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

#1111 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,210 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 15 November 2012 - 04:54 AM

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.
  • 0

#1112 WiDeN

WiDeN

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,754 posts
  • Joined: 08-December 06

Posted 15 November 2012 - 06:51 AM

King, why do I bother replying to you with more than one line? You ignore me in favor of one line replies.
  • 0

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

MirandaKerr.jpg
2 0 1 5 S t a n l e y C u p C h a m p i o n s


#1113 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,621 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 08:05 AM

VAN
J.R. Umberger (playoff beastmode)
Ryan Murray (Top D prospect, 2nd overall, 2012)

CBJ
Schneider
Ballard


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.
  • 0

#1114 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,621 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 08:12 AM

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.


There's a reason for this beyond age or cap hit and it's why Schnieder is staying.
  • 0

#1115 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 09:16 AM

King, why do I bother replying to you with more than one line? You ignore me in favor of one line replies.


Sorry - do you have a link to your post? This is RE: Bieksa/Phaneuf, yes? Hard to keep up in this thread.
  • 0

#1116 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 10:32 AM

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.


There's a reason for this beyond age or cap hit and it's why Schnieder is staying.


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.

Edited by Canucks_Hockey_101, 15 November 2012 - 10:51 AM.

  • 0

#1117 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 10:59 AM

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.

and you are blinded by your fan favouritism for Luongo and not any true form of reality for the facts.
  • 2

#1118 komodo1970

komodo1970

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 707 posts
  • Joined: 23-August 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 11:22 AM

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.
  • 1

#1119 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,832 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 11:34 AM

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.


Days gone by, and no progress in the Luongo thread.

King - you never fail to amuse. Your logic is certainly creative - Lecavalier has a lot higher value than Luongo? You've outdone yourself once again.
For all your talk about decline and albatross contracts, it's truly remarkable that you could sustain such a hard sell for Lecavalier.
Ridiculous.
Not as much demand in the market for starting goaltenders as borderline top 6 centers? Your credibility continues to skyrocket.

And I see you've made numerous references to how crazy you think it is that I would consider Phaneuf a third pairing guy in Vancouver.
Let me spell this out for you once again.

1) Hamhius
2) Edler
3) Phaneuf

Which guy, Hamhius or Edler, do you think Phaneuf is better than?

Also, the Leafs could use someone in their corner who dramatically over-rates their players. I'm sure you'd make a suitable addition to their fanbase.

Edited by oldnews, 15 November 2012 - 11:36 AM.

  • 0

#1120 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,832 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 11:42 AM

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)

For a young blue chip goalie though... You know?

Schneider for Reilly.


File these in the severe overpayment folder.

Apparently Reilly has already succeeded Gardiner as the next premature god-send from Lalaland.

Lol at those still in denial that if the Canucks move a goaltender, it will be Luo.

Edited by oldnews, 15 November 2012 - 11:50 AM.

  • 0

#1121 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 01:19 PM

File these in the severe overpayment folder.

Apparently Reilly has already succeeded Gardiner as the next premature god-send from Lalaland.

Lol at those still in denial that if the Canucks move a goaltender, it will be Luo.


I think the major denial of this community is that, due to each player's contract structure, either can be had for "the right price". With this denial comes the refusal to assess Schneider's league value while drastically under estimating Luongo's.

Edited by Canucks_Hockey_101, 15 November 2012 - 01:20 PM.

  • 0

#1122 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 01:19 PM

Double post

Edited by Canucks_Hockey_101, 15 November 2012 - 01:20 PM.

  • 0

#1123 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,297 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 15 November 2012 - 01:27 PM

File these in the severe overpayment folder.

Apparently Reilly has already succeeded Gardiner as the next premature god-send from Lalaland.

Lol at those still in denial that if the Canucks move a goaltender, it will be Luo.


Is Reilly really that bad of a deal? From what I've seen tossed around here I would think he would be better than Ashton, Franson, and as pick? No?

I really don't believe in Gardiner as you stated he is a god-send from Lalaland, who really knows if he's any good. However, Reilly has never played for the Leafs so his hype is based on people's opinions that actually know hockey. I'd kill for one of these top notch D's I keep seeing going to every team but ours every year. Just looking for an opinion from someone that seems to at least watch hockey as I haven't seen Reilly all that much to be honest, but he was 5th overall.

