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

#1381 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 21 November 2012 - 01:56 PM

"3rd grade logic"; actually, it's 3rd grade reading comprehension on your part. Did I say that Kesler "is not as good as he once was"? No, I said that he wasn't playing to his 2010-11 level. Big difference.

Do you disagree with that statement on Kesler?


I disagree with trading Luongo.

Edited by Canucks_Hockey_101, 21 November 2012 - 01:57 PM.

  • 0

#1382 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:52 PM

I disagree with trading Luongo.


So do I, but it's happening, so you should learn to accept it.

Edited by King of the ES, 21 November 2012 - 04:52 PM.

  • 0

#1383 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 21 November 2012 - 05:50 PM

So do I, but it's happening, so you should learn to accept it.


When?
  • 0

#1384 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,869 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 21 November 2012 - 07:12 PM

IIRC, Hodgson's beef against the organization is that he knew Kesler was injured and wanted the 2C position as he believed he'd be more effective then injured Kesler. Kesler and AV refused the proposal and a disgruntled Hodgson was promptly traded. Rehab for Kesler, Buffalo for Hodgson and the pressbox for Kassian who is currently carrying the great burden of being the next Bertuzzi.

And Luongo is the biggest mess? Sure...


If I read correctly, I'm not sure you read correctly, or where you read that - that version seems like a slight revision. Hodgson's beef against the organization - at least the final beef (aside from the prior issues around his handling during his back issues) - started months before the trade deadline and had little or nothing to do with Kesler's injury, and ironically, Hodgson had only a few months in the NHL under his belt at the time.

If you go back and read Tony Gallagher raking up an ice-time controversy,

I think the Canucks are really playing with fire. In fact, I know they’re playing with fire with this business of what they’re doing to Hodgson. They may not have to accede to demands to be traded, if in fact they come, but you don’t want to be messing around.
Once a player starts doing that, starts asking, if you’ve gotta say no, then you’re starting to really sour the relationship and I don’t think they want to go there. They are perilously close to that kind of situation. I mean, if I had been Cody’s agent I would have been asking long ago. They have been way more than patient.


And if you read Hodgson's agent Ritch Winter's uber-pedantic 6400 word response to PITB's take on the 'controversy', you will find that Winters objected to nothing that Gallagher said - apparently the 'controversy' had everything to do with the handlers' dissatisfaction that the rookie was getting only 13/14 minutes of ice time a game. But the idea that he would be more effective than Kesler or take the 2nd line role was not specified.

Tony Gallagher implied that it was an atrocity that Hodgson wasn't given more minutes, whether they came from the top two centers, or the combination of Malhotra/Lapierre, who, as everyone knows, carry the defensive load for Vancouver, enabling the top guys to play to their strengths. IMO there really was nowhere to usurp these minutes, and Hodgson was already being optimized. I don't buy the pump and dump stories - I think you simply pump your player regardless, and Vigneault, despite his reputation, did a fairly solid job of that.


IMO, his agent did not necessarily have the most prudent conception of what is in his player's best interests. Winters undoubtedly intended well for Hodgson by pushing for more minutes for his client, but if you read what he published, he goes so far as to put Hodgson in a class with Steven Stamkos. I mean, that's flattering, but get real. If the object is to win a sizable contract for your client when his ELC comes to an end, wouldn't it be more advantageous to wait out a little more development, let the perception that your client is limited by circumstance in Vancouver percolate, show what a team guy he is by respecting the veterans and thriving in his role, and take advantage of the particular situation, which also favoured his client. In Vancouver, opposition teams had to concentrate on shutting down Henrik, and then the 40 goal scoring Selke winner, and then by the time Hodgson hits the ice, he is seeing not only bottom pairings, but also has two outstanding two-way linemates that allowed him to really play to his strengths, and some outstanding centers to learn from. There was nothing pressing him to be ready to step up to pressure filled big minutes against players who face a high quality of competition - nor did he really need to be an NHL developed defensive center, which really is not a criticism as much as it is the reality of being a rookie who is also primarily an offensive center. Winters/Gallagher and Gillis/Vigneault simply could not see eye to eye - I personally don't agree with the push to, imo prematurely, lobby for a greater role for Hodgson. It was divisive, it wasn't terribly realistic, and the optics of it, I think, really hurt Hodgson. I also think Gallagher sunk his teeth into this one so deeply and publicly that the result was to drive a rift into the team that was fairly irreconcilable. I don't see it as exclusively Hodgson's fault, but I also don't see his camp's position as being at all realistic - and it was divisive - at a fairly sensitive time for Vancouver.
I'm not at all disappointed with the way Gillis resolved it - he got the type of prospect almost all of us wanted, at the position of greatest need - and he sent Hodgson to a team where he could play precisely the type of role he wanted.
Not sure why the whining still ensues - the idea that Hodgson was the key to last year's window is more embellishment than a Kesler dive.

