Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

My Official Roberto Luongo Proposal


  • Please log in to reply
61 replies to this topic

#31 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,275 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 09 October 2012 - 07:13 PM

Won't lie, that top six sucks.


Yep. Frolik. After all king's prattle, this is his solution. Derp.
  • 0

#32 sting

sting

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 845 posts
  • Joined: 09-November 11

Posted 09 October 2012 - 09:17 PM

The only player that makes any sense coming back from Chicago in a Luongo trade is David Bolland. Yeah thats right i said it!!

While a top 6 forward would be nice. IMO the nucks have these already in the system in Jensen, Kassian, and Schroeder. The biggest organizational need is 3C and if your trading away impact players you better address one of these holes or why bother trading.
Especially to a Western rival.

Edited by sting, 09 October 2012 - 09:18 PM.

  • 0

#33 Pineapples

Pineapples

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,028 posts
  • Joined: 15-June 10

Posted 09 October 2012 - 11:23 PM

Our D is fine the way it is. It's Offence that we need. This trade wouldn't help us.
  • 0

Pineapple_jumps.gifPineapple_jumps.gif

 


#34 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 10 October 2012 - 03:37 AM

The Canucks, you say, are soft, so you propose to bring in Leddy and Frolik!?! Wow. Would the Canucks pushback ever surge!!! You just swim and swim in contradictions king.


Fair point, but you're failing to mention that I also included Kyle Beach, who could play in the NHL right now, and who would be exactly the type to offset that softness. Beach is "pushback" defined.

And suggesting that Higgins be moved (to make room for an AHLer who aint ready) just goes to show how very little you know about hockey - the Canucks third line has two outstanding wingers - which is what allowed the pump and dump of Hodgson to work - those two guys made him look much better than he actually was.


:lol:

Chris Higgins was the invisible man in the playoffs, and it did not surprise me at all. The guy is a career floater. It's pretty hilarious that you're suggesting that him and Hansen carried Hodgson to his levels of productivity last year. If it's so easy to "pump and dump" players, like Mike Gillis bitterly fed his sheep about what he did to Hodgson (read: you), why doesn't he do that to Keith Ballard? Why doesn't he do that to Zack Kassian, to make the trade not look as foolish as it was?

The only problem with the 3rd line was that it had a slow, soft, defensively challenged guy playing center - thankfully, Gillis turned that softness into Kassian.
How exactly does your proposal help the third line?


Again, you are hilarious in your biased bitterness. Cody Hodgson was the problem with the 3rd line?!? That's what you're honestly trying to sell here? Gee, yeah, that line sure turned it around when the great Sami Pahlsson arrived, didn't they?

Do you think that Cody and his "softness" would've been benched in the playoffs, like Zack Kassian was?
  • 0

#35 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 10 October 2012 - 03:45 AM

Yep. Frolik. After all king's prattle, this is his solution. Derp.


Yep. Unlike you, I don't expect to turn Roberto Luongo into Patrick Kane. Derp.

Welcome to planet earth!
  • 0

#36 komodo1970

komodo1970

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 692 posts
  • Joined: 23-August 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 09:31 AM

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 - ?
  • 0

#37 Darth Kane

Darth Kane

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,617 posts
  • Joined: 07-June 09

Posted 10 October 2012 - 09:59 AM

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 - ?


From a Vancouver perspective I can understan why you feel this way, but just know that Chicago will never deal one of their core (Toews, Kane, Sharp, Hossa, Bolland, Keith and Seabrook) for Luongo. Part of that is how Chicago views goalies, part of it is the marketing strategy around the core (like it or not), and part of it is Vancouver's goalie situation (sooner or later Luongo has to be dealt, so why rush and overpay). Like I've said before, we won the Cup in 2010 because of our depth and we're just starting to rebuild that depth after the purge in the summer of 2010. Bowman isn't about to trade away the core and the depth we have coming through the pipeline (i.e. Saad, Shaw, McNeill, Danault, Teravainen).

