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

#91 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 13 October 2012 - 07:21 PM

King doesn't seem to understand the game of poker. He would have folded his hand long ago, and these guys would be laughing all the way to the Luongo reception at the airport. Calling a bluff King - that is what Gillis is doing - rejecting patented low-balls - and in case you haven't noticed, Gillis is the guy holding the cards. The urgency will increase, but it won't be Gillis feeling the real pressure. He'll have some half-wits from the Province nipping at his heels; the Leafs management however would be so lucky - and don't be surprised if Tallon pays a reasonable price when the chips are down.


What game of poker?

This is not complicated. There are maybe 3 teams with interest in Luongo - and not great interest, or else they would've offered something compelling enough for Gillis to accept (which probably isn't much). There's no "poker" going on here. He wants out, he's getting traded. And you can bet that the teams with interest are discussing with eachother, too. The only leverage that Gillis has is that he can park Luongo on the bench - but that still doesn't help the Canucks at all, which you don't understand.

And why can't you, or anyone else, just explain to me how Luongo's perceived value will rise as a 34 year-old NHL backup? Howcome everybody's avoiding that question?

Edited by King of the ES, 13 October 2012 - 07:25 PM.

  • 0

#92 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 13 October 2012 - 07:24 PM

What do you mean "we're stuck with" them?


We have them under contract. They're not going anywhere.

If Gillis had Buono's stones, Malhotra would've been waived a long time ago, but, alas, we're stuck with him for one more year.

Edited by King of the ES, 13 October 2012 - 07:24 PM.

  • 0

#93 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,205 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 13 October 2012 - 07:43 PM

What you're saying is technically correct, that the offseason hasn't ended. But once it does, oh boy, do we have a major issue on our hands that will follow us until the very second that he leaves.


The risk is small, yes. $2.3M is his cap hit I believe? The reward potential is high - if he can be counted on to score 20 goals, annually, it would be considered an excellent return. Speaking of "disasters", Raymond was a disaster last year, and you could even say that Kesler was, too. Do we also need to ask ourselves "why", or do we just default to the "durr, they were injured" excuse?



I recall a fairly "savvy" GM giving up on Michael Grabner, too. Does Tallon giving up on Frolik indicate that he's a write-off? Hope not, or else what have we ended up with in Jason Garrison?


Dramatic king, that is dramatic. Luongo major issue blah blah blah - you don't know what will happen when the lockout ends, and if Luongo isn't dealt right away, who cares? You'll probably read the Province too much. Matters not what media blabbers about.

Frolik counted on to score 20 goals a year? That's serious wishful thinking and ironic coming from mr. negative expectations - he had 5 in 63 games and was -10 surrounded by scoring talent in Chicago. Year before 3 goals in 28 games in Chicago - that's 8 goals in 91 games since Tallon dealt him. I doubt Tallon is losing any sleep over that decision haha.

Lapierre scored more goals than that last season - is a mere 1 million cap hit, threw 244 hits, is able to play a shut down role, takes draws, agitates people, drops the gloves, and is a general pain in the ass to play against. You whine about being "stuck" with that - find us some better bang for your buck than that King - instead you want to add a 7 or 8 goal scorer who is extremely soft and a liability without the puck for more than twice the cap hit.. Ok there king. You'd probably get a lot more satisfaction as a Flames and Feaster fan.

Keep going on about Grabner all you want - his 32 points last year was pretty unspectacular - particularly when you consider his 3 million cap hit, his glaring -18, and his complete and utter softness - he threw a total of 16 body checks in a complete season - that is a number you could expect from a goaltender. The guy you call a disaster, Raymond, looks like Dustin Brown by comparison.

Raymond's disaster was 10 goals in 55 games (same 30 point scoring pace as Grabner at a lower cap hit), was +4 off broken back surgery on a line where every player suffered a major injury and Booth was a newcomer. Only you could see that as a disaster and still be here re-selling Frolik and whining about Grabner. Once you get a bad idea in your head, it just rattles around and around and keeps you prattling - that is what we are stuck with.

