Boudrias Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 No I don't gotta think that. I think there is no urgency to make a deal - and in addition there was the draft, and then there was free agency, and then there was/is the CBA negotiations and lockout - all those things add uncertainty. What players would be acquired in the draft, what players would be lost and signed in free agency, what will happen with the salary cap and floor? If Garrison had re-signed in Florida, that would effect if and what young blueliners they might consider moving. For all we know, Gillis may be holding out for Gudbranson, while Tallon is willing to move Bjugstad. These guys simply don't apprise "insiders" of what deals they are negotiating, particularly not distant guys unrelated to their teams in any serious way - and by that, I mean that Dreger is an outsider who knows shat about what Gillis and Tallon are up to (why would he feed real information to a Leafs insider?) If anything Tallon would posture that he is offering nothing or next to in order to keep the Leafs from countering with offers that run the bidding up. Anyhow - your deal in my opinion hurts the Canucks - I'd consider Frolik a waste of cap space. Perhaps if you'd like to propose a deal of Frolik for Raymond straight up it might make a little sense, given Frolik is a RW and they have similar cap hits (but no, Frolik and his 5 goals, 10 assists and -10 in 63 games is not better than Raymond). What's the point of adding Frolik and still needing to upgrade (with more dead cap space)? Leddy in my opinion is not needed (not going to repeat the reasons why) but in addition he is an RFA who will be looking for a significant raise on his 1.1 million cap hit, and the timing couldn't really be worse, considering Edler has to be accommodated this year. Leddy would be a distant, distant second to Edler and would require making another move. No you can't throw Ballard in the Luongo deal - Chicago can't absorb both cap hits. Tanev belongs here (yes, we really need him), his cap hit will remain sensible for a while and I think you are underestimating him. Leddy doesn't make sense and in taking him and Frolk, you'd leave very little cap room to work with. I'd much rather have a couple very solid prospects and a guy with huge upside at RW - Upshall - whose cap space, if he is injured, can be used. I wouldn't be surprised if Frolik winds up on waivers in the near future anyhow. Luongo on the other hand... that is just a plain cheap-shot on the part of Dreger - has absolutely no credibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 If indeed we were offered Schenn for Luongo and didn't take it, that was a mistake on MG's part IMO. But in all fairness I can see him not wanting to jump at the first offer. Unfortuatnely, that offer is now off the table. As a result, we are probably better holding on to Lou and tandeming the goalies until something better can be done, like at the trade deadline or in the off season before next year's season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 No I don't gotta think that. I think there is no urgency to make a deal - and in addition there was the draft, and then there was free agency, and then there was/is the CBA negotiations and lockout - all those things add uncertainty. What players would be acquired in the draft, what players would be lost and signed in free agency, what will happen with the salary cap and floor? If Garrison had re-signed in Florida, that would effect if and what young blueliners they might consider moving. For all we know, Gillis may be holding out for Gudbranson, while Tallon is willing to move Bjugstad. These guys simply don't apprise "insiders" of what deals they are negotiating, particularly not distant guys unrelated to their teams in any serious way - and by that, I mean that Dreger is an outsider who knows shat about what Gillis and Tallon are up to (why would he feed real information to a Leafs insider?) If anything Tallon would posture that he is offering nothing or next to in order to keep the Leafs from countering with offers that run the bidding up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunningWild Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 Wow. Bjugstad and Canucks, interesting read: http://www.startribu...11.html?refer=y Into June, Bjugstad started to lean toward returning to school. Then, in late June, Bjugstad got wind that the Vancouver Canucks were pursuing him in a trade for goalie Roberto Luongo contingent upon signing Cory Schneider long-term. The trade talk came directly from the Canucks' brass, who wanted to know if Bjugstad planned to leave school. Panthers General Manager Dale Tallon heard about it and made clear to Bjugstad that the Panthers were not trading him. "Draft day, I was driving and I heard the talk that I might be getting traded to Vancouver, which was really random to me," Bjugstad said. "It didn't go through, but it showed me ... it's a business. My uncle [former Gopher and North Star Scott Bjugstad] talks about it all the time. College hockey, you're playing with your buddies. ... Get to the NHL, and it's a business. It's not a bad business by any means, so I can't complain if it's my job someday." By late June, Bjugstad essentially decided he would return to school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 I just can't see any scenario where Luongo's value increases as he continues to be with our team, so I don't know how Mike Gillis could reasonably be "holding out" for Gudbranson, or, really, anybody. The longer that he's our backup (if/when hockey starts), the lower his value gets. There should be urgency, before NHL fans/teams become comfortable with the notion that Luongo is an NHL backup. It will hurt his value. It actually might be better if they just sent him home. Frolik's 22 years old. Last season was a disaster, and even the previous one was not very encouraging. However, he did have consecutive 21-goal years in his first two years in the league. He can produce. I actually am nowhere near as bearish towards Raymond as most people are on this site, and I think signing him for $2M or whatever it was was probably Gillis' best move of the summer. But Frolik's interesting. Not a lot of risk, tons of reward potential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 Dreger, like most sports anaylist, struggles to stay relevant. Especially tough during a lockout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkeeterHansen Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 We're stuck with Lapierre & Malhotra for this year, anyway, so unless they're going somewhere else, it makes no sense to acquire a 3rd line C. If Mason Raymond is a top-six forward on this team, Michael Frolik also certainly has a chance to be. And is Kyle Beach not a prospect? You keep forgetting about his inclusion in this. Sure, just completely ignore the fact that along with those 3 goals, Leddy had 34 assists. A mere 11X times more than Tanev's career totals of 3 assists in 54 NHL games played. See the difference yet? How about the fact that Leddy's also 2 years younger than Tanev. Registering yet? Sure he is. He's ready. He's better than Dale Weise, that I can assure you of. He happens to be on Chicago, where they have an embarrassment of young forward riches. But even HF has said that they wouldn't be surprised to see him in the NHL this year, mostly due to his extremely rare skillset. Shawn Matthias? That's who you're suggesting? Please, refresh my memory. Just post your proposal again. This is the 5th time I've asked. I'm not selling them as "great" assets at all. If you look at Chicago's cap, the reality is that they probably don't have room for Leddy, who's due for a big raise next year. Seabrook, Keith, Hjalmarsson, Oduya, and Montador are all signed to pretty significant, multi-year deals. Leddy becomes expendable to them, because, really, Duncan Keith is their PP QB anyway. Michael Frolik is not a "great" asset; he's a boom-or-bust type. I liked very much what I saw of him in the 2011 playoffs, but then he went on to completely vanish this year. He's a gamble. And again, with Shaw, Saad, Smith, Kruger, etc., they are very robust in the category of offensively capable prospects that could replace him. Kyle Beach is somebody that a lot of people have already written-off. "Great" asset? Probably not. Intriguing potential? Sure. I doubt that Chicago would want to trade him, to be honest, just due to the rarity of his skillset. But I'm just a huge fan, so I included him as it is possible that he's fallen out of favour with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf47 Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 What do you mean "we're stuck with" them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagori78 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 As dramatic as usual king. Luongo's value isn't rising (no one is suggesting that Luongo is a bottle of wine), his value isn't dropping - he's not a volatile stock. He's not the Canucks backup. The offseason hasn't even ended. Your sense of urgency serves absolutely nothing except to evidence your inexperienced mindset. There should be patience. Nervous nellies on a hair-trigger would make gawd awful GMs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 What do you mean "we're stuck with" them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf47 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 What game of poker? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf47 Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Brilliant...we finally agree on something ES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.