• 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.

ConnorFutureGM

Luongo Trade Theory 101

419 posts in this topic

Op didn't say to trade him for peanuts like most CDCer's do.

If that limited return doesn't equal what Lu is actually worth and how much he would help his team, then it is foolish to trade him.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allow me to clarify for the OP. He has stated in the past that he can't wait to see the "table scraps we get for Luongo."

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not the OP - presuming that this was addressed to me.

You and BUREV simply do not understand market dynamics. Waivers has been discussed for Luongo, according to Dreger. The fact that that's even being considered as an option should give you an indication of the type of offers that we've received.

But, you can also put your head in the sand and ignore that, or claim that Dreger has a vendetta against the Canucks, like others have. Whatever makes you feel better.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does the Luongo Trading Theory 101 change if the salary cap end up around $64-$65 million? Do you still think you'll get a top 6 forward in return?

Also, it looks like for players with existing contracts over 5 years the players cap hit will apply even if they retire. So Luongo's cap hit stays the same for the duration of his contract. If this part of the CBA stands up it becomes 100 times more difficult to deal Luongo unless its for a similar contract (which would be difficult). Please, no Hossa for Luongo rumors, it's not happening.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does the Luongo Trading Theory 101 change if the salary cap end up around $64-$65 million? Do you still think you'll get a top 6 forward in return?

Also, it looks like for players with existing contracts over 5 years the players cap hit will apply even if they retire. So Luongo's cap hit stays the same for the duration of his contract. If this part of the CBA stands up it becomes 100 times more difficult to deal Luongo unless its for a similar contract (which would be difficult). Please, no Hossa for Luongo rumors, it's not happening.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If what you say happens, there would be no value coming to the Canucks in exchange for Luongo.

I remember hearing earlier in the off season that Luongo was thinking about retiring in 6 or 7 years. That would leave a team paying for Luongo at a cap hit of 5.33 two years after he retires.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, no, all the more reason to cut your losses and get rid of him.

You see no problems with paying $5.2M to your backup goaltender, eh?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allow me to clarify for KingofES. He has stated in the past that he can't wait to see the "table scraps we get for Luongo."

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not the OP - presuming that this was addressed to me.

You and BUREV simply do not understand market dynamics. Waivers has been discussed for Luongo, according to Dreger. The fact that that's even being considered as an option should give you an indication of the type of offers that we've received.

But, you can also put your head in the sand and ignore that, or claim that Dreger has a vendetta against the Canucks, like others have. Whatever makes you feel better.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what will happen to the buyouts? Maybe a team buys out a player like Luongo instead of letting him retire (assuming he isn't too far from retirement). If this clause goes through both Vancouver and Chicago stand to lose big time. But if Hossa remains relatively healthy he can be the next Selanne (different style) and play into his 40s. Maybe Luongo would be the next Broduer?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You believe what Lu said 6 months ago, tell me not to believe what he said just one month ago, and now your telling me I should believe what a reporter has to say. See the logical fallacy in that?

Either way, if MG declined a Lu for Schenn deal, he certainly wouldn't just waive Lu. He will either wait for the right deal, or just not trade him. There's no harm in keeping him on the team.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will definitely be locker room tension if Luongo stays on the Canucks.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They haven't had any so far that we know of, so why should that start now? They're team players, they'll be fine.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He asked for a trade after the team offically made Schnieder the starter. Luongo doesn't want to be in Vancouver anymore and his team mates are going to know that and they won't want him there. It'll snowball from there.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will definitely be locker room tension if Luongo stays on the Canucks.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yea paying that much for a backup could be a problem. But this isn't Huet we're talking about. This is a guy who will win a majority of his games. If we keep both goalies, they would split the games.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He asked for a trade after the team offically made Schnieder the starter. Luongo doesn't want to be in Vancouver anymore and his team mates are going to know that and they won't want him there. It'll snowball from there.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and I'm sure that they'd just be thrilled with that arrangement.

Kind-of, sort-of NHL starters, kind-of, sort-of NHL backups. Sounds like one hell of an idea.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The team didn't "officially" make Schneider starter. Therefore, there is no tension. Instead, it just means each goalie will really have to earn their games. The rest of the team won't have a problem with Lu staying.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.