So as much as you think this is a fair trade (and I understand where you're coming from) I can say with certainty it won't happen. I am a Luongo fan and I have no issue with him on the Blackhawks, for the right price I would welcome the deal. But I just don't see a Chicago/Vancouver deal happening for Luongo.
  • 0

rundblad3_zpsc5e56154.png


#38 ice orca

ice orca

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,357 posts
  • Joined: 07-October 10

Posted 10 October 2012 - 10:51 AM

From a Vancouver perspective I can understan why you feel this way, but just know that Chicago will never deal one of their core (Toews, Kane, Sharp, Hossa, Bolland, Keith and Seabrook) for Luongo. Part of that is how Chicago views goalies, part of it is the marketing strategy around the core (like it or not), and part of it is Vancouver's goalie situation (sooner or later Luongo has to be dealt, so why rush and overpay). Like I've said before, we won the Cup in 2010 because of our depth and we're just starting to rebuild that depth after the purge in the summer of 2010. Bowman isn't about to trade away the core and the depth we have coming through the pipeline (i.e. Saad, Shaw, McNeill, Danault, Teravainen).

So as much as you think this is a fair trade (and I understand where you're coming from) I can say with certainty it won't happen. I am a Luongo fan and I have no issue with him on the Blackhawks, for the right price I would welcome the deal. But I just don't see a Chicago/Vancouver deal happening for Luongo.

I still think Hossa for Luongo is a good hockey deal for both teams as it addresses the needs for the now instead of the future. Lou in net for the Hawks would make them cup contenders. Hossa in the top six on the Canucks is what the doctor ordered. It all boils down to Bowman weather he wants to let a core player go and i think Hossa would be the one.
  • 0

#39 Darth Kane

Darth Kane

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,617 posts
  • Joined: 07-June 09

Posted 10 October 2012 - 10:58 AM

I still think Hossa for Luongo is a good hockey deal for both teams as it addresses the needs for the now instead of the future. Lou in net for the Hawks would make them cup contenders. Hossa in the top six on the Canucks is what the doctor ordered. It all boils down to Bowman weather he wants to let a core player go and i think Hossa would be the one.


For any goaltender the answer to that is "no". Most likely the answer is "no" to trading any of the core at this point. I hear you about Hossa, contract for contract that deal makes the most sense. But aside from Toews, Hossa is our most dangerous player and best two way forward.

If you're looking to make a deal with Chicago for Luongo your best option is a combination of 2-3 of the following players: Bickell, Frolik, Leddy, Stalberg, Hayes, Kruger, Crawford, Emery, and our low to medium prospects (i.e. Smith, Morin, Lalonde, Beach). I'd add Olesz to the list but I know the Canucks wouldn't want him. In all likelihood the list of players I mentioned wouldn't be good enough for the Canucks, that's while I still feel a Luongo deal between Chicago and Vancouver won't happen.

Edited by Darth Kane, 10 October 2012 - 10:58 AM.

  • 0

rundblad3_zpsc5e56154.png


#40 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 10 October 2012 - 11:22 AM

If you're looking to make a deal with Chicago for Luongo your best option is a combination of 2-3 of the following players: Bickell, Frolik, Leddy, Stalberg, Hayes, Kruger, Crawford, Emery, and our low to medium prospects (i.e. Smith, Morin, Lalonde, Beach). I'd add Olesz to the list but I know the Canucks wouldn't want him. In all likelihood the list of players I mentioned wouldn't be good enough for the Canucks, that's while I still feel a Luongo deal between Chicago and Vancouver won't happen.


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.
  • 0

#41 unknown33429

unknown33429

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 767 posts
  • Joined: 21-August 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 11:22 AM

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.
  • 0

Are you CRAZY??? Trade Green for ONE first round pick?? He's restricted after this season.... He WILL get an offer sheet for 7-8 million from a number of teams regardless if he plays another minute for us or not. That offer sheet would be worth 4 first round draft choices.


Some fans overrate their players, and then there is this guy.

#42 Alex Burrows 14

Alex Burrows 14

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,415 posts
  • Joined: 03-August 12

Posted 10 October 2012 - 11:43 AM

No thank you.
  • 0
Posted Image

#43 Darth Kane

Darth Kane

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,617 posts
  • Joined: 07-June 09

Posted 10 October 2012 - 11:57 AM

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.