Edited by Dogbyte, 15 November 2012 - 01:35 PM.

  • 0

Canuckslogo160x160.jpg


#1124 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 01:27 PM

King - you never fail to amuse. Your logic is certainly creative - Lecavalier has a lot higher value than Luongo? You've outdone yourself once again.
For all your talk about decline and albatross contracts, it's truly remarkable that you could sustain such a hard sell for Lecavalier.
Ridiculous.
Not as much demand in the market for starting goaltenders as borderline top 6 centers? Your credibility continues to skyrocket.


And again, more strong talk with nothing backing it up except one Canuck fan's biased views. Great job, as always.

Lecavalier is younger than Luongo. Lecavalier's contract length is two years shorter than Luongo's. Though he hasn't been as good as when he was a Rocket Richard winner, this is still who had 49 points in 64 games last year. 54 in 65 the year before. Not excellent, but close to a point per game. Still a good player. Still a Cup winner. What "borderline" top-6 center do you know of that still averages 0.80 PPG in his two worst years of his career?

And to your point about goaltenders, I'd list the following teams as potentially in the market for a starting goaltender:

-Chicago
-Columbus
-Edmonton
-Florida
-Brooklyn
-Toronto
-Washington

That's 7 teams. Compare that to the teams that might be interested in acquiring a bona-fide top-6 center:

-Anaheim
-Buffalo
-Calgary
-Chicago
-Colorado
-Columbus
-Dallas
-Detroit
-Edmonton
-Florida
-Minnesota
-Montreal
-New Jersey
-Brooklyn
-Philly
-Phoenix
-Toronto
-Winnipeg

See the difference? A guy like Lecavalier is simply more scarce than a guy like Luongo. And for all of the talk about how badly Brian Burke would want to add Luongo, would Lecavalier not make even more sense for them? The 6'4" Sundin replacement? Not that Vinny would ever waive his NTC to go there, but think about it.

And I see you've made numerous references to how crazy you think it is that I would consider Phaneuf a third pairing guy in Vancouver.
Let me spell this out for you once again.

1) Hamhius
2) Edler
3) Phaneuf

Which guy, Hamhius or Edler, do you think Phaneuf is better than?


Give me Phaneuf over either of them without much of a second thought. Hamhuis is a good 2-3, Edler's a 1B right now, I'd say. Too inconsistent and easily nerved out of games. Phaneuf's toughness gives him the clear edge, IMO.
  • 0

#1125 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,832 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:05 PM

Is Reilly really that bad of a deal? From what I've seen tossed around here I would think he would be better than Ashton, Franson, and as pick? No?

I really don't believe in Gardiner as you stated he is a god-send from Lalaland, who really knows if he's any good. However, Reilly has never played for the Leafs so his hype is based on people's opinions that actually know hockey. I'd kill for one of these top notch D's I keep seeing going to every team but ours every year. Just looking for an opinion from someone that seems to at least watch hockey as I haven't seen Reilly all that much to be honest, but he was 5th overall.


I think Reilly is outstanding - I am very impressed by what I've seen in the Subway Series - however I would not give up Luongo, Schroeder, Sauve, a 2nd AND take a terrible cap dump like Connolly in order to get him. For that type of return, a team better be sending a legitimate top 10 NHL defenseman (and sorry to the Phaneuf lovers in this thread, but he nowhere near qualifies.)
  • 0

#1126 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,832 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:17 PM

I think the major denial of this community is that, due to each player's contract structure, either can be had for "the right price". With this denial comes the refusal to assess Schneider's league value while drastically under estimating Luongo's.


Schneider signed a contract before testing the RFA waters - a serious team-player kind of move. Would he have done that if he were under the impression that he is a trade chip? I think it's pretty clear to most people that Gillis intends to keep Schneider and that whether or not Luongo is dealt is the only real contingency here.

I certainly don't underestimate Luongo's value - which is why I think a deal where he is thrown in, with a first round pick/prospect like Schroeder, another solid depth blueline prospect like Sauve, a 2nd round pick, and on top of that, take back a cap dump in order to land a 5th overall pick is an extreme, extreme undervaluation of Luongo.

