Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

Luongo Trade Theory 101


  • Please log in to reply
418 replies to this topic

#331 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 13 December 2012 - 05:11 PM

I disagree with this common characterizaion of Upshall as a cap dump or a bad contract - Florida is a tight budget/salary team, which is the only reason I think a guy like Upshall could be available at a devaluation.
His 3.5 million cap hit is very reasonable for a guy who scores at a 20 to 30 goal pace throughout his career, and does a lot more than score. His downside is not his contract but his health - and when he's not healthy, his cap hit does not apply. He's a guy who could be a third piece in a deal but if playing could potentially be a serious impact roster player, particularly when you consider the types of players he could line up with as team-mates. Imo there are few better risks out there to take.


He has not once scored 20, let alone 30. The "potential/pace" argument gets old after a while. Upshall's 29 years old, and if the last 2 years are any indication, he is not trending in the right direction.

Edited by King of the ES, 13 December 2012 - 05:11 PM.

  • 0

#332 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,042 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 13 December 2012 - 05:17 PM

He has not once scored 20, let alone 30. The "potential/pace" argument gets old after a while. Upshall's 29 years old, and if the last 2 years are any indication, he is not trending in the right direction.

You still haven't replied to my post. Which leads me to believe that you're either too lazy or you don't want to be proven wrong, which is the more likely reason.
  • 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


#333 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 13 December 2012 - 05:35 PM

You still haven't replied to my post. Which leads me to believe that you're either too lazy or you don't want to be proven wrong, which is the more likely reason.


Oh, proven wrong like how you just were in the Luongo trade thread by me, for saying something equally stupid?

I copy directly people's posts. They're very clearly in my quotes. Just like I've done with yours. Comprende?
  • 0

#334 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,166 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 13 December 2012 - 06:07 PM

They don't think it's fair, or else they would make the trade. They think that Nick Bjugstad is more valuable than Roberto Luongo. That's what their message is. So I have no idea how you think that Shore, Petrovic, Upshall, and a 1st would get it done, unless you think Florida would rather have Bjugstad than that package, too.


No they don't.

There is a difference between a player that you consider pretty much untouchable barring a massive overpayment, and someone who is actually worth more.
  • 0

zackass.png


#335 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,693 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 13 December 2012 - 09:24 PM

He has not once scored 20, let alone 30. The "potential/pace" argument gets old after a while.


Uhm King, buddy, ol' pal ol' chum... you may want to go back and check your figures on that point. Upshall has scored 20+ goals (22 to be exact), in 2010-11 (which he split between Phoenix and Columbus). This was the only season where he went 82 games.

He has shown he can score, and were it not for injuries he may have broken the 20 goal mark several times over his career. I would agree that he is a risk, but if he did pan out he'd probably be the kind of winger that could do very well in the top-6.

regards,
G.

PS - you may want to go back and change that point in your post. I think no one else has noticed it as yet, and your secret is safe with me. :)

Edited by Gollumpus, 13 December 2012 - 09:34 PM.

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

#336 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,693 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 13 December 2012 - 09:34 PM

They don't think it's fair, or else they would make the trade. They think that Nick Bjugstad is more valuable than Roberto Luongo. That's what their message is. So I have no idea how you think that Shore, Petrovic, Upshall, and a 1st would get it done, unless you think Florida would rather have Bjugstad than that package, too.


No they don't.

There is a difference between a player that you consider pretty much untouchable barring a massive overpayment, and someone who is actually worth more.


Huberdeau is likely untouchable. Bjugstad can probably be had for the right price and in the right situation.

Florida needs to address their goaltending. Luongo can be had for the right price, which is something more than a bucket of used tape.

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

#337 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,166 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 13 December 2012 - 09:40 PM

Huberdeau is likely untouchable. Bjugstad can probably be had for the right price and in the right situation.

Florida needs to address their goaltending. Luongo can be had for the right price, which is something more than a bucket of used tape.