Every fan overvalues their players, and I'm probably guilty of that too. But what Canucks fans have to realize is that the biggest factor in the Luongo deal is the overall situation, not the quality of the player. The other 29 GMs know that sooner or later Luongo will be dealt, so why bother overpaying for him? It's not like Luongo is a 25 year old player will loads of potential, while he's still good he's likely at the tail end of his peak. Why would I give up Kane, a player who's yet to play his best hockey?

There's neen a couple good deals mentioned, and your (new) proposal is definistely one of them.
  • 0

rundblad3_zpsc5e56154.png


#44 Darth Kane

Darth Kane

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,617 posts
  • Joined: 07-June 09

Posted 10 October 2012 - 12:02 PM

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.


I agree with you, Vancouver doesn't need another offensive forward. You need either a gritty player or defensive oriented forward.

Bolland would fit the Canucks needs perfectly, but he's not going anywhere right now. But that's why I think Kruger would be a good option. He's a defensive minded centre and he has some offensive potential, he's not the biggest guy but he plays smart hockey and he's not afraid to play in the corners or in front of the net. Think of Kruger as Bolland-Lite. If the Canucks can get more for Luongo from another team then go for it, but you won't get a star player or prospect from Chicago.
  • 1

rundblad3_zpsc5e56154.png


#45 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,344 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 01:47 PM

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 - ?

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 ;)
  • 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


#46 komodo1970

komodo1970

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 692 posts
  • Joined: 23-August 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 05:53 PM

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 ;)


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.
  • 0

#47 Alchemy Time

Alchemy Time

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,854 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 12

Posted 10 October 2012 - 08:32 PM

CHI: Luongo
CGY: Frolik, Olesz
VAN: Comeau, Backlund, Nemisz, Howse, Crawford


So Vancouver essentially deals Lu for Comeau, Backlund, Nemisz, Howse,and Crawford? The winner is obvious here. Calgary is the obvious loser.
  • 0
Posted Image

#48 Darth Kane

Darth Kane

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,617 posts
  • Joined: 07-June 09

Posted 10 October 2012 - 08:51 PM

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.


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?
  • 0

rundblad3_zpsc5e56154.png


#49 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,275 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 09:18 PM

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


Lu for a handful of Flames AHLers, none of whom could make the Canucks roster - and a goaltender we don't need... no thanks - not to mention that Calgary could ill-afford to part with a couple of their young centers (or any prospects for that matter). If they start dealing youth for veterans it would only convince me further that they have completely lost their marbles.
  • 0

#50 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,344 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 09:24 PM

CHI: Luongo
CGY: Frolik, Olesz
VAN: Comeau, Backlund, Nemisz, Howse, Crawford

That's probably the worst proposal involving Luongo I've ever seen. Seriously, its basically Calgary's garbage for an elite goalie who's not even being traded to the Flames. Pointless trade to say the least.
  • 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


#51 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,275 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 09:24 PM

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?


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).

I think that's probably the most realistic deal, and I don't see that happening.
The Hawks are too shallow up the middle to move Bolland.
They Hawks blueline aside from Seabrook and Keith don't have anyone that would improve Vancouver - and they're obviously not going to move Seabrook.
The only pieces they have that make sense imo are at RW - Kane no, Stahlberg (a UFA in a year), Shaw (good young player, but probably not what Vancouver would want), Frolik (are you kidding me King?).... Hossa would make the closest thing to sense, but...

p.s. I don't ever want to see Kane in a Nucks uniform. Just a bad fit. Period. If Chicago deals him, that will be telling...headcase.

Edited by oldnews, 10 October 2012 - 09:35 PM.

  • 0

#52 Darth Kane

Darth Kane

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,617 posts
  • Joined: 07-June 09

Posted 10 October 2012 - 09:29 PM

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).


Toews is a better player, no doubt about it. But after Toews, Hossa is the man. Hossa's game is more than just points the guy plays great defense and he's stellar on the PK. Although I'm not a fan of Hossa's contract it was necessary to get him to sign with us and I'm glad he's on the team.
  • 0

rundblad3_zpsc5e56154.png


#53 ConnorFutureGM

ConnorFutureGM

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 327 posts
  • Joined: 05-March 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 11:36 PM

CHI: Luongo
CGY: Frolik, Olesz
VAN: Comeau, Backlund, Nemisz, Howse, Crawford

A few people jumped on this trade as bad.