Toronto offered Schenn - a 5th overall who is also a relatively proven NHL defenseman - which Gillis, imo, rejected for good reason.

Luongo certainly has a lot more value than a 7.7 million dollar 49 point top 9 center like Lecavalier - and he is certainly worth a 1st round pick, and imo, a prospect in addition.
  • 0

#1127 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,297 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:20 PM

I think Reilly is outstanding - I am very impressed by what I've seen in the Subway Series - however I would not give up Luongo, Schroeder, Sauve, a 2nd AND take a terrible cap dump like Connolly in order to get him. For that type of return, a team better be sending a legitimate top 10 NHL defenseman (and sorry to the Phaneuf lovers in this thread, but he nowhere near qualifies.)


Okay,

When I re-read it I saw that the extra parts seemed over the top. As I've stated before I see Phaneuf somewhere in the 20-30 overall range myself. Even though I think he and other good misaligned younger defenders could really find a role on the team he doesn't really fill a spot unless we get rid of Edler.

As for posters that think you just acquire the best players you can and move them around later that's exactly why we're in the mess we are now. Too many players that play the exact same roles. While on medicore teams this is a good approach but if you are a cap team you have to at least fill all the postions with purpose. No point in spending $60 mil when you can have the same team for $55. Something I believe MG is still learning.

Edited by Dogbyte, 15 November 2012 - 02:31 PM.

  • 0

Canuckslogo160x160.jpg


#1128 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,832 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:29 PM

And again, more strong talk with nothing backing it up except one Canuck fan's biased views. Great job, as always.

Lecavalier is younger than Luongo. Lecavalier's contract length is two years shorter than Luongo's. Though he hasn't been as good as when he was a Rocket Richard winner, this is still who had 49 points in 64 games last year. 54 in 65 the year before. Not excellent, but close to a point per game. Still a good player. Still a Cup winner. What "borderline" top-6 center do you know of that still averages 0.80 PPG in his two worst years of his career?

And to your point about goaltenders, I'd list the following teams as potentially in the market for a starting goaltender:

-Chicago
-Columbus
-Edmonton
-Florida
-Brooklyn
-Toronto
-Washington

That's 7 teams. Compare that to the teams that might be interested in acquiring a bona-fide top-6 center:

-Anaheim
-Buffalo
-Calgary
-Chicago
-Colorado
-Columbus
-Dallas
-Detroit
-Edmonton
-Florida
-Minnesota
-Montreal
-New Jersey
-Brooklyn
-Philly
-Phoenix
-Toronto
-Winnipeg

See the difference? A guy like Lecavalier is simply more scarce than a guy like Luongo. And for all of the talk about how badly Brian Burke would want to add Luongo, would Lecavalier not make even more sense for them? The 6'4" Sundin replacement? Not that Vinny would ever waive his NTC to go there, but think about it.



Give me Phaneuf over either of them without much of a second thought. Hamhuis is a good 2-3, Edler's a 1B right now, I'd say. Too inconsistent and easily nerved out of games. Phaneuf's toughness gives him the clear edge, IMO.


Yeah King, teams are going to be lined up to take on Lecavalier's 7.7 million cap hit.
I'm sure the only reason he is still in Tampa is because he has rejected the blockbuster offers that Yzerman has been receiving for him.
In case you haven't noticed, his declining production is far more obvious than your tenuous claims about Luongo - who by the way is a goaltender - there happen to be a few 40 year old guys performing at a very high level in the NHL at that position - who is the oldest top 6 center that you can think of?
One minute you are on and on claiming the Sedin's production is declining, the next you are on and on about a hard sell of Lecavalier.

The Canucks simply do not need nor have room for Lecavalier (or Phaneuf for that matter.)

Lecavalier would be a $7.7 million third line center in Vancouver. We never hear the end of Raymond's league average cap hit, or Ballard's 4.5 - how would Lecavalier's cap hit be received?

How about his lifetime plus/minus of -112?

1) Hank
2) Kesler
3) Lecavalier

Which guy, Hank or Kesler, is Lecavalier going to displace?

And like Phaneuf is relative to Hamhuis and Edler, Lecavailier's cap hit is 1.6 and 2.7 million higher than Hank or Kesler's.

See the similarity?

Phaneuf - third pairing guy at 6.5 million.
Lecavalier - third line center at 7.7 million.

