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

#1771 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

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

Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:15 PM

Grabner: 6'0", 185
Upshall: 6'0", 200

Those 15 pounds can be accounted for by the fact that Upshall's 4 years his senior - not that it's really important, anyway, as it relates to Grabner's game.


Those 15 lbs can also be accounted for body type. Grabner has a lighter frame, while Upshall has a heavier frame. If Grabner puts an extra 15 lbs on to his frame he's going to be overweight. This will not help his conditioning or his speed. And it is important to Upshall, because those extra 15 lbs on his frame allow him to be somewhat successful at the more physical style of game he plays.

Heck, look at Smyl. He was around 5' 8" and played at around 190 lbs.


Talking about physicality, "hits" is a stat that is totally vague and cannot be looked at with any sort of reliability. I'm not saying that Grabner's physical, but even if Upshall has a load of hits to his stat line, think anyone's scared of him/looking over their shoulder in going to get the puck in the corner? Fat chance.


I suspect that a defender is looking over their shoulder at either of these players but for different reasons. Upshall threatens a body check which could lead to a turn over. Grabner's speed threatens a stick check and a puck steal.

And it doesn't have to be a situation of, "OMFGUPSHALLCUMMINTOOHITZME!!!!!!" A good physical player can also knock the other player down or merely off balance, tie them up in front of the net, break their stride, rub them out along the boards, and if a big hit comes along, then they do that as well. Grabner might be able to do these things. Upshall will do things, and have the physical ability to do them better.


And why didn't you bring up the goals per game ratio? Grabner's 0.34 is over 50% higher than Upshall's 0.23. Why wouldn't he be able to crack the top 6? 54 goals in the last 2 years as a 23/24 year-old say hello. He's done his job.


I revisit Smyl. He had a goals per game ratio of .29 and a points per game ratio of .75 over his 896 games. He was maybe not even as fast as Upshall let alone Grabner. So, would you take Grabner or Smyl (assuming Smyl was in his early prime).

I also note that you slide over the fact that Grabner had a very serious drop-off in goal production last year, and a very abrupt rise in his +/-. This drop-off in goal production is of the same level as Raymond. Just saying.


Oh, and let's not forget that he was the NHL's fastest skater at the 2011 ASG. :bigblush:


Yeah, and in four years time, when he's 15 pounds heavier, I'm sure Grabner will still be the fastest skater in the 2015 ASG, assuming he gets a head start. :)


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

#1772 TmanVan

TmanVan

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 613 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:20 PM

Luongo for Bozak, a guy who is a UFA in seven months, and Kadri? Can someone explain how they see Kadri fitting in the scheme? Is Kyle Wellwood 2.0 going to bump Kesler to the third line? Is Kadri a third line center? Is he better than Schroeder?
Where are these reports/rumours coming from?


Kadri's first year in the AHL: 44gp, 17g, 24 a, 41 points -> o.93 points per game
Schroeders first year : 61gp, 10g, 18a, 28 points -> 0.45 points per game

Kadri's second year: 48gp, 18g, 22a, 40 points -> 0.83 ppg
Schroeders second year: 76gp, 21g, 23a, 44 points -> 0.57 ppg

Kadri this year: 17gp, 2g, 13a, 15 points -> 0.88 ppg
Schroeder : 18gp,7g, 4a, 11 points -> 0.61 ppg

and for what its worth.......

Kadri in the nhl : 51 gp, 8g, 11a, 19 points - > 0.37 ppg
Kassian : 44 gp, 4g, 6a, 10 points -> 0.22 ppg


Kadri has been thrown under the bus in Toronto simply because he was/is expected to jump into their first line C role and be their savour. Yeah, he may have been a couple pounds over weight but thats something that can easily be dealt with. He has the skill, and definetly the playmaking ability that we need at center moving forward.
  • 0

#1773 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,208 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:21 PM

The real problem here is what are the Canucks going to do with two backup goaltenders?
Where are we going to get a legitimate #1?
  • 0

#1774 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,574 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:23 PM

The sheer idiocy of some people on this board amazes me. 'We have no 1D.' Last time I checked Hamhuis is a 1D on any NHL team, a 2D on just a few. 'Kesler an average 2C.' Last time I checked it was just two years ago he won the Selke as the BEST TWO-WAY CENTER/FORWARD IN THE GAME. My God :picard:


Everyone on this team sucks except for Luongo apparently.
  • 0

#1775 TmanVan

TmanVan

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 613 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:24 PM

dp

Edited by TmanVan, 30 November 2012 - 08:28 PM.