Maybe if we offer Lu for Bjugstad one for one they might accept (Which is something I would never do) other than that, barring a significant overpayment I doubt Tallon will include him in a deal, which is why I continue to believe Toronto is the far more likely buyer.
  • 0

zackass.png


#338 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,693 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 13 December 2012 - 10:05 PM

Maybe if we offer Lu for Bjugstad one for one they might accept (Which is something I would never do) other than that, barring a significant overpayment I doubt Tallon will include him in a deal, which is why I continue to believe Toronto is the far more likely buyer.


Yeah.

Toronto is a (somewhat) better "now" trade partner. Florida is a far better "future" trade partner. It will be interesting to see where Gillis goes with this deal.

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

#339 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,166 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 13 December 2012 - 10:31 PM

Yeah.

Toronto is a (somewhat) better "now" trade partner. Florida is a far better "future" trade partner. It will be interesting to see where Gillis goes with this deal.


I agree to a certain extent.

Florida does have better young players although the one's that will be avaliable to us won't be much better than what we could get from Toronto IMO.

From Florida I could see us getting Petrovic, Mattias, Ellerby, Howden, Shore, MacFarland and some of there other prospects. Possibly Bjugstad but I doubt they budge personally.

Toronto I could see: Kadri, Colbourne, Ashton, Biggs, Finn, Percy, Ross, McKegg, Frattin, Franson, then like Florida the other prospects would probably be avaliable too.


I would rather aim for Bozak. then 2 of these 3: Kadri, Biggs, 1st or 2nd pick. Rather than whatever we would get from Florida (Assuming Bjugstad isn't included)

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 13 December 2012 - 10:32 PM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#340 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,053 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 13 December 2012 - 11:05 PM

He has not once scored 20, let alone 30. The "potential/pace" argument gets old after a while. Upshall's 29 years old, and if the last 2 years are any indication, he is not trending in the right direction.


2008 - 2011: 48 goals, 150 games. Do the math. 26 goals per 82 games.

22 goals 2 years ago is trending in the wrong direction?
18 in 49 games the year before.
This is not potential - it is performance King.
Denial gets old after a while.

Edited by oldnews, 13 December 2012 - 11:11 PM.

  • 0

#341 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 14 December 2012 - 04:39 AM

Uhm King, buddy, ol' pal ol' chum... you may want to go back and check your figures on that point. Upshall has scored 20+ goals (22 to be exact), in 2010-11 (which he split between Phoenix and Columbus). This was the only season where he went 82 games.


Right, OK. I just did a quick scan, didn't bother to check combining years. My bad.
  • 0

#342 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 14 December 2012 - 04:41 AM

Florida needs to address their goaltending. Luongo can be had for the right price, which is something more than a bucket of used tape.


Not really. The two guys who led them to a division championship last year are back, and they've got one of the most highly-regarded prospects at that position that currently exist.

What's the problem?
  • 0

#343 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,053 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 14 December 2012 - 12:13 PM

Not really. The two guys who led them to a division championship last year are back, and they've got one of the most highly-regarded prospects at that position that currently exist.

What's the problem?


I've seen how many times you've stated that Florida is pathetic, that you don't believe they are very good...
Now... no problems eh?
Yes, division champions.
But 36 year old starter who is a UFA in 6 months.
35 year old backup who has a year left on his contract.
That most highly regarded prospect is injury prone - and the problematic is that it is his knees that are the challenge. I've heard how many times it has been questioned whether Schneider could be another Mason - well Markstrom is nowhere near a guaranteed NHL starter.

Edited by oldnews, 14 December 2012 - 12:14 PM.

  • 1

#344 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,693 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 14 December 2012 - 12:18 PM

Right, OK. I just did a quick scan, didn't bother to check combining years. My bad.


Meh, easy to miss. I missed it a week or so ago the first time I looked at Upshall's stats.