Edited by oldnews, 13 October 2012 - 08:26 PM.

  • 2

#94 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,205 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 13 October 2012 - 08:15 PM

What game of poker?

This is not complicated. There are maybe 3 teams with interest in Luongo - and not great interest, or else they would've offered something compelling enough for Gillis to accept (which probably isn't much). There's no "poker" going on here. He wants out, he's getting traded. And you can bet that the teams with interest are discussing with eachother, too. The only leverage that Gillis has is that he can park Luongo on the bench - but that still doesn't help the Canucks at all, which you don't understand.

And why can't you, or anyone else, just explain to me how Luongo's perceived value will rise as a 34 year-old NHL backup? Howcome everybody's avoiding that question?


Poker king - a game where people want your chips and they don't want to give up anything to get them. When that game playing is done a deal might get done.

That is seriously dense king. You honestly believe that Tallon and Burke are discussing their offers with each other, trying to conspire to keep the price low? That is idiotic. The Leafs were on the outside (again) looking in at the Panthers in the playoffs - they are conference rivals. Your 'understanding' of how things work is entertaining. If the Panthers land Luongo, the Leafs want them to pay a high price - likewise where the Panthers and Toronto are concerned. They could be fighting for the 8th seed next year. They're not talking, they're not conspiring - their interests are opposed.

You keep suggesting that people think Luongo's value will rise if he were ever to be considered a "backup". Perhaps the reason no one is answering that dumb straw question is because it is a figment of your imagination. Luongo's value hasn't dropped - it hasn't risen - it's not as you see it - you are far too dramatic and short-term of a thinker. His value is far more fixed than you perceive - despite the games you buy from Toronto's insignificant media. Regardless you proposed two roster players and a prospect - like I said, not really that far off in perceived value from what I proposed. The only thing is, your proposal was an insult to all the wingers we already have. Frolik? Really. Still arguing that? You should take a hiatus and let that one fade away.

Edited by oldnews, 14 October 2012 - 10:49 AM.

  • 0

#95 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 13 October 2012 - 10:36 PM

What game of poker?

This is not complicated. There are maybe 3 teams with interest in Luongo - and not great interest, or else they would've offered something compelling enough for Gillis to accept (which probably isn't much). There's no "poker" going on here. He wants out, he's getting traded. And you can bet that the teams with interest are discussing with eachother, too. The only leverage that Gillis has is that he can park Luongo on the bench - but that still doesn't help the Canucks at all, which you don't understand.

And why can't you, or anyone else, just explain to me how Luongo's perceived value will rise as a 34 year-old NHL backup? Howcome everybody's avoiding that question?

Brilliant...we finally agree on something ES :)
  • 0

#96 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,326 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 13 October 2012 - 10:40 PM

We have them under contract. They're not going anywhere.

If Gillis had Buono's stones, Malhotra would've been waived a long time ago, but, alas, we're stuck with him for one more year.

You want Malhotra waived? lol. You wouldn't have said that two years ago.
  • 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


#97 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,755 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 13 October 2012 - 11:35 PM

Im currently watching the MSU vs. MINN college game on the Score right now. Been watching Bjugstad the whole game, and I can't see what is so special about him. He does stand out with his size; yet it doesn't seem like it will translate to anything all that special at a pro level, perhaps the AHL though.

He reminds me of Jason Bonsignore, not sure if that is good or bad.

-Jagori


Meh, not every player has a dominant role in every game. So far this season Bjugstad has 2g 1a and is +4 in two games, where his team has scored a total of 12 goals. He won 18 of 25 faceoffs he took in those two games (72%).

I'd be willing to risk that he'll develop into a very good NHL player.

regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#98 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,755 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 14 October 2012 - 12:02 AM

What game of poker?