  • 0

#1776 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:41 PM

The real problem here is what are the Canucks going to do with two backup goaltenders?
Where are we going to get a legitimate #1?

seriously????
  • 0

#1777 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:44 PM

seriously????


Are you serious in asking "seriously????" ?
  • 1

#1778 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,216 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:49 PM

Luongo for Bozak, a guy who is a UFA in seven months, and Kadri? Can someone explain how they see Kadri (Kyle Wellwood 2.0) fitting in? Is he going to bump Kesler to the third line? Is Kadri a third line center? Is he better than Schroeder? Not imo - and I'd be willing to bet the Canucks would not trade Schroeder for Kadri one for one. If Kadri, oddly enough, were considered to fit here, then where would Bozak fit? Two more centers who'd essentially overlap each other? This deal makes no sense.
Where are these reports/rumours coming from?
Not going to happen.


Bozak fits in on the 3rd line, he's a response defensive player, good on draws, backchecks, has good enough size (he isn't a small player), skates well, brings good offense.

Kadri is better than Schroeder for sure and I'm a huge Schroeder fan, Kadri can play wing and center as far as I know, he has great offensive qualities, either player could play 2nd or 3rd line when needed, and if Kadri isn't ready (Which I think he was last year for sure) then he can always play in the AHL for a bit longer. And he probably has higher upside than most of our prospects aside from maybe Jensen.

The real problem here is what are the Canucks going to do with two backup goaltenders?
Where are we going to get a legitimate #1?


:lol: :picard:

I am big Lu fan but the writing is on the wall, he has to be moved. Schneider is our guy.

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 30 November 2012 - 08:50 PM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#1779 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,208 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:49 PM

seriously????


:shock:

(I'm mimicking the claims that Burrows is a third liner, Kesler is a average 2nd line C, the D is laughable, Higgins is weak, etc...)
  • 0

#1780 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:53 PM

:shock:

(I'm mimicking the claims that Burrows is a third liner, Kesler is a average 2nd line C, the D is laughable, Higgins is weak, etc...)


Burrows IS a third liner, Kesler IS. An average 2C, the D is not as much laughable as it is by committee, Higgins is the new Gelinas.
  • 0

#1781 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

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

Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:56 PM

Luongo for Bozak, a guy who is a UFA in seven months, and Kadri? Can someone explain how they see Kadri (Kyle Wellwood 2.0) fitting in? Is he going to bump Kesler to the third line? Is Kadri a third line center? Is he better than Schroeder? Not imo - and I'd be willing to bet the Canucks would not trade Schroeder for Kadri one for one. If Kadri, oddly enough, were considered to fit here, then where would Bozak fit? Two more centers who'd essentially overlap each other? This deal makes no sense.
Where are these reports/rumours coming from?
Not going to happen.


It is interesting to see the number of proposals which might have looked okay in July, but are less viable in November.

I agree about the number of guys being mentioned who would now be nothing more than long term rentals by the time the season gets underway (assuming there is a season). Bozak might be able to help the team, but he could possibly also be acquired in a different deal rather than be a centerpiece of deal for Luongo. And if there is a season, depending on how many games there are, maybe the Canucks will just run with Malhotra, Lapierre, Schroeder and Ebbett since Kesler will likely be ready to go by the start of the season. And for all we know, Gillis already has Arnott lined up as the guy who was going to take over the 2/3C duties prior to the lockout.

I believe that Gillis has a better chance of getting a useful roster player if the deal is with a solid playoff club rather than with one which is still re-building (eg. Toronto, Florida... yes, Florida).