You seem oblivious to the reality of a salary cap - not to mention that you are keen to add extremely over-valued guys who don't really fit the team's existing needs.

Edited by oldnews, 15 November 2012 - 02:43 PM.

  • 0

#1129 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:35 PM

I agree with this, though the same could be said for Luongo's and Schneider's potential destinations:

Luongo
NTC - player can supply five-team trade list following final game of 2013-14, valid through July 15, 2014; if player does not submit trade list at that time, team can request a five-team trade list following final game of 2017-18 season, valid through Sept. 1, 2018). If player submitted a trade list in 2014 and was not moved, team loses right to request trade list in 2018.
Cap Hit: $5,333,000.00
Length of Contract: 10 years remaining
Actual Salary
2012-2013 - $6,714,000 - 33
2013-2014 - $6,714,000 - 34
2014-2015 - $6,714,000 - 35
2015-2016 - $6,714,000 - 36
2016-2017 - $6,714,000 - 37
2017-2018 - $6,714,000 - 38
2018-2019 - $3,382,000 - 39
2019-2020 - $1,618,000 - 40
2020-2021 - $1,000,000 - 41
2021-2022 - $1,000,000 - 42 (Hasek retired at 43 years old)

FLORIDA - Luongo's prefered destination, Tallon doesn't want him, but wants Schneider
CHICAGO - Vancouver's favorite enemy
TORONTO - Rumored refused by Luongo, denied rumor by both Gillis and Burke

Schneider:
No clauses
Cap Hit: $4,000,000.00
Length of contract: 3 years
Actual Salary
2012-2013 - $3,500,000.00
2013-2014 - $4,000,000.00
2014-2015 - $4,500,000.00

FLORIDA
COLUMBUS
TAMPA BAY
BOSTON
WINNIPEG
TORONTO
COLORADO
CALGARY
EDMONTON
ANAHEIM
MINNESOTA
SAN JOSE
CHICAGO
DETROIT
OTTAWA
WASHINGTON
NEW JERSEY
PHILADELPHIA
  • 0

#1130 D-Money

D-Money

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,126 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:36 PM

And again, more strong talk with nothing backing it up except one Canuck fan's biased views. Great job, as always.

Lecavalier is younger than Luongo. Lecavalier's contract length is two years shorter than Luongo's. Though he hasn't been as good as when he was a Rocket Richard winner, this is still who had 49 points in 64 games last year. 54 in 65 the year before. Not excellent, but close to a point per game. Still a good player. Still a Cup winner. What "borderline" top-6 center do you know of that still averages 0.80 PPG in his two worst years of his career?


LOL!

Seriously? "Two worst year of his career"? Or, more likely, his first two years of decline from his prime? A decline that will likely continue through the 2015-16 season, even though he's still due 10 million per year. And a decline that will likely become even steeper from 2016-20, where he'll still have a 7.7 million cap hit.

Luongo would immediately become the best goalie on about 2/3 of the teams in the league. And his cap hit is actually below average for a veteran starting goaltender. Whereas Lecavalier wouldn't be the best forward on any team...except maybe Columbus. And his cap hit is one of the highest in the league.

Add in the fact that goaltenders usually maintain more effectiveness in their late-30's than skaters, and your whole argument is complete lunacy.
  • 1
Posted Image

#1131 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:41 PM

Yeah King, teams are going to be lined up to take on Lecavalier's 7.7 million cap hit - and in case you haven't noticed, his declining production is far more obvious than your tenuous claims about Luongo - who by the way is a goaltender - there happen to be a few 40 year old guys performing at a very high level in the NHL at that position - who is the oldest top 6 center that you can think of?

And by the way - Lecavalier would be a third line center in Vancouver.

1) Hank
2) Kesler
3) Lecavalier

Which guy, Hank or Kesler, is Lecavalier going to displace?

And like Phaneuf is relative to Hamhuis and Edler, Lecavailier's cap hit is 1.6 and 2.7 million higher than Hank or Kesler's.

See the similarity?

Phaneuf - third pairing guy at 6.5 million.
Lecavalier - third line center at 7.7 million.