As I see things it's not a game of poker, it's more a game of blackjack and Gillis is the house with an ace showing.

regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#99 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:12 AM

As I see things it's not a game of poker, it's more a game of blackjack and Gillis is the house with an ace showing.

regards,
G.

Luongo is no ACE !!!!
  • 2

#100 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,205 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:45 AM

Brilliant...we finally agree on something ES :)


Which part do you agree with? The part Gillis should have taken a lowball bluff offer and gotten it over with? Or the part where Tallon and Burke have each other on speed dial conspiring to help each other keep Luongo's value lower? Or the part where King poses one of his patented straw questions, which really doesn't represent what anyone is arguing, wondering why no one is taking him or his question seriously?
  • 0

#101 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,205 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 14 October 2012 - 11:17 AM

Would you prefer a different analogy king?

You have a very nice car. People really would like to have it. (Do I need to re-quote Dreger on Nonis and Luongo? probably, but I'm not going to)
You have a ticket to a lottery and win another very nice car - newer, and even a little faster.
You decide to sell your other car.
After all, you can only drive one car at a time. But then again, there is no brand of car that never needs servicing - in which case, you could just use or need another car.
You aren't really desperate for the money or the space, but who knows, perhaps you'll find a pick-up you could use more.
The first guy that shows up to have a look is one of those guys. You know there are a couple other guys interested - they've called to inquire what your asking price is. This guy kicks the tires, he searches and nit picks - he obviously wants the car - but he's playing a game most of us can easily identify, otherwise he wouldn't be making the effort... He's attempting to justify a low ball offer. In effect, this whole part of the process is a waste of time.
You'd have to be an idiot to sell to that first guy for his first low ball offer. You let him walk away. If he wants the car, he'll have to come back with a ball park offer, particularly when you know there is no other comparable car on the market.
All you've missed out on is a lowball offer that'll be available anytime. Once winter comes, that guy is going to need that car - that would be a better time to sell.
  • 0

#102 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 14 October 2012 - 11:43 AM

You keep suggesting that people think Luongo's value will rise if he were ever to be considered a "backup". Perhaps the reason no one is answering that dumb straw question is because it is a figment of your imagination. Luongo's value hasn't dropped - it hasn't risen - it's not as you see it - you are far too dramatic and short-term of a thinker. His value is far more fixed than you perceive - despite the games you buy from Toronto's insignificant media.


Oh, yes, that Toronto media! They're out to screw the city of Vancouver and the Canucks!

First of all, if it's true that his value hasn't dropped, then why are people giving us "lowball offers" like you keep suggesting? Does that not sound contradictory to you?

Secondly, I'm not saying that he's a worse PLAYER, I'm saying that the MARKET DYNAMICS have changed. He wants out. The whole world knows it. We've signed Schneider and we're going with him. That is not a secret. That is not a "bluff". MG has shown his hand, and Luongo has shown his. He's on his way out. To which, as far as I know, you agree.

KNOWING THIS, teams simply are not going to offer much - unless they desperately want him, which clearly doesn't appear to be the case. Again, I will bring up the example of a piece of real estate. You can have the nicest house on the block, but if the market experiences a sharp downturn, for whatever reason, and you don't feel like the value of your home has changed, you're simply wrong; it has. People will not be willing to pay what they would've last year, when the market was hot. The market for Luongo is cold. And if the strategy is to hang on to him until the deadline, hoping that some team will get desperate and overpay, that is a serious, serious risk.

You're really suggesting that Luongo's value today isn't worse than what it was last year?
  • 0

#103 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 14 October 2012 - 11:50 AM

Would you prefer a different analogy king?