I've seen how many times you've stated that Florida is pathetic, that you don't believe they are very good...
Now... no problems eh?
Yes, division champions.
But 36 year old starter who is a UFA in 6 months.
35 year old backup who has a year left on his contract.
That most highly regarded prospect is injury prone - and the problematic is that it is his knees that are the challenge. I've heard how many times it has been questioned whether Schneider could be another Mason - well Markstrom is nowhere near a guaranteed NHL starter.


What he said.

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

#345 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,053 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 14 December 2012 - 12:19 PM

Right, OK. I just did a quick scan, didn't bother to check combining years. My bad.


I think what you might be evidencing is that Upshall is a player whose value perhaps is generally not realized.

Which is what I think makes him a good target as an add-in with allegedly 'negative' value ('cap/salary dump') - when in fact he is a good risk and could be a serious steal in a deal - and the type of player he is would fit very nicely with Kesler, Booth, Higgins, Hansen...
  • 0

#346 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 14 December 2012 - 02:50 PM

I've seen how many times you've stated that Florida is pathetic, that you don't believe they are very good...
Now... no problems eh?
Yes, division champions.
But 36 year old starter who is a UFA in 6 months.
35 year old backup who has a year left on his contract.
That most highly regarded prospect is injury prone - and the problematic is that it is his knees that are the challenge. I've heard how many times it has been questioned whether Schneider could be another Mason - well Markstrom is nowhere near a guaranteed NHL starter.


I don't think they're very good, per se, but I also don't think that they "need" a goaltender, let alone a to-be 34 year-old with 9 years left on his deal.

As for Markstrom, you might be right, but I am correct in saying that he is very, very highly regarded, so it again makes you wonder why they'd be so eager to bring back Roberto Luongo.
  • 0

#347 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,693 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 14 December 2012 - 03:44 PM

I think what you might be evidencing is that Upshall is a player whose value perhaps is generally not realized.

Which is what I think makes him a good target as an add-in with allegedly 'negative' value ('cap/salary dump') - when in fact he is a good risk and could be a serious steal in a deal - and the type of player he is would fit very nicely with Kesler, Booth, Higgins, Hansen...


Assuming he'd be willing to waive his NMC/NTC.


I don't think they're very good, per se, but I also don't think that they "need" a goaltender, let alone a to-be 34 year-old with 9 years left on his deal.

As for Markstrom, you might be right, but I am correct in saying that he is very, very highly regarded, so it again makes you wonder why they'd be so eager to bring back Roberto Luongo.


Indeed it does. If Luongo is so old (not that old), has so many years left on his contract, and apparently is willing to play through the entire length of his remaining contract (or so you assume), and has the cap hit which it does (which is not that bad), and considering all of the other issues, both real and imagined ...

... why would Tallon have picked up the phone in the first place?

This is a point I have raised before, and I do not recall seeing an answer from you. Getting Luongo at some kind of fire sale price would not remove any of these concerns. How would Luongo going to Florida for just even a cap dump contract do anything to solve the concerns you have raised? His contract would still have the same length remaining. The cap hit would remain the same. Luongo would still be 34 years old.

So, if the goaltending situation in Florida isn't that bad, and they don't need Luongo, why did Tallon even enter the discussion?


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

#348 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,166 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 14 December 2012 - 05:29 PM

Not really. The two guys who led them to a division championship last year are back, and they've got one of the most highly-regarded prospects at that position that currently exist.

What's the problem?


There goaltending wasn't a problem last season but it wasn't a savior either, they are both old and declining, and this year likely won't make the playoffs IMO. I think we can all agree it is unlikely they win the division.

Then even looking beyond the goaltending, they lost one of there top pair defensemen (Garrison) aswell as some offensive/scoring forwards in Sammuelson and Wolski. So there skater roster is worse, and there goaltenders continue to age and are likely worse.

And as for Markstrom. He's had a tough time with injuries and honestly he is overrated. Lack has put up the same or better #'s than him in the AHL (Maybe with the exception of this season) Not saying Lack is better but I don't think Markstrom is what some think he is. There are other prospect goaltenders I would choose ahead of Markstrom if I had the choice.