Depending on what happens with the new CBA, if the Flyers can rid themselves of Bryzgalov's contract they may enter the Luongo sweepstakes. On the other hand (just to contradict myself), Tampa Bay (who did finish out of the playoffs) has a bit of depth on the RW, and Purcell just signed (as of a few months ago) a new 3 year deal with a very reasonable cap hit.

Teams like Toronto and Florida might have guys who could fill a role on the Canucks, but if they traded away any of the really good ones in order to get Luongo, then their team now has a large hole elsewhere which needs to be re-filled. I see these teams looking to acquire Luongo using prospects and picks as the main piece, with perhaps an extra contract added to help with the cap hit.

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

#1782 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,327 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 30 November 2012 - 09:02 PM

Burrows IS a third liner, Kesler IS. An average 2C, the D is not as much laughable as it is by committee, Higgins is the new Gelinas.

Dude. Do you even watch the Canucks? Or are you just this naturally dumb?
  • 2

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


#1783 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,208 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 30 November 2012 - 09:02 PM

Bozak fits in on the 3rd line, he's a response defensive player, good on draws, backchecks, has good enough size (he isn't a small player), skates well, brings good offense.

Kadri is better than Schroeder for sure and I'm a huge Schroeder fan, Kadri can play wing and center as far as I know, he has great offensive qualities, either player could play 2nd or 3rd line when needed, and if Kadri isn't ready (Which I think he was last year for sure) then he can always play in the AHL for a bit longer.


So the result of the Luongo deal is to add two more, at best, third line centers...

Which would leave Bozak, Lapierre, Malhotra, Schroeder and Kadri competing for two spots.

My problem with this type of deal is that it has no balance / makes virtually no sense (to the Canucks, let alone the Leafs who can't afford to drop a couple centers). Take one of these guys out of the deal (preferably Kadri), Bozak's value is limited by the fact there is no term to his contract, add a RW like Frattin (or Biggs), a blueline prospect (perhaps a guy like Holzer), and a pick...

Edited by oldnews, 30 November 2012 - 09:05 PM.

  • 1

#1784 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,216 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 30 November 2012 - 09:10 PM

So the result of the Luongo deal is to add two more, at best, third line centers...

Which would leave Bozak, Lapierre, Malhotra, Schroeder and Kadri competing for two spots.

My problem with this type of deal is that it has no balance / makes virtually no sense (to the Canucks, let alone the Leafs who can't afford to drop a couple centers). Take one of these guys out of the deal (preferably Kadri), Bozak's value is limited by the fact there is no term to his contract, add a RW like Frattin (or Biggs), a blueline prospect (perhaps a guy like Holzer), and a pick...


Kadri has the offensive skills to play in the top 6, Manny and Lappy would be great as 4th liners, Bozak could take the 3rd spot, and I guess Schroeder would continue his season in the AHL and gets a big chance next year, not that alot of people here have faith he will be something.

Kadri will be more than a 3rd liner, offensively he already is. Bozak played top 6 in Toronto, I don't think he is a bonified top 6 guy but I would take him in the top 6 over Manny or Lappy anyday. Bozak is a 2nd/3rd tweener center IMO and Kadri is the same but he is a little different due to the circumstances of him being not completely proven.
  • 0

zackass.png


#1785 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,208 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 30 November 2012 - 09:11 PM

Burrows IS a third liner, Kesler IS. An average 2C, the D is not as much laughable as it is by committee, Higgins is the new Gelinas.


Ok. I see.
Burrows is a third liner....and a second liner, and a first liner, and pretty much anything else you need him to be.
Kesler is an average 2C... (if we're talking about Team USA, Russia, Sweden or Canada...)
the D is by committee.... a committee of four top pair blueliners (another top 4 in the third pairing and a future top 4)....
Higgins is the new Gelinas.... uh, yeah, because Gelinas was f#$%kin awesome!!! (two seasons in Vancouver, two 30 goal seasons in Vancouver, fan favorite, Keenan was an ingrate!)

Edited by oldnews, 30 November 2012 - 09:19 PM.