You have a very nice car. People really would like to have it. (Do I need to re-quote Dreger on Nonis and Luongo? probably, but I'm not going to)
You have a ticket to a lottery and win another very nice car - newer, and even a little faster.
You decide to sell your other car.
After all, you can only drive one car at a time. But then again, there is no brand of car that never needs servicing - in which case, you could just use or need another car.
You aren't really desperate for the money or the space, but who knows, perhaps you'll find a pick-up you could use more.
The first guy that shows up to have a look is one of those guys. You know there are a couple other guys interested - they've called to inquire what your asking price is. This guy kicks the tires, he searches and nit picks - he obviously wants the car - but he's playing a game most of us can easily identify, otherwise he wouldn't be making the effort... He's attempting to justify a low ball offer. In effect, this whole part of the process is a waste of time.
You'd have to be an idiot to sell to that first guy for his first low ball offer. You let him walk away. If he wants the car, he'll have to come back with a ball park offer, particularly when you know there is no other comparable car on the market.
All you've missed out on is a lowball offer that'll be available anytime
. Once winter comes, that guy is going to need that car - that would be a better time to sell.


The bolded sentences are where your analogy don't add up.

#1, there should be a sense or urgency to trade him. As I've said repeatedly, and to which nobody has provided a reasonable counter, his value WILL NOT RISE as our backup goaltender, which he will be, if he's still on our team on opening night. In addition to the terrible optics of trying to move a 34 year-old backup goaltender with 9 years remaining on his contract, there will be a distraction of epic proportions following this team with each day that he is still a member of it. And you are dreaming if you don't think that that'd have an effect on the psychology of Cory Schneider, and the rest of the team. The amount of bad scenarios that could play out are endless; what if Schneider just plays himself out of the starting job, then Luongo comes in and dominates? Then what? Do we trade Schneider? Do we beg Luongo to stick with us, while we try to find a team for Schneider?

#2, what's a "lowball" today will be even less in 365 days, if he's still with us at that time. Cars depreciate very rapidly with each passing year, as do 34 year-old backup goaltenders with big contracts.
  • 0

#104 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 14 October 2012 - 12:31 PM

Would you prefer a different analogy king?

You have a very nice car. People really would like to have it. (Do I need to re-quote Dreger on Nonis and Luongo? probably, but I'm not going to)
You have a ticket to a lottery and win another very nice car - newer, and even a little faster.
You decide to sell your other car.
After all, you can only drive one car at a time. But then again, there is no brand of car that never needs servicing - in which case, you could just use or need another car.
You aren't really desperate for the money or the space, but who knows, perhaps you'll find a pick-up you could use more.
The first guy that shows up to have a look is one of those guys. You know there are a couple other guys interested - they've called to inquire what your asking price is. This guy kicks the tires, he searches and nit picks - he obviously wants the car - but he's playing a game most of us can easily identify, otherwise he wouldn't be making the effort... He's attempting to justify a low ball offer. In effect, this whole part of the process is a waste of time.
You'd have to be an idiot to sell to that first guy for his first low ball offer. You let him walk away. If he wants the car, he'll have to come back with a ball park offer, particularly when you know there is no other comparable car on the market.
All you've missed out on is a lowball offer that'll be available anytime. Once winter comes, that guy is going to need that car - that would be a better time to sell.

Maybe you over value your first car because you have an emotional attachment, but, and a big but, maybe the car is not as good as you believe it to be and won;t fetch the price you think its worth. Maybe you are wrong??
  • 1

#105 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,205 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 14 October 2012 - 01:19 PM

Oh, yes, that Toronto media! They're out to screw the city of Vancouver and the Canucks!

First of all, if it's true that his value hasn't dropped, then why are people giving us "lowball offers" like you keep suggesting? Does that not sound contradictory to you?

Secondly, I'm not saying that he's a worse PLAYER, I'm saying that the MARKET DYNAMICS have changed. He wants out. The whole world knows it. We've signed Schneider and we're going with him. That is not a secret. That is not a "bluff". MG has shown his hand, and Luongo has shown his. He's on his way out. To which, as far as I know, you agree.