I agree with your point that the goaltending situation is nothing resembling that kind of mess. Luongo and Schneider have handled it exceptionally well.

Edited by oldnews, 21 November 2012 - 07:22 PM.

  • 3

#1385 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,349 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 21 November 2012 - 07:17 PM

Hodgson wouldn't have done much to help us in the playoffs anyways, with the way we were being outplayed even he did put up decent points it wouldn't have been a big help.

Plus know AV he would have played him less minutes than he got in the Season, so his icetime would have been even more diminished IMO.

I don't know why we still complain about Coho, it's over lets just focus on Kass.
  • 0

zackass.png


#1386 RUPERTKBD

RUPERTKBD

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,647 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 21 November 2012 - 07:27 PM

Hodgson wouldn't have done much to help us in the playoffs anyways, with the way we were being outplayed even he did put up decent points it wouldn't have been a big help.

Plus know AV he would have played him less minutes than he got in the Season, so his icetime would have been even more diminished IMO.

I don't know why we still complain about Coho, it's over lets just focus on Kass.

I agree that it's pointless to complain about him, but your assertion that he would have made no difference is complete speculation.

Both of our goaltenders played well. The area that was lacking was offense (again) and Hodgson may have quite possibly made a difference. I'm not saying that he would have, but it's exactly as accurate as it would be to state that he wouldn't have.
  • 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!

#1387 WiDeN

WiDeN

    Canucks Second-Line

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

Posted 21 November 2012 - 08:35 PM

Ok there Phiip Pullman

Ok there Dr Phil.

Ok there.
"We spend the first twelve months of our children's lives teaching them to walk and talk and the next twelve telling them to sit down and shut up." Phyllis Diller.

LOL, I don't know if you're laughing with me or at me, but either is fine. I was being goofy.

This is undeniable.

Kesler is an idiot with a big head who wanted to score 41 goals again, and the coaching staff is even stupider for allowing him to play.

I clearly remember AV's comment, "I told Kelser he can play but I don't want to see him limping out there."

It was quite obvious he was injured all year.

I agree to a certain extent. Delaying the surgery doesn't exactly help us win if he is only 60 or 70%. But it does keep us afloat until the offseason. I don't know, I don't agree with letting him play when he needs surgery, but it might have been something that was supposed to get better over time and didn't. I guess my response below is part of the reason I'm ok with it.

And? What's wrong with that logic?

If somebody's playing in an NHL game, I'm going to assume that he has been signed off to play by the coaches, by the trainers, by the medical staff, etc. A guy like Kesler has been invested in very heavily and they're not going to allow him to play "because he wants to". Sorry, doesn't work that way. Medical personnel have reputations and professional licenses/designations at stake. If Kesler was too injured to play, he would not have been playing.

This is the same crap that everyone said about Cody when he was struggling in the AHL with the Moose. "Don't look at the numbers, he's hurt!"

And BTW - have any of you considered the possibility that Kesler's 41-goal season was an anomaly?

  • 2007-08: 21 goals
  • 2008-09: 26 goals
  • 2009-10: 25 goals
  • 2010-11: 41 goals
  • 2011-12: 22 goals
Which one of those is not like the other?

I'm sorry. You must be new to hockey.

