good fit? Who do we have that can run our PP? We don't have a defenceman with his instincts for offense. Yes, that includes your hero Jason Garrison.

If you're holding out for a guy like Patrick Kane or Marian Hossa, Roberto's going to be our backup, at $5.2M per year, until 2022.

But anyway, like I said earlier, IT'S YOUR TURN. Where's your Luongo proposal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...