KNOWING THIS, teams simply are not going to offer much - unless they desperately want him, which clearly doesn't appear to be the case. Again, I will bring up the example of a piece of real estate. You can have the nicest house on the block, but if the market experiences a sharp downturn, for whatever reason, and you don't feel like the value of your home has changed, you're simply wrong; it has. People will not be willing to pay what they would've last year, when the market was hot. The market for Luongo is cold. And if the strategy is to hang on to him until the deadline, hoping that some team will get desperate and overpay, that is a serious, serious risk.

You're really suggesting that Luongo's value today isn't worse than what it was last year?


Your house analogy fails because there has been no sharp downturn in the goaltending market.

I don't know and you don't know what the offers have been - but I do know what your insider in Toronto has been saying - to review, waivers, cap dump, Komisarek, blah, blah, blah, etc - and I pointed out the ironic quotes where he was pumping Luongo's and Nonis' tires. By the way - it's not Gillis bluffing - it's Toronto - Gillis is calling that lowball b.s.

You oversimplify "market dynamics" assuming that because it is known that the Canucks are dealing Luongo, his value automatically plummets by the day. That's like saying "Your car has no value - because I know you are selling it." Things don't work that way. Far too simplistic King. You seem to realize this by trying to prop up your claim with a silly sharp downturn in the housing market analogy - which is simply not the case. But this too has been done to death - one legitimate starting goaltender on the market - things balance out. Not a worst case scenario as you suggest.
\Ironically the only worst case scenario I see is the one you proposed - to bring in Frolik to play in the top 6.

Edited by oldnews, 14 October 2012 - 01:33 PM.

  • 0

#106 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,205 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 14 October 2012 - 01:23 PM

Maybe you over value your first car because you have an emotional attachment, but, and a big but, maybe the car is not as good as you believe it to be and won;t fetch the price you think its worth. Maybe you are wrong??


Maybe you'd need to assess the market value, and then you'd have to have an idea what I am asking, before you purport to suggest that the valuation is wrong?

I also notice you didn't really engage the question above.

Edited by oldnews, 14 October 2012 - 01:28 PM.

  • 0

#107 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 14 October 2012 - 01:28 PM

You oversimplify "market dynamics" assuming that because it is known that the Canucks are dealing Luongo, his value automatically plummets by the day. That's like saying "Your car has no value - because I know you are selling it." Things don't work that way.


So how do they work? A guy at Roberto's age and with Roberto's contract, now an NHL backup, will just suddenly become a hot commodity to teams not in the playoffs and a bidding war will be created out of thin air? I wonder if that's what Hawk fans assumed would happen to Cristobal Huet.

The reason why this won't happen is that the number of suitors won't change - find me more than 3 - 5 teams who might have a realistic interest in bringing in Luongo, and who Luongo might have a realistic interest in going to. They don't exist. Couple this with the knowledge that we do need to trade him, and I see this as a scenario where the buyer, and not the seller, has all of the leverage.

Edited by King of the ES, 14 October 2012 - 01:28 PM.

  • 0

#108 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,205 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 14 October 2012 - 01:39 PM

So how do they work? A guy at Roberto's age and with Roberto's contract, now an NHL backup, will just suddenly become a hot commodity to teams not in the playoffs and a bidding war will be created out of thin air? I wonder if that's what Hawk fans assumed would happen to Cristobal Huet.

The reason why this won't happen is that the number of suitors won't change - find me more than 3 - 5 teams who might have a realistic interest in bringing in Luongo, and who Luongo might have a realistic interest in going to. They don't exist. Couple this with the knowledge that we do need to trade him, and I see this as a scenario where the buyer, and not the seller, has all of the leverage.


This is typical of how you operate. "Will suddenly become a hot commodity" blah blah "out of thin air" blah blah.. Again, your dramatic straw arguments.