THE PLAYOFFS

The who?

THE PLAYOFFS

Oh, is that the big hockey competition where hockey players play injured all the time because they've just played 82 games and need 16 wins to achieve their goal they set as a team 7 months ago and every team plays at 150% and hits everything that moves and guys take pucks in the face to save goals and stuff?

YES, IT'S THE PLAYOFFS

You mean players are allowed by their medical staff to play hurt because they have a chance at winning the Stanley frick'n Cup even though those trainers and coaches have reputations to uphold?

YES, IT'S THE PLAYOFFS
  • 4

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


#1388 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,349 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 21 November 2012 - 08:40 PM

I agree that it's pointless to complain about him, but your assertion that he would have made no difference is complete speculation.

Both of our goaltenders played well. The area that was lacking was offense (again) and Hodgson may have quite possibly made a difference. I'm not saying that he would have, but it's exactly as accurate as it would be to state that he wouldn't have.


IMO the problem was defense and inconsistentcy (Except game 3)

We turned alot of pucks over in the first 2 games, made alot of bad plays and were outworked. I think if we were sharper in those areas the offense would have came.

Either way AV would have benched him at time to give Lappy time (Let's be honest, AV prob would have) and IMO any offense he would brought wouldn't really have lead to anymore wins than we got with the way LA outplayed us for part of that series.

You are right though, it's something we will never no so either view has the same traction.
  • 0

zackass.png


#1389 Ossi Vaananen

Ossi Vaananen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,904 posts
  • Joined: 25-April 12

Posted 21 November 2012 - 09:08 PM

It's the PLAYOFFS
  • 3

2d7ye0p.jpg

 

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#1390 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,869 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 21 November 2012 - 09:19 PM

LOL, I don't know if you're laughing with me or at me, but either is fine. I was being goofy.


I thought your post was hilarious - and I like Philip Pullman - I'm an 'adult', but I read the Dark Materials trilogy. Very well written, and no dumbing-it-down for young people.
No shot intended.
  • 1

#1391 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 21 November 2012 - 09:38 PM

You mean players are allowed by their medical staff to play hurt because they have a chance at winning the Stanley frick'n Cup even though those trainers and coaches have reputations to uphold?

YES, IT'S THE PLAYOFFS


I guess that rule doesn't apply, then, to Dan Hamhuis?
  • 0

#1392 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 21 November 2012 - 09:39 PM

If I read correctly, I'm not sure you read correctly, or where you read that - that version seems like a slight revision. Hodgson's beef against the organization - at least the final beef (aside from the prior issues around his handling during his back issues) - started months before the trade deadline and had little or nothing to do with Kesler's injury, and ironically, Hodgson had only a few months in the NHL under his belt at the time.

If you go back and read Tony Gallagher raking up an ice-time controversy,

I think the Canucks are really playing with fire. In fact, I know they’re playing with fire with this business of what they’re doing to Hodgson. They may not have to accede to demands to be traded, if in fact they come, but you don’t want to be messing around.
Once a player starts doing that, starts asking, if you’ve gotta say no, then you’re starting to really sour the relationship and I don’t think they want to go there. They are perilously close to that kind of situation. I mean, if I had been Cody’s agent I would have been asking long ago. They have been way more than patient.


And if you read Hodgson's agent Ritch Winter's uber-pedantic 6400 word response to PITB's take on the 'controversy', you will find that Winters objected to nothing that Gallagher said - apparently the 'controversy' had everything to do with the handlers' dissatisfaction that the rookie was getting only 13/14 minutes of ice time a game. But the idea that he would be more effective than Kesler or take the 2nd line role was not specified.

Tony Gallagher implied that it was an atrocity that Hodgson wasn't given more minutes, whether they came from the top two centers, or the combination of Malhotra/Lapierre, who, as everyone knows, carry the defensive load for Vancouver, enabling the top guys to play to their strengths. IMO there really was nowhere to usurp these minutes, and Hodgson was already being optimized. I don't buy the pump and dump stories - I think you simply pump your player regardless, and Vigneault, despite his reputation, did a fairly solid job of that.