  • 0

#1786 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 30 November 2012 - 09:11 PM

:shock:

(I'm mimicking the claims that Burrows is a third liner, Kesler is a average 2nd line C, the D is laughable, Higgins is weak, etc...)

whew !!!!
  • 0

#1787 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,216 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 30 November 2012 - 09:16 PM

Burrows IS a third liner, Kesler IS. An average 2C, the D is not as much laughable as it is by committee, Higgins is the new Gelinas.


If Kesler is an average 2C explain having two 70 point season's and a major NHL trophy under his belt?

Higgins is a hard worker with a slightly above average skillset, brings grit, speed, decent offense, good two-way play. I'll take him on my 2nd/3rd line anyday.

The D has 3 solid pairs with the addition of Garrison aswell as the maturation of Tanev and even Edler.

Burrows is definitely not a 3rd liner, more like above average 2nd liner.


Your post is laughable really.
  • 1

zackass.png


#1788 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

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

Posted 30 November 2012 - 09:22 PM

Burrows IS a third liner, Kesler IS. An average 2C, the D is not as much laughable as it is by committee, Higgins is the new Gelinas.


It would be nice to have a team that was so good that Burrows was on the 3rd line, and Kesler was the 3C. Some teams seem to not even be able to manage to get even one guy who is a legitimate top-6 player.

1.) Just out of curiosity, would you list all of the teams which have a top-6 comprised of top-6 players.

2.) The D does not have a top-4 comprised of all-stars. I haven't seen a team which could claim such a thing since teams like Montreal back in the day. I assume you are speaking to the lack of a single top d-man, a Weber, a Chara, a whom-ever who logs all of the big minutes etc.

So, aside from Nashville (because they have Weber), Boston (because they have Chara), and perhaps Minnesota(Suter), which teams have a better D (top-4) than the Canucks?

3.) Higgins is the new Gelinas? Hmm, Gelinas had a .24 goals per game avg. Higgins is currently at .26. Gelinas scored 30+ goals for the Canucks, twice. Higgins has scored 20+ in his career in 3 seasons, and might have done it again last year had he not missed 11 games. Not bad for a 2nd/3rd liner. He's also at about .5 pts per game, which is also not too shabby.

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

#1789 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,208 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 30 November 2012 - 09:24 PM

Kadri has been thrown under the bus in Toronto simply because he was/is expected to jump into their first line C role and be their savour. Yeah, he may have been a couple pounds over weight but thats something that can easily be dealt with. He has the skill, and definetly the playmaking ability that we need at center moving forward.


“His body fat today is probably in the bottom three to five guys in our whole camp. That’s unacceptable." Marlies coach Dallas Eakins.
Kadri, who used to be accused of being too small, defended himself. He said his body-fat ratio was better than last year.
“It definitely could have been a little better; it’s definitely not bad,” said Kadri.
Kadri admitted he really doesn’t like some vegetables.
“The squash and the spinach, these healthy dressings you’ve got to put on your salad, I’m not a huge fan of."

Training with Roberts, dining with Wellwood... :bigblush:
  • 2

#1790 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

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

Posted 30 November 2012 - 09:32 PM

Kadri's first year in the AHL: 44gp, 17g, 24 a, 41 points -> o.93 points per game
Schroeders first year : 61gp, 10g, 18a, 28 points -> 0.45 points per game

Kadri's second year: 48gp, 18g, 22a, 40 points -> 0.83 ppg
Schroeders second year: 76gp, 21g, 23a, 44 points -> 0.57 ppg

Kadri this year: 17gp, 2g, 13a, 15 points -> 0.88 ppg
Schroeder : 18gp,7g, 4a, 11 points -> 0.61 ppg

and for what its worth.......

Kadri in the nhl : 51 gp, 8g, 11a, 19 points - > 0.37 ppg
Kassian : 44 gp, 4g, 6a, 10 points -> 0.22 ppg


Kadri has been thrown under the bus in Toronto simply because he was/is expected to jump into their first line C role and be their savour. Yeah, he may have been a couple pounds over weight but thats something that can easily be dealt with. He has the skill, and definetly the playmaking ability that we need at center moving forward.