Who needs more than 3 to 5 teams with realistic interest. There is only one Luongo - the Canucks aren't looking to move 3 to 5 Luongos. Derp. There is no unanimity required.

Edited by oldnews, 14 October 2012 - 01:41 PM.

  • 0

#109 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 14 October 2012 - 01:47 PM

Who needs more than 3 to 5 teams with realistic interest. There is only one Luongo - the Canucks aren't looking to move 3 to 5 Luongos. Derp. There is no unanimity required.


Uh-huh. And what happens if those 3 - 5 teams get off to unexpectedly good starts, with their goaltenders playing well? What if interest in a 34 year-old backup with a 9-year contract wanes? What then? Do you just ignore those possibilities and hope and pray that the best-case scenario plays out? Sounds pretty irresponsible, to me!
  • 0

#110 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,205 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 14 October 2012 - 02:05 PM

Uh-huh. And what happens if those 3 - 5 teams get off to unexpectedly good starts, with their goaltenders playing well? What if interest in a 34 year-old backup with a 9-year contract wanes? What then? Do you just ignore those possibilities and hope and pray that the best-case scenario plays out? Sounds pretty irresponsible, to me!


Uh-huh - and what if there is an earthquake and a tsunami buries Vancouver under water... and Gillis had failed to get value for Luongo before the catastrophe...

Or what if Schneider decides to play handball in Europe where they don't have lockouts, instead of returning to the NHL?

Or what if Gillis trades Luongo after the lockout ends?
  • 0

#111 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 14 October 2012 - 02:24 PM

Uh-huh - and what if there is an earthquake and a tsunami buries Vancouver under water... and Gillis had failed to get value for Luongo before the catastrophe...

Or what if Schneider decides to play handball in Europe where they don't have lockouts, instead of returning to the NHL?


Make light of the scenarios that I brought up, but they're very real. Even if 1 or 2 of the suitors have unexpectedly good years, this further reduces the pool of buyers, further lowering the probable return.

This is why there's urgency.

Edited by King of the ES, 14 October 2012 - 02:24 PM.

  • 0

#112 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,205 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 14 October 2012 - 02:28 PM

Make light of the scenarios that I brought up, but they're very real. Even if 1 or 2 of the suitors have unexpectedly good years, this further reduces the pool of buyers, further lowering the probable return.

This is why there's urgency.


It's called a lockout. You are about the only person wasting their energy on urgency when deals can't even be spoken of let alone made.
And I'm wasting my time with your circular worst case scenarios.
  • 0

#113 sampy

sampy

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,049 posts
  • Joined: 05-May 07

Posted 14 October 2012 - 02:32 PM

Make light of the scenarios that I brought up, but they're very real. Even if 1 or 2 of the suitors have unexpectedly good years, this further reduces the pool of buyers, further lowering the probable return.

This is why there's urgency.

Well Scrivens was just pulled in his debut for the AHL Marlies. Burke isn't an idiot, he knows he won't be anywhere near the playoffs with Reimer and Scrivens as his goalies. With Luongo, the Leafs would be in.
O'Reilly please.
  • 0

#114 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 14 October 2012 - 04:56 PM

This is typical of how you operate. "Will suddenly become a hot commodity" blah blah "out of thin air" blah blah.. Again, your dramatic straw arguments.

Who needs more than 3 to 5 teams with realistic interest. There is only one Luongo - the Canucks aren't looking to move 3 to 5 Luongos. Derp. There is no unanimity required.

Maybe you'd need to assess the market value, and then you'd have to have an idea what I am asking, before you purport to suggest that the valuation is wrong?

I also notice you didn't really engage the question above.

and...maybe your assessment is wrong...Lous an aging, middle of the pack goalie with some serious flaws in his physical and mental game who has not proven to be consistant in the playoffs....whats that worth on the market? The Canucks appear to have chosen Schneids going forward...ever ask yourself why? Maybe management have lost faith in Lou....and teams will research why.
  • 1

#115 RunningWild

RunningWild

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,196 posts
  • Joined: 09-December 10

Posted 14 October 2012 - 05:01 PM

The bolded sentences are where your analogy don't add up.