IMO, his agent did not necessarily have the most prudent conception of what is in his player's best interests. Winters undoubtedly intended well for Hodgson by pushing for more minutes for his client, but if you read what he published, he goes so far as to put Hodgson in a class with Steven Stamkos. I mean, that's flattering, but get real. If the object is to win a sizable contract for your client when his ELC comes to an end, wouldn't it be more advantageous to wait out a little more development, let the perception that your client is limited by circumstance in Vancouver percolate, show what a team guy he is by respecting the veterans and thriving in his role, and take advantage of the particular situation, which also favoured his client. In Vancouver, opposition teams had to concentrate on shutting down Henrik, and then the 40 goal scoring Selke winner, and then by the time Hodgson hits the ice, he is seeing not only bottom pairings, but also has two outstanding two-way linemates that allowed him to really play to his strengths, and some outstanding centers to learn from. There was nothing pressing him to be ready to step up to pressure filled big minutes against players who face a high quality of competition - nor did he really need to be an NHL developed defensive center, which really is not a criticism as much as it is the reality of being a rookie who is also primarily an offensive center. Winters/Gallagher and Gillis/Vigneault simply could not see eye to eye - I personally don't agree with the push to, imo prematurely, lobby for a greater role for Hodgson. It was divisive, it wasn't terribly realistic, and the optics of it, I think, really hurt Hodgson. I also think Gallagher sunk his teeth into this one so deeply and publicly that the result was to drive a rift into the team that was fairly irreconcilable. I don't see it as exclusively Hodgson's fault, but I also don't see his camp's position as being at all realistic - and it was divisive - at a fairly sensitive time for Vancouver.
I'm not at all disappointed with the way Gillis resolved it - he got the type of prospect almost all of us wanted, at the position of greatest need - and he sent Hodgson to a team where he could play precisely the type of role he wanted.
Not sure why the whining still ensues - the idea that Hodgson was the key to last year's window is more embellishment than a Kesler dive.

I agree with your point that the goaltending situation is nothing resembling that kind of mess. Luongo and Schneider have handled it exceptionally well.


I stand corrected. Great post.
  • 0

#1393 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,507 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:07 PM

I guess that rule doesn't apply, then, to Dan Hamhuis?

You try playimg again after hipchecking a 6'4" 220lb mammoth. Yea, it doesn't happen.
  • 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


#1394 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,349 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:29 PM

I guess that rule doesn't apply, then, to Dan Hamhuis?


I guess you havent heard of playable injuries and unplayable injuries.
  • 0

zackass.png


#1395 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,869 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:41 PM

I guess that rule doesn't apply, then, to Dan Hamhuis?


Derp.

"Vancouver Canucks defenceman Dan Hamhuis will have surgery early next week and may not be ready for the start of training camp.
Hamhuis left Game 1 of the Stanley Cup Final early in the second period following a hip check from Boston Bruins forward Milan Lucic. It was later discovered that Hamhuis suffered a sports hernia, groin and lower abdomen injury."
  • 1

#1396 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,500 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:11 PM

Luongo to Toronto:


To: Toronto
Roberto Luongo, Chris Tanev, and Kyle Okposo

To: Brooklyn
Nikolai Kulemin, Keith Ballard, Mason Raymond +3rd Pick from TO and Van

To Vancouver:
Josh Bailey, Jake Gardiner +2nd round pick from Brooklyn and Toronto.

2nd deal: The Flip

To Anaheim; Jake Gardiner and Brooklyn + TO's 2nd round picks.
To Vancouver: Luca Sbisa and Anaheim's 1st round pick.

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Booth-Kesler-Kassian
Higgins-Bailey-Hansen
Malhotra-Lappierre-Pinnozotto

Hamhuis-Bieksa
Edler-Garrison
Sbisa-Alberts/K-Conn

Schneider
Lack
  • 0

#1397 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,507 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:18 PM

Luongo to Toronto:


To: Toronto
Roberto Luongo, Chris Tanev, and Kyle Okposo

To: Brooklyn
Nikolai Kulemin, Keith Ballard, Mason Raymond +3rd Pick from TO and Van

To Vancouver:
Josh Bailey, Jake Gardiner +2nd round pick from Brooklyn and Toronto.