While it's far from a perfect trade, there is one player going to the Canucks they should be happy to get: Backlund.

Backlund is actually a really good option as a 3rd line centre. Some felt that Luongo straight up for Bolland was a reasonable deal. Backlund is one of the few if not only Flames player who did well against strong opposition last season. He projects to be at least a Bolland type player who is younger and on a cheaper contract. The rest of the players going to the Canucks are filler.
  • 0

#54 komodo1970

komodo1970

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 692 posts
  • Joined: 23-August 11

Posted 11 October 2012 - 09:32 AM

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?


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.

Edited by komodo1970, 11 October 2012 - 09:48 AM.

  • 0

#55 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 11 October 2012 - 10:22 AM

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.


I think you're missing the more fundamental point that Chicago would not consider trading Patrick Kane for Roberto Luongo.
  • 0

#56 Darth Kane

Darth Kane

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,617 posts
  • Joined: 07-June 09

Posted 11 October 2012 - 10:23 AM

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.


I have no issue with you preferring Kane over Hossa based on their skill and performance, everyone is entitled to their opion. But at the end of the day you want to best players on your team, and to say you wouldn't want Hossa on your team because you don't want a lot of Europeans on your team is ridiculous. How is Hossa's game European (based on the traditional stereotypes)? Is he soft - no, is he one dimensional - no, does he have a poor attitude or work ethic - no, does Hossa disappear when the pressure is on - no, this is when he plays his best.

Edited by Darth Kane, 11 October 2012 - 10:24 AM.

  • 0

rundblad3_zpsc5e56154.png


#57 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,889 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 11 October 2012 - 03:25 PM

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.


  • 0

#58 Alchemy Time

Alchemy Time

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,854 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 12

Posted 11 October 2012 - 05:22 PM

Lu for a handful of Flames AHLers, none of whom could make the Canucks roster - and a goaltender we don't need... no thanks


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.
  • 0
Posted Image

#59 Darth Kane

Darth Kane

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,617 posts
  • Joined: 07-June 09

Posted 11 October 2012 - 06:47 PM

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.


I'm not blaming all the goaltending issues on our defense, but their poor play definitely contributed to the problem. Both the defense and Crawford can (and I believe will) be better.

Versus last year our defense has already been shaken up. Out are O'Donnell, Lepisto, Scott and Olsen (he's gone to the AHL). In are Oduya (late season acquisition), Brookbank, and Rozsival. I would take Keith, Sebrook, Leddy, Hjalmarsson, Oduya, Rozsival and Brookbank all over Ballard without a doubt. Ballard could not crack our top 6 defense. I don't think Olsen is too far away from being better either. But aside from all that, Ballard has zero trade value based on his poor play and cap hit.

Edited by Darth Kane, 11 October 2012 - 07:47 PM.

  • 0

rundblad3_zpsc5e56154.png


#60 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,275 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 11 October 2012 - 07:07 PM

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.


They're not AHLers because they make the Flames roster. They would be Wolves if in the Canucks system. Backlund can scarcely command ice-time on the team that is probably the shallowest in the NHL up the middle. I see him falling behind Henrik, Kesler, Lapierre, Malhotra and probably even Schroeder once the puck eventually hits the ice. He's far too soft to be considered a third line center. Comeau wouldn't have a prayer of playing left wing in Vancouver, behind Daniel, Booth, and Higgins (not to mention that Burrows and Raymond are also natural LW in the event Vancouver adds a RW)... Those guys don't improve Vancouver at all.
The only guy that peaks any interest in that list is Nemisz - but regardless, that is simply a deal the makes absolutely no sense. Why would Calgary, who are short of propsects, want to move Backlund, Comeau, Nemisz and Howse for a joke like Frolik, and Olesz, who has proven less than Comeau? I'd take the Canucks return over Calgary's anyday, but in either event, that deal gets shut down by everyone but Chicago.

Edited by oldnews, 11 October 2012 - 07:16 PM.

  • 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.