#1, there should be a sense or urgency to trade him. As I've said repeatedly, and to which nobody has provided a reasonable counter, his value WILL NOT RISE as our backup goaltender, which he will be, if he's still on our team on opening night. In addition to the terrible optics of trying to move a 34 year-old backup goaltender with 9 years remaining on his contract, there will be a distraction of epic proportions following this team with each day that he is still a member of it. And you are dreaming if you don't think that that'd have an effect on the psychology of Cory Schneider, and the rest of the team. The amount of bad scenarios that could play out are endless; what if Schneider just plays himself out of the starting job, then Luongo comes in and dominates? Then what? Do we trade Schneider? Do we beg Luongo to stick with us, while we try to find a team for Schneider?

#2, what's a "lowball" today will be even less in 365 days, if he's still with us at that time. Cars depreciate very rapidly with each passing year, as do 34 year-old backup goaltenders with big contracts.


Luongo is currently 33 yrs old. You are making a lot of assumptions in your statement, such as Luongo will be the back up. Anyone can spew an argument based on assumptions because they have no validity, they are mere speculation. I'm curious why you strongly believe Luongo's value will not rise? You seem pretty adamant on this theory, would like to hear the reasoning.
  • 0

#116 Get real canuck fans

Get real canuck fans

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,366 posts
  • Joined: 06-March 08

Posted 14 October 2012 - 06:29 PM

Well Scrivens was just pulled in his debut for the AHL Marlies. Burke isn't an idiot, he knows he won't be anywhere near the playoffs with Reimer and Scrivens as his goalies. With Luongo, the Leafs would be in.
O'Reilly please.


Scrivens has played 2 games with a GAA of 2.02, so would not say he been to terribly bad.
  • 0

#117 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,205 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 14 October 2012 - 07:28 PM

and...maybe your assessment is wrong...Lous an aging, middle of the pack goalie with some serious flaws in his physical and mental game who has not proven to be consistant in the playoffs....whats that worth on the market? The Canucks appear to have chosen Schneids going forward...ever ask yourself why? Maybe management have lost faith in Lou....and teams will research why.


what was the assessment again? that's the part you would need to know before you pretend to know whether it's right or wrong.

I don't need to ask myself why they've chosen Schneider - there are very few teams that wouldn't choose him over their starter - and I also doubt there are many teams that need to 'research' this at this point.

btw - your assessment of Luongo is wrong.

Edited by oldnews, 14 October 2012 - 07:49 PM.

  • 0

#118 SkeeterHansen

SkeeterHansen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,140 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 11

Posted 14 October 2012 - 08:55 PM

what was the assessment again? that's the part you would need to know before you pretend to know whether it's right or wrong.

I don't need to ask myself why they've chosen Schneider - there are very few teams that wouldn't choose him over their starter - and I also doubt there are many teams that need to 'research' this at this point.

btw - your assessment of Luongo is wrong.


There are very few teams with a goalie tandem as good as Vancouvers...
  • 0

/=S=/


#119 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 14 October 2012 - 09:27 PM

what was the assessment again? that's the part you would need to know before you pretend to know whether it's right or wrong.

I don't need to ask myself why they've chosen Schneider - there are very few teams that wouldn't choose him over their starter - and I also doubt there are many teams that need to 'research' this at this point.

btw - your assessment of Luongo is wrong.

only your humble opinion...and your credentials are what to evaluate Lou?
  • 0

#120 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,205 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:06 PM

There are very few teams with a goalie tandem as good as Vancouvers...


I agree - the Canucks haven't "lost faith" in Luo as Smurf suggest - they simply drafted and developed a young marquis goaltender who has forced their hand by earning his due, despite Luongo's considerable talent.
  • 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.