So, if the goaltending situation in Florida isn't that bad, and they don't need Luongo, why did Tallon even enter the discussion?


Doug MacLean expains, and I agree with him, I think this is the reason too. And it makes sense when you really think about it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpsZdb_ovvo

(The part I'm talking about is at 3:25)

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 14 December 2012 - 05:31 PM.

  • 1

zackass.png


#349 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,693 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 15 December 2012 - 12:33 AM

Doug MacLean expains, and I agree with him, I think this is the reason too. And it makes sense when you really think about it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpsZdb_ovvo

(The part I'm talking about is at 3:25)


Yup, makes sense to me.

You know this, and I know this, but somehow King can not grasp this.

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

#350 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,166 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 15 December 2012 - 12:56 AM

Yup, makes sense to me.

You know this, and I know this, but somehow King can not grasp this.

regards,
G.


It's not a dire need where they will overpay but they definetly have alot of interest. They don't want the same thing to happen like last time where there players start accepting losing because then there is no going back.

Cause last time they have tons of young talent and talented players in there prime. Horton, Booth, Weiss, Ballard, Wideman, exc. And they were never able to put it together, they don't want to see the same thing happen with the impressive young talent they have now assembled.

I hope King can realize this too like you and I.
  • 0

zackass.png


#351 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 15 December 2012 - 10:04 AM

Indeed it does. If Luongo is so old (not that old), has so many years left on his contract, and apparently is willing to play through the entire length of his remaining contract (or so you assume), and has the cap hit which it does (which is not that bad), and considering all of the other issues, both real and imagined ...

... why would Tallon have picked up the phone in the first place?

This is a point I have raised before, and I do not recall seeing an answer from you. Getting Luongo at some kind of fire sale price would not remove any of these concerns. How would Luongo going to Florida for just even a cap dump contract do anything to solve the concerns you have raised? His contract would still have the same length remaining. The cap hit would remain the same. Luongo would still be 34 years old.

So, if the goaltending situation in Florida isn't that bad, and they don't need Luongo, why did Tallon even enter the discussion?


Has it even been established that he has? The only concrete thing that I've heard is a quote from Bjugstad, saying that Tallon called him to offer assurance that he will not be traded.

But to answer your question, and under the assumption that he has, any player could be valuable to any team, depending on the asking price. Maybe Tallon just wanted to know what Gillis wants. For a low enough price, maybe Luongo would be attractive to him.
  • 0

#352 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 15 December 2012 - 10:12 AM

Yup, makes sense to me.

You know this, and I know this, but somehow King can not grasp this.


I can grasp it just fine. I can understand why Florida would want to acquire Lou. I'm saying that it's not essential and I'm also saying that they probably won't be eager to pay very much, since they know that Gillis has to get rid of him, and they have a very reasonable alternative path to take. It's you guys who simply aren't looking at it from the other side, and with blind faith in everyone's apparent desire for Luongo.

Example, Smashian calls Florida's current goaltending tandem "old and declining", yet Clemmensen's about 1.5 years older, and even Theodore is only about 2.5 years older. Not much of a difference, is there?
  • 0

#353 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,693 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 18 December 2012 - 11:13 PM

But to answer your question, and under the assumption that he has, any player could be valuable to any team, depending on the asking price. Maybe Tallon just wanted to know what Gillis wants. For a low enough price, maybe Luongo would be attractive to him.


I can grasp it just fine. I can understand why Florida would want to acquire Lou. I'm saying that it's not essential and I'm also saying that they probably won't be eager to pay very much, since they know that Gillis has to get rid of him, and they have a very reasonable alternative path to take. It's you guys who simply aren't looking at it from the other side, and with blind faith in everyone's apparent desire for Luongo.


Once again, if Luongo has a bad contract, how would getting him for even a low grade prospect (a contract for a contract trade) do anything to off-set all of these negatives? You acknowledge that Luongo is a good player, but that is not the point to which I am seeking an answer from you.