H. SEDIN
LECAVALIER
KESLER

No point in judging salary over talent. It makes no sense at all. If Lecavalier were to become available. he would instantly slot in on 2C, as would Marleau. Kesler on the other hand would have to be taken aside and convinced that, for the betterment of the team, he would be on the third line; the most important of all forward positions.

Edited by Canucks_Hockey_101, 15 November 2012 - 02:43 PM.

  • 0

#1132 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,832 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:47 PM

H. SEDIN
LECAVALIER
KESLER

No point in judging salary over talent. It makes no sense at all. If Lecavalier were to become available. he would instantly slot in on 2C, as would Marleau. Kesler on the other hand would have to be taken aside and convinced that, for the betterment of the team, he would be on the third line; the most important of all forward positions.


That would have been true in 2008 - but not since.

Kesler has been a plus player in a shut down role for 7 straight seasons.
Lecavalier - obviously declining production, and his two-way play? - nine minus seasons (five in a row), two plus in his career (-112) - offensive-zone start type of player...

And the new CBA is going to raise the salary cap to $75 million - or are the Canucks going to make other moves or sacrifices in order to land Lecavalier? There is no way to slice this as an intelligent move.

It is a king of es kind of proposition.

The point you make above (in a different post) about Schneider - there's another team that wants him.

Vancouver.

Edited by oldnews, 15 November 2012 - 03:05 PM.

  • 0

#1133 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,297 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:54 PM

H. SEDIN
LECAVALIER
KESLER

No point in judging salary over talent. It makes no sense at all. If Lecavalier were to become available. he would instantly slot in on 2C, as would Marleau. Kesler on the other hand would have to be taken aside and convinced that, for the betterment of the team, he would be on the third line; the most important of all forward positions.


Move Kesler to the wing. If you don't get another player to bolster the second line we might as well target Crosby or Malkin because that's the only guys that are going to succeed with our plethora of 3rd liners that play there.
  • 0

Canuckslogo160x160.jpg


#1134 D-Money

D-Money

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,126 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:17 PM

I have nothing against Lecavalier - just his contract. It's bad now, and it will only get worse.
  • 0
Posted Image

#1135 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:23 PM

Schneider signed a contract before testing the RFA waters - a serious team-player kind of move. Would he have done that if he were under the impression that he is a trade chip? I think it's pretty clear to most people that Gillis intends to keep Schneider and that whether or not Luongo is dealt is the only real contingency here.

I certainly don't underestimate Luongo's value - which is why I think a deal where he is thrown in, with a first round pick/prospect like Schroeder, another solid depth blueline prospect like Sauve, a 2nd round pick, and on top of that, take back a cap dump in order to land a 5th overall pick is an extreme, extreme undervaluation of Luongo.

Toronto offered Schenn - a 5th overall who is also a relatively proven NHL defenseman - which Gillis, imo, rejected for good reason.

Luongo certainly has a lot more value than a 7.7 million dollar 49 point top 9 center like Lecavalier - and he is certainly worth a 1st round pick, and imo, a prospect in addition.


In "RFA waters" you mean hold out, tarnish his name and prevent himself from playing the game he loves? RFAs have no rights beyong the aforementioned. If I threw 12 million dollars at you, you'd sign the contract too.

Edited by Canucks_Hockey_101, 15 November 2012 - 03:31 PM.

  • 0

#1136 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,832 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:35 PM

In RFA waters you mean holding out, tarnishing his name and preventing himself from playing the game he loves? If I threw 12 million dollars at you, you'd sign the contract too.


Not sure what you are trying to say. How would he prevent himself from playingthe game he loves? It's not about "holding out".
My point was that by signing before July 1st, he waived his opportunity to field some pretty lucrative offer-sheets - there would have been no need to "hold out" - either the Canucks match or are compensated. Either way, Schneider would not have been preventing himself from playing. What he did was essentially leave some money on the table by re-signing with Vancouver - and he took some leverage out of the hands of teams that were poised to offer sheet Schneider. I highly doubt he did that without some kind of good faith in return from the Canucks.
  • 0

#1137 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:41 PM

Yeah King, teams are going to be lined up to take on Lecavalier's 7.7 million cap hit.
I'm sure the only reason he is still in Tampa is because he has rejected the blockbuster offers that Yzerman has been receiving for him.
In case you haven't noticed, his declining production is far more obvious than your tenuous claims about Luongo - who by the way is a goaltender - there happen to be a few 40 year old guys performing at a very high level in the NHL at that position - who is the oldest top 6 center that you can think of?
One minute you are on and on claiming the Sedin's production is declining, the next you are on and on about a hard sell of Lecavalier.