Not to knock Kadri, but the stats you provided could also be said to indicate that he is losing ground or standing still while Schroeder is improving.

I don't believe that Kadri is as bad as some are making him out to be. This being said, I do have to question things like his attitude. The Gary Roberts summer workout followed by showing up to camp being overweight is reason for the Leafs to be troubled.


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

#1791 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,208 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 30 November 2012 - 09:58 PM

Kadri has the offensive skills to play in the top 6, Manny and Lappy would be great as 4th liners, Bozak could take the 3rd spot, and I guess Schroeder would continue his season in the AHL and gets a big chance next year, not that alot of people here have faith he will be something.

Kadri will be more than a 3rd liner, offensively he already is. Bozak played top 6 in Toronto, I don't think he is a bonified top 6 guy but I would take him in the top 6 over Manny or Lappy anyday. Bozak is a 2nd/3rd tweener center IMO and Kadri is the same but he is a little different due to the circumstances of him being not completely proven.


Ok. I'll try to be reasonable... but it is the Leafs we are talking about here, haha.
Picking up a pair of centers is probably not such a bad idea - as you point out, Kadri could be converted to wing - and Bozak might also be a good guy to play at RW. Having a pair of centers on a line is never a bad idea - and with Kesler's health issues, perhaps loadiing up on centers is the ticket.
I'm not denying that Kadri has talent - I think Schroeder will be a good NHL center - Kadri may be as well, and it would be extremely sweet if he were to break out in Vancouver after Toronto has been so disappointed... tbh, it'd be interesting to see how Kadri does given the opportunity that Hodgson had.
  • 0

#1792 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,216 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 30 November 2012 - 10:36 PM

Ok. I'll try to be reasonable... but it is the Leafs we are talking about here, haha.
Picking up a pair of centers is probably not such a bad idea - as you point out, Kadri could be converted to wing - and Bozak might also be a good guy to play at RW. Having a pair of centers on a line is never a bad idea - and with Kesler's health issues, perhaps loadiing up on centers is the ticket.
I'm not denying that Kadri has talent - I think Schroeder will be a good NHL center - Kadri may be as well, and it would be extremely sweet if he were to break out in Vancouver after Toronto has been so disappointed... tbh, it'd be interesting to see how Kadri does given the opportunity that Hodgson had.


I think the Leafs are deep enough at center, they have some underperforming players (Connolly, Lombardi) Who should be good top 9 Center's for them, and Kadri wasn't on the team anyways so they only lose 1 roster player. Plus they also have Colbourne who is probably going to be close to NHL ready soon.

For us getting Bozak is simple, he will slot in to the 3rd line, and will be able to move up and down the line-up and be effective. Kadri is a bit more difficult, he is still a prospect even though he has played games, he has offensive skill, can play wing, and if he can be put in the role that Hodgson was in maybe, or even the 2nd W spot and we can use his offensive skill he could breakout in a big way offensively. Atleast that's what we would hope for when we would get him because he has high upside IMO, and he would probably be one of if not our top prospect.
  • 0

zackass.png


#1793 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 01 December 2012 - 07:19 AM

Name another goaltender who carries elite status, who has flamed out spectacularly year after year for no apparent reason?
I dont know whether or not Cory will be less reliable. What are the odds though of him having the constant inconsistency issues that Luongo has had? I would say slim to none.


Neither Bryzgalov nor Fleury looked particularly good in this years' playoffs.

But honestly, when it's a 7-0, 8-0 affair, is it really the goalie, or has the team simply quit after being down? My guess is that with this bunch, it's far more likely to be the latter.
  • 0

#1794 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 01 December 2012 - 07:23 AM

Kadri has been thrown under the bus in Toronto simply because he was/is expected to jump into their first line C role and be their savour. Yeah, he may have been a couple pounds over weight but thats something that can easily be dealt with. He has the skill, and definetly the playmaking ability that we need at center moving forward.


