• Announcements

    • StealthNuck

      All Threads Must Contain Tags!   07/25/2017

      ALL THREADS MUST CONTAIN TAGS   All threads in this forum must contain tags prefixed to topic titles. The purpose of the tags is to eliminate confusion in recent threads lists, and to create an organized and consistent environment. Moderators may immediately lock and thread that does not contain tags.    Tags must be placed at the start of your thread title, following this exact formatting:    [Tag] Thread Title   Here are some of the most used popular tags:    [Proposal]
      A trade, or trades, for next season, or even the off-season.
      [Off-Season]
      FA signings, off-season trades for RFA's, UFA's rights etc...
      [Value Of]
      (A question regarding a players worth, whether from another team, or the Canucks)
      [Speculation] Posting a rumor (with a source of course), but providing why it could be possible for the Canucks to land that player.   [Discussion]
      Thoughts on team trading strategy and composition.   Please feel free to create your own tag if none of these suit your thread.   

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

King of the ES

My Official Roberto Luongo Proposal

Recommended Posts

Jesus, a lot of you have a hard-on for Kane. I don't think he is any way a fit for this team (no offense Darth Kane). A Luongo for Kane trade is terrible for us because:

1) Luongo would do better in Chicago than Kane in Vancouver (we aren't exactly the grittiest team right now, and adding Kane would just soften our top 6), while Luongo immediately fills a need Chicago has.

2) We are taking more money back.

3) Luongo has struggled recently and lost his job as a starter, but Kane hasn't been lighting it up either. A smallish player that gets 66 points in 82 games is not worth over 6 mil. We are giving the Sedins a hard time for being PPG players last year; imagine the heat Kane will get.

The only player I'd want out of Chicago that they'd even consider giving up is Bolland (not likely though), but they are lacking centres so I don't see it happening. We would have a sick shutdown 3rd line with him as centre, which would be better than Malhotra's line even before his injury IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In general, and I know you're trying to be cordial to this group, the reality is that most fans of this team badly overvalue their players. They don't have the ability to think of the transaction from the other side's perspective.

I just actually responded to a post where someone posted 5 different Luongo trade options, one of them including Ryan Murray+, one of them including Morgan Reilly+, one of them including Filip Forsberg+, one other laugher, and one including Nick Bjugstad+, which may be reasonable, except that if Florida was willing to trade him, we probably wouldn't be discussing this any longer, as you've gotta think that the trade would've taken place by now.

My deal makes the most sense, by far, of anything that I've seen on this site.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus, a lot of you have a hard-on for Kane. I don't think he is any way a fit for this team (no offense Darth Kane). A Luongo for Kane trade is terrible for us because:

1) Luongo would do better in Chicago than Kane in Vancouver (we aren't exactly the grittiest team right now, and adding Kane would just soften our top 6), while Luongo immediately fills a need Chicago has.

2) We are taking more money back.

3) Luongo has struggled recently and lost his job as a starter, but Kane hasn't been lighting it up either. A smallish player that gets 66 points in 82 games is not worth over 6 mil. We are giving the Sedins a hard time for being PPG players last year; imagine the heat Kane will get.

The only player I'd want out of Chicago that they'd even consider giving up is Bolland (not likely though), but they are lacking centres so I don't see it happening. We would have a sick shutdown 3rd line with him as centre, which would be better than Malhotra's line even before his injury IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I absolutely believe that a deal involving Chicago and Vancouver could, and should, involve one of their top 3 forwards. Of their top 3, my focus would be on Patrick Kane. Yes, I know there's a lot of history between Kane and the city of Vancouver, but I believe it can be overcome.

Kane is a proven winner and thrives on critical situations. To some, his attitude needs adjusting, but I am one who says it doesn't. It is his attitude that fuels his will to succeed and it is his attitude that makes him a star. One must remember that although he is a pro, he is still just a kid. All hockey players handle success in different ways. His behavior is his way. I further feel that playing with a solid core of veterans who show professionalism and poise could assist in helping him to mature as a man ( as long as it doesn't affect his game ),

Kane has, at times, been trying on Chicago fans, His off ice antics have been well documented to the dismay of Chicago management. The chance to dump a contravercial player, while improving in a critical position may be welcome to Chicago brass.

In order to secure Lou, Chicago would have to drop salary. As their respective annual incomes are similar, it only makes sense.

The biggest obsticle would be the NTCs which both players have. Once it becomes knowledge that Chicago wished to deal Kane, I feel he would waive it. No player wants to be where they are not wanted and a chance to stick it to your old team with a mortal enemy may be very inticing, Add to that, the fact that Vancouver is a perennial contender and a beautiful city to live in and I believe he accepts it.

Lou wants out of Vancouver. As time goes on, I believe his resolve will weaken. As he sits on the bench watching game after game, his want to compete will take over and acceptance will become more his mind set.

Another potential blocker is the desire for each side not to be one upped. The Vancouver/Chicago rivalry is one of the fiercest in all of sport and has resulted in some of the best games I've seen in recent memory. For one or the other to win a cup with the pieces of this deal being big factors in it would be an embarrassment to the other team, especially if we face one another in the playoffs. However, I would see this deal as an enhancement to an already furious relationship, and would watch with more interest. Games would become, in my mind, epic battles and it is the fans who would benefit the most.