Really? Who? Who are these 40 year-old goalies performing at a very high level?

The fact is that there are 0 40 year-old goalies in the top 30 of the NHL's SVP leaders. Do feel free to continue on with your hyperbole, though, such as Lecavalier being a 3rd line C.

The Canucks simply do not need nor have room for Lecavalier (or Phaneuf for that matter.)

Lecavalier would be a $7.7 million third line center in Vancouver. We never hear the end of Raymond's league average cap hit, or Ballard's 4.5 - how would Lecavalier's cap hit be received?

How about his lifetime plus/minus of -112?

1) Hank
2) Kesler
3) Lecavalier

Which guy, Hank or Kesler, is Lecavalier going to displace?


You're not paying attention to what's going on. I've not advocated for Vancouver to acquire Lecavalier. I'm raising a point about the contradiction of how CDCers scoff at trading Luongo for "only" Paajarvi, while they're simultaneously aghast at the notion of trading Zack Kassian for Vincent Lecavalier. That's the whole point of this discussion.

Phaneuf - third pairing guy at 6.5 million.
Lecavalier - third line center at 7.7 million.

You seem oblivious to the reality of a salary cap - not to mention that you are keen to add extremely over-valued guys who don't really fit the team's existing needs.


Just hilarious. Dion Phaneuf on the Vancouver Canucks' third pair. Let me guess - Sid Crosby would be right behind Jordan Schroeder on the Wolves' 2nd PP unit, right?

You seriously need a one-way ticket out of Canuck Dreamworld. Phaneuf on the 3rd pair. :lol:
  • 0

#1138 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:46 PM

Seriously? "Two worst year of his career"? Or, more likely, his first two years of decline from his prime? A decline that will likely continue through the 2015-16 season, even though he's still due 10 million per year. And a decline that will likely become even steeper from 2016-20, where he'll still have a 7.7 million cap hit.

Luongo would immediately become the best goalie on about 2/3 of the teams in the league. And his cap hit is actually below average for a veteran starting goaltender. Whereas Lecavalier wouldn't be the best forward on any team...except maybe Columbus. And his cap hit is one of the highest in the league.

Add in the fact that goaltenders usually maintain more effectiveness in their late-30's than skaters, and your whole argument is complete lunacy.


Fine, but everyone will decline eventually. You don't actually think that Luongo's ascending, do you?

And as I've shown, there are simply more teams who might be in the market for a top-six C. Too much parity at the goaltending position, too few available jobs.
  • 0

#1139 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:49 PM

I have nothing against Lecavalier - just his contract. It's bad now, and it will only get worse.


Yeah, and does that sound like anybody else familiar?

Like, someone that we're perhaps trying to move?
  • 0

#1140 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,832 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:58 PM

Really? Who? Who are these 40 year-old goalies performing at a very high level?

The fact is that there are 0 40 year-old goalies in the top 30 of the NHL's SVP leaders. Do feel free to continue on with your hyperbole, though, such as Lecavalier being a 3rd line C.

Just hilarious. Dion Phaneuf on the Vancouver Canucks' third pair. Let me guess - Sid Crosby would be right behind Jordan Schroeder on the Wolves' 2nd PP unit, right?


Seriously? You've never heard of Martin Brodeur? Did you see any of the ECF this year? He was the guy playing goal for the New Jersey Devils. Roloson was 18-12 with .912 sv% and 2.56 gaa at 42 years of age two seasons ago, .916 and 2.64 at 41- showed signs of "decline" this year at 43. Thomas is the spring chicken at 38.

Just a few other noteworthy goaltenders who played into their 40s...
Ed Belfour, Dominek Hasek, Curtis Joseph, Jacques Plante, Tony Esposito, Terry Sawchuk, Johnny Bower...

Clearly a bunch of bumbs.

Oh, and Phaneuf is clearly to defensemen what Crosby is to centers. Your point about hyperbole carries so much more weight now.

Edited by oldnews, 15 November 2012 - 04:08 PM.

  • 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.