I agree. If Gillis is able to turn Luongo into Bozak & Kadri, bravo. The fact that Bozak's a UFA in 7 months is really not that relevant; the point is that he's a supplement to the lineup today, the obvious 3rd line C, and Kadri just puts another skilled guy in our cupboard, a guy with high potential who's probably NHL-ready.
  • 0

#1795 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 01 December 2012 - 07:26 AM

So the result of the Luongo deal is to add two more, at best, third line centers...

Which would leave Bozak, Lapierre, Malhotra, Schroeder and Kadri competing for two spots.

My problem with this type of deal is that it has no balance / makes virtually no sense (to the Canucks, let alone the Leafs who can't afford to drop a couple centers). Take one of these guys out of the deal (preferably Kadri), Bozak's value is limited by the fact there is no term to his contract, add a RW like Frattin (or Biggs), a blueline prospect (perhaps a guy like Holzer), and a pick...


Are you saying that you'd rather have Luke Schenn?

:bigblush:
  • 0

#1796 WiDeN

WiDeN

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,751 posts
  • Joined: 08-December 06

Posted 01 December 2012 - 07:47 AM

I agree. If Gillis is able to turn Luongo into Bozak & Kadri, bravo. The fact that Bozak's a UFA in 7 months is really not that relevant; the point is that he's a supplement to the lineup today, the obvious 3rd line C, and Kadri just puts another skilled guy in our cupboard, a guy with high potential who's probably NHL-ready.

Can someone let MG know this please.
  • 0

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

Posted Image
2 0 14 S t a n l e y C u p C h a m p i o n s


#1797 ice orca

ice orca

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,346 posts
  • Joined: 07-October 10

Posted 01 December 2012 - 07:51 AM

I agree. If Gillis is able to turn Luongo into Bozak & Kadri, bravo. The fact that Bozak's a UFA in 7 months is really not that relevant; the point is that he's a supplement to the lineup today, the obvious 3rd line C, and Kadri just puts another skilled guy in our cupboard, a guy with high potential who's probably NHL-ready.

Kadri is just another small soft forward with the mythical good potential card attached to him. The Canucks dont need that kind of player, they need a good greasy big forward who can score and bust teeth when called upon. Red flags are up when Kadri came into camp with big body fat after going on the great Gary Roberts plan in the summer. There is a reason most leaf fans want him in a trade for Luongo, they know he is a bust.
  • 0

#1798 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,197 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 01 December 2012 - 08:00 AM

Kadri is just another small soft forward with the mythical good potential card attached to him. The Canucks dont need that kind of player, they need a good greasy big forward who can score and bust teeth when called upon. Red flags are up when Kadri came into camp with big body fat after going on the great Gary Roberts plan in the summer. There is a reason most leaf fans want him in a trade for Luongo, they know he is a bust.

What is it about Van fans who positively gush about To Laffer wannabees. Who's dispensing the Laffer koolaid?

For those debating Burrows role, please consult Stevie Y!
  • 0

#1799 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 01 December 2012 - 08:08 AM

Can someone let MG know this please.


Why is it so important? We'd be acquiring a guy in a contract year full of motivation. There's also a good chance that his offensive numbers would go down, playing on the 3rd line, meaning that we might then be able to extend him at a discount.

And if he's not a fit, cut bait at year end.

Why is it so important that he has a multi-year contract?
  • 0

#1800 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 01 December 2012 - 08:11 AM

Kadri is just another small soft forward with the mythical good potential card attached to him. The Canucks dont need that kind of player, they need a good greasy big forward who can score and bust teeth when called upon. Red flags are up when Kadri came into camp with big body fat after going on the great Gary Roberts plan in the summer. There is a reason most leaf fans want him in a trade for Luongo, they know he is a bust.


Kassian is just another big strong forward with the mythical Milan Lucic potential card attached to him - what's your point?

Not sure what your expectations are out of trading Luongo, but if we're able to get a top-10 pick from 3 years ago, who's put up good numbers in the AHL, and who would definitely be much more highly regarded if he was on any other team but Toronto, that's a pretty big win, in my books.
  • 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.