To Vancouver:

Patrick Kane

1st rnd pick 2013

To Chicago:

Roberto Luongo

David Booth

Chris Tanev

In my eyes we get great returns for what we give up.

We get the piece that, in my opinion, puts our forward lines over the top, We also get a 1st rnd pick in a season that may involve an open lottery for the 1st overall pick. In my mind, the more chances the better. If hockey is played this year, then a second pick opens up more options for drafting or dealing for assets.

Chicago gets their premier goalie, a forward to replace the loss of Kane and an up and coming defenseman with defensive skills.

The fact is Lou wants out so we really lose nothing here. Booth is suspect in my mind and has not found a good fit here. We have assets within our system that can replace him. Our defense is deep and I don,t see Tanev getting a real shot at a full time spot here. It is my opinion that all involved in the deal are expendable and would serve Chicago well.

New lines:

Sedin - Sedin - Burrows

Jensen - Kesler - Kane

Higgins - Malhotra - Hansen

Weise - Lapierre - Kassian

Pinizzotto, Raymond, Schroeder

Edler - Bieksa

Hamhuis - Garrison

Ballard - ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as I would love to see a Luongo+ for Kane deal go down, I would much rather see a Luongo for Marian Hossa deal happen, mainly because one of my buddies is a Hawks fan and Hossa is his favourite player ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hossa is a great player on any team but I would like to see more North American talent in the line up. Kane can also play two positions, which I am always for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Vancouver essentially deals Lu for Comeau, Backlund, Nemisz, Howse,and Crawford? The winner is obvious here. Calgary is the obvious loser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hossa is a far better player than most North American guys. I've heard the knock on European players in the past, but none of that applies to Hossa. I'm surprised to hear you say you wouldn't want Hossa because he's European, have you ever seen him play for an extended period of time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. Hossa is a force. As far as I'm concerned there is no better player on the Hawks roster - the most consistently threatening player they have. The guy is deadly strong, is a much better two way player than he gets credit for - and is a fierce competitor (the Euro-stereotype fails miserably). He would be a deadly addition in Vancouver - I could live with his contract (he and Luongo have nearly mirror image deals).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hossa is a far better player than most North American guys. I've heard the knock on European players in the past, but none of that applies to Hossa. I'm surprised to hear you say you wouldn't want Hossa because he's European, have you ever seen him play for an extended period of time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it can be said of a lot of North American players too, but I don't believe Kane can be counted among them. He was instrumental in their cup win and is one of the most noticeable players when it counts.

I believe he and Kesler would be awesome together and would be a great line for a kid like Jensen to break into the league with. History has created a lot of animosity on both sides of the fence, but, with a few games (especially when they play Chicago), I believe all will be forgiven.

Also Kane is only twenty three years old. He has a lot of years left in him and, with Jensen, could be here long after the Sedins retire and would serve us well in continuing the winning ways that the Canucks have come to be known for in recent years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but I am not a particular fan of having a lot of Europeans on a team. Although the odd one does emerge to be a difference maker when it counts (ie. Peter Forsberg, Jarmir Jagr), more often than not, they tend to disappear when the pressure is really on. Even our own beloved Sedins seem to fold under pressure and become invisible in critical situations. Europeans are great regular season players but have issues when the stakes are raised.

I know it can be said of a lot of North American players too, but I don't believe Kane can be counted among them. He was instrumental in their cup win and is one of the most noticeable players when it counts.

I believe he and Kesler would be awesome together and would be a great line for a kid like Jensen to break into the league with. History has created a lot of animosity on both sides of the fence, but, with a few games (especially when they play Chicago), I believe all will be forgiven.

Also Kane is only twenty three years old. He has a lot of years left in him and, with Jensen, could be here long after the Sedins retire and would serve us well in continuing the winning ways that the Canucks have come to be known for in recent years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds like your saying the problem is defence, not goaltending?

But then even if you feel your team is 8 or 9 deep in defenders, you should want to shake up that mix up. Cuz your blaming it. Also, I DOUBT heavily your 9th guy is better than Ballard? To me it sounds like your in denial.

I still see why you don't take him due to cap. I am happy to hear anyone reject a trade on value; but your logic is pretty flawed.

1. Ballard - Sorry, but he's not any better than 8-9 defensemen we have in the organization, especially for that cap hit.

2. Why doesn't the trade work - part of the issue with goaltending was the team's defense. An improved defense combined with a bounce back year from Crawford then goaltending is not an issue. Sure, it's not certain Crawford will bounce back, but the talent is there (see 2010/2011) be there are lots of goalies that bounce back after poor 2nd year. So all things considered giving Crawford another shot and keeping a top forward is the better way to go.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a Luongo fan but I don't think a deal can be made between Chicago and Vancouver that will realistically satisfy each team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds like your saying the problem is defence, not goaltending?

But then even if you feel your team is 8 or 9 deep in defenders, you should want to shake up that mix up. Cuz your blaming it. Also, I DOUBT heavily your 9th guy is better than Ballard? To me it sounds like your in denial.

I still see why you don't take him due to cap. I am happy to hear anyone reject a trade on value; but your logic is pretty flawed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Backlund and Comeau are not AHLers. Crawford would make a great back-up.Plus some depth, I can't see a better deal happening for Lu.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.