2nd deal: The Flip

To Anaheim; Jake Gardiner and Brooklyn + TO's 2nd round picks.
To Vancouver: Luca Sbisa and Anaheim's 1st round pick.

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Booth-Kesler-Kassian
Higgins-Bailey-Hansen
Malhotra-Lappierre-Pinnozotto

Hamhuis-Bieksa
Edler-Garrison
Sbisa-Alberts/K-Conn

Schneider
Lack

Not bad. However if we're sending Gardiner to Anaheim I would suspect Ryan would be coming back to Vancouver. If not then I'd just hang on to Jake.
  • 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


#1398 WolfxHaley

WolfxHaley

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 950 posts
  • Joined: 07-January 10

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:27 PM

It's the PLAYOFFS

New slogan for the next Stanley Cup Playoffs haha.
  • 0

Posted Image


#1399 WolfxHaley

WolfxHaley

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 950 posts
  • Joined: 07-January 10

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:29 PM

I guess you havent heard of playable injuries and unplayable injuries.

What are these things you speak of.
  • 0

Posted Image


#1400 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,349 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:33 PM

Luongo to Toronto:


I might want to hang onto Jake in that Anaheim deal, Sbisa is good but I think Gardiner has higher upside. now for your other deal.


Toronto:
Gives: Jake Gardiner, Nikolai Kulemin, 2nd, 3rd

Gets: Roberto Luongo, Chris Tanev, and Kyle Okposo

Gardiner = Okposo + Tanev
Luongo = Kulemin + 2nd, 3rd

Not bad valuewise, it's fair IMO, but I still have doubts on if Toronto would be willing to give up Gardiner.


Vancouver:
Gives: Roberto Luongo, Chris Tanev, Keith Ballard, Mason Raymond, 3rd

Gets: Josh Bailey, Jake Gardiner +2nd round pick from Brooklyn and Toronto.

Luongo + Tanev + Raymond = Gardiner + Bailey
Ballard = or slightly < 2nd + 3rd

That's probably how it works out, I don't mind our deal but to give up that many pieces I would like to get either: A player better than Bailey, another piece, or a 1st. I would have to think about it longer but right now I think I'll pass.

Long Island:
Gives: Josh Bailey, Kyle Okposo, 2nd

Gets: Nikolai Kulemin, Keith Ballard, Mason Raymond +3rd Pick from TO and Van

Okposo = Kulemin + 3rd
Bailey + 2nd = Raymond + Ballard + 3rd

I think this is a good deal for NYI, they get depth and if every player plays up to capabilites then it would be outstanding. If I were them I would do it.



I don't think it would go through, someone would probably have an issue with the deal, most likely Toronto or Us.

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 21 November 2012 - 11:34 PM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#1401 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:34 PM

Luongo to Toronto:


To: Toronto
Roberto Luongo, Chris Tanev, and Kyle Okposo

To: Brooklyn
Nikolai Kulemin, Keith Ballard, Mason Raymond +3rd Pick from TO and Van

To Vancouver:
Josh Bailey, Jake Gardiner +2nd round pick from Brooklyn and Toronto.

2nd deal: The Flip

To Anaheim; Jake Gardiner and Brooklyn + TO's 2nd round picks.
To Vancouver: Luca Sbisa and Anaheim's 1st round pick.

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Booth-Kesler-Kassian
Higgins-Bailey-Hansen
Malhotra-Lappierre-Pinnozotto

Hamhuis-Bieksa
Edler-Garrison
Sbisa-Alberts/K-Conn

Schneider
Lack


If we're gonna deal with Anaheim anyways:

VAN
Schneider
Ballard
1st

ANA
Ryan
Fowler
2nd
  • 0

#1402 Ossi Vaananen

Ossi Vaananen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,904 posts
  • Joined: 25-April 12

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:54 PM

New slogan for the next Stanley Cup Playoffs haha.