You talk about the cap hit, the actual salary payments, the term remaining on the deal, Luongo's age, heck, we could even toss in that he got the Canucks to game 7 of the finals and didn't win the Cup. All of that stuff makes Luongo not a desirable guy to pick up.

Assume Tallon said he'd give a guy who was the Panthers 9th round pick from 4 years ago for Luongo, and Gillis said yes. Does Luongo's term get shorter? Does his cap hit go down? Does Luongo get younger? Does his take home pay shrink?

How does Tallon trying to get Luongo at a fire sale price reduce the impact of all of these negatives? And frankly, just because they wouldn't have to give up much of anything to get him isn't a very good answer. Do you have any others?


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

#354 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,053 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 19 December 2012 - 08:40 PM

I can grasp it just fine. I can understand why Florida would want to acquire Lou. I'm saying that it's not essential and I'm also saying that they probably won't be eager to pay very much, since they know that Gillis has to get rid of him, and they have a very reasonable alternative path to take. It's you guys who simply aren't looking at it from the other side, and with blind faith in everyone's apparent desire for Luongo.

Example, Smashian calls Florida's current goaltending tandem "old and declining", yet Clemmensen's about 1.5 years older, and even Theodore is only about 2.5 years older. Not much of a difference, is there?


On the other hand, you talk about how viable these guys are - Florida has Theodore and Clemmenson - they don't really need Luongo - so clearly a guy who is 36 years old is a reasonable starter, and probably will be for another few years, when he'll be 38. Undermines your insistance that Luongo's age and term is such a problem, doesn't it. Luongo in 5 years will be 38, and at the end of his real contract / into the cap circumvention years - when his salary drops off to 3.3, 1.6, 1.0 and 1.0 million...
  • 0

#355 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,166 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 19 December 2012 - 08:50 PM

Example, Smashian calls Florida's current goaltending tandem "old and declining", yet Clemmensen's about 1.5 years older, and even Theodore is only about 2.5 years older. Not much of a difference, is there?


Luongo still has more time remaining in his prime than both, but the difference is (And it is a huge one) Luongo is much much better than both of them.

Luongo's game in 2 years will be better than Theodore's was 3 years ago, and probably better than Clemmensen's has ever been.
  • 0

zackass.png


#356 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 19 December 2012 - 09:24 PM

Luongo still has more time remaining in his prime than both, but the difference is (And it is a huge one) Luongo is much much better than both of them.

Luongo's game in 2 years will be better than Theodore's was 3 years ago, and probably better than Clemmensen's has ever been.

Luongos stats were not much better than either, and Lou played on a much better team, so, if he was better he wasn;t much better.
  • 1

#357 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,166 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 19 December 2012 - 09:27 PM

Luongos stats were not much better than either, and Lou played on a much better team, so, if he was better he wasn;t much better.


Who's better? Luongo, Clemmensen or Theodore? Which one of those is a proven, star #1 goalie, and which other 2 are average starters/backups.

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 19 December 2012 - 09:28 PM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#358 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 19 December 2012 - 09:57 PM

Who's better? Luongo, Clemmensen or Theodore? Which one of those is a proven, star #1 goalie, and which other 2 are average starters/backups.

I;m saying, based on last years play, there wasn;t much to choose between the 3.
  • 0

#359 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,166 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 19 December 2012 - 10:00 PM

I;m saying, based on last years play, there wasn;t much to choose between the 3.


Even with last years play I would choose Lu, he was inconsistent but he also carried this team at times through Janurary to March.

Niether goalies carried the Panthers at all.
  • 0

zackass.png


#360 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 19 December 2012 - 10:20 PM

Even with last years play I would choose Lu, he was inconsistent but he also carried this team at times through Janurary to March.

Niether goalies carried the Panthers at all.

And I believe if either Florida played for the Canucks, they would /could have done as well as Lou and would Lou have had success with Florida. We each have our own opinion.
  • 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.