Lol. No, it's the new slogan to respond to anything ES says. Like when he says Dubnyk is a good goalie, or Paajarvi is the next Gretzky, you just say:

IT'S THE PLAYOFFS
  • 0

2d7ye0p.jpg

 

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#1403 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,507 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:55 PM

If we're gonna deal with Anaheim anyways:

VAN
Schneider
Ballard
1st

ANA
Ryan
Fowler
2nd

Jonas Hiller says hi.
  • 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


#1404 WolfxHaley

WolfxHaley

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 950 posts
  • Joined: 07-January 10

Posted 22 November 2012 - 12:21 AM

Lol. No, it's the new slogan to respond to anything ES says. Like when he says Dubnyk is a good goalie, or Paajarvi is the next Gretzky, you just say:

IT'S THE PLAYOFFS

It all makes sense now haha
  • 0

Posted Image


#1405 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,623 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 22 November 2012 - 08:27 AM

If we're gonna deal with Anaheim anyways:

VAN
Schneider
Ballard
1st

ANA
Ryan
Fowler
2nd


Doesn't Anaheim have a goaltender they kind of like already?
  • 0

#1406 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,869 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 22 November 2012 - 08:48 AM

Luongo to Toronto:


To: Toronto
Roberto Luongo, Chris Tanev, and Kyle Okposo

To: Brooklyn
Nikolai Kulemin, Keith Ballard, Mason Raymond +3rd Pick from TO and Van

To Vancouver:
Josh Bailey, Jake Gardiner +2nd round pick from Brooklyn and Toronto.

2nd deal: The Flip

To Anaheim; Jake Gardiner and Brooklyn + TO's 2nd round picks.
To Vancouver: Luca Sbisa and Anaheim's 1st round pick.

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Booth-Kesler-Kassian
Higgins-Bailey-Hansen
Malhotra-Lappierre-Pinnozotto

Hamhuis-Bieksa
Edler-Garrison
Sbisa-Alberts/K-Conn

Schneider
Lack


Luongo, Tanev, Raymond and Ballard
for
Gardiner and Bailey
Luo for Gardiner straight up is more than enough, the picks cancel out, and Tanev, Raymond and Ballard for Bailiey is...
imo a big overpayment.

How about we forget about Gardiner,
send Luongo to Toronto
who cares what Toronto gives the Isles
and send Okposo and Bailey here.
  • 0

#1407 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,349 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 22 November 2012 - 08:52 AM

Luongo, Tanev, Raymond and Ballard
for
Gardiner and Bailey
Luo for Gardiner straight up is more than enough, the picks cancel out, and Tanev, Raymond and Ballard for Bailiey is...
imo a big overpayment.

How about we forget about Gardiner,
send Luongo to Toronto
who cares what Toronto gives the Isles
and send Okposo and Bailey here.


I would much rather forget about Bailey and instead get Gardiner and Okposo
  • 0

zackass.png


#1408 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,233 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 22 November 2012 - 09:02 AM

If I read correctly, I'm not sure you read correctly, or where you read that - that version seems like a slight revision. Hodgson's beef against the organization - at least the final beef (aside from the prior issues around his handling during his back issues) - started months before the trade deadline and had little or nothing to do with Kesler's injury, and ironically, Hodgson had only a few months in the NHL under his belt at the time.

If you go back and read Tony Gallagher raking up an ice-time controversy,

I think the Canucks are really playing with fire. In fact, I know they’re playing with fire with this business of what they’re doing to Hodgson. They may not have to accede to demands to be traded, if in fact they come, but you don’t want to be messing around.
Once a player starts doing that, starts asking, if you’ve gotta say no, then you’re starting to really sour the relationship and I don’t think they want to go there. They are perilously close to that kind of situation. I mean, if I had been Cody’s agent I would have been asking long ago. They have been way more than patient.


And if you read Hodgson's agent Ritch Winter's uber-pedantic 6400 word response to PITB's take on the 'controversy', you will find that Winters objected to nothing that Gallagher said - apparently the 'controversy' had everything to do with the handlers' dissatisfaction that the rookie was getting only 13/14 minutes of ice time a game. But the idea that he would be more effective than Kesler or take the 2nd line role was not specified.

Tony Gallagher implied that it was an atrocity that Hodgson wasn't given more minutes, whether they came from the top two centers, or the combination of Malhotra/Lapierre, who, as everyone knows, carry the defensive load for Vancouver, enabling the top guys to play to their strengths. IMO there really was nowhere to usurp these minutes, and Hodgson was already being optimized. I don't buy the pump and dump stories - I think you simply pump your player regardless, and Vigneault, despite his reputation, did a fairly solid job of that.


IMO, his agent did not necessarily have the most prudent conception of what is in his player's best interests. Winters undoubtedly intended well for Hodgson by pushing for more minutes for his client, but if you read what he published, he goes so far as to put Hodgson in a class with Steven Stamkos. I mean, that's flattering, but get real. If the object is to win a sizable contract for your client when his ELC comes to an end, wouldn't it be more advantageous to wait out a little more development, let the perception that your client is limited by circumstance in Vancouver percolate, show what a team guy he is by respecting the veterans and thriving in his role, and take advantage of the particular situation, which also favoured his client. In Vancouver, opposition teams had to concentrate on shutting down Henrik, and then the 40 goal scoring Selke winner, and then by the time Hodgson hits the ice, he is seeing not only bottom pairings, but also has two outstanding two-way linemates that allowed him to really play to his strengths, and some outstanding centers to learn from. There was nothing pressing him to be ready to step up to pressure filled big minutes against players who face a high quality of competition - nor did he really need to be an NHL developed defensive center, which really is not a criticism as much as it is the reality of being a rookie who is also primarily an offensive center. Winters/Gallagher and Gillis/Vigneault simply could not see eye to eye - I personally don't agree with the push to, imo prematurely, lobby for a greater role for Hodgson. It was divisive, it wasn't terribly realistic, and the optics of it, I think, really hurt Hodgson. I also think Gallagher sunk his teeth into this one so deeply and publicly that the result was to drive a rift into the team that was fairly irreconcilable. I don't see it as exclusively Hodgson's fault, but I also don't see his camp's position as being at all realistic - and it was divisive - at a fairly sensitive time for Vancouver.
I'm not at all disappointed with the way Gillis resolved it - he got the type of prospect almost all of us wanted, at the position of greatest need - and he sent Hodgson to a team where he could play precisely the type of role he wanted.
Not sure why the whining still ensues - the idea that Hodgson was the key to last year's window is more embellishment than a Kesler dive.

I agree with your point that the goaltending situation is nothing resembling that kind of mess. Luongo and Schneider have handled it exceptionally well.

Good job, good read.
I think Galagher has had it in for Gillis ever since Gillis made it clear he wouldn't kiss his butt.
I thought CoHo was coming along nicely and should have continued through the playoffs as you suggested as a team player. Perhaps his camp was never truly aware of the extent of Kesler's mounting injuries. If he had stuck it out he would have had half a season at the 2nd C position failing a lockout.

CoHo's reality was a slow career start from injuries and then ending on a team with two very top level centers. His future with the Canucks never played to his offensive strengths unless they had moved him to the wing.
  • 0

#1409 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,811 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 22 November 2012 - 11:58 AM

I guess that rule doesn't apply, then, to Dan Hamhuis?


Actually, Hamhuis was injured and therefore could not play.

I believe what WiDeN meant to say was, "You mean players are allowed by their medical staff to play not at 100% because they have a chance at winning the Stanley frick'n Cup even though those trainers and coaches have reputations to uphold?" (see the bold part)

Does this clear things up for you? :)


regards,
G.
  • 1
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#1410 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,511 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 22 November 2012 - 12:50 PM

Lol. No, it's the new slogan to respond to anything ES says. Like when he says Dubnyk is a good goalie, or Paajarvi is the next Gretzky, you just say:

IT'S THE PLAYOFFS

Or you could ignore him - just a suggestion...
  • 1

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

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

 





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.