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

#61 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,757 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 30 October 2012 - 05:44 PM

And his value will just magically increase while getting a year older and establishing himself as an NHL backup?

Seriously, remove Canuck-blinders before posting, please. This is not a good situation.

You should be the one removing the blinders if you think keeping both goalies, if we can't find a good deal for Luongo, is a bad thing.
  • 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


#62 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,877 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 30 October 2012 - 07:47 PM

Actually, I specified two "top" prospects, a decent 2/3 forward and either the rights to a d-man (with maybe a pick if he doesn't sign here) or a third top prospect. Geez, get it right. :P


I wasn't sure what you were getting at the first time. You're saying: top 9 forward, top 6 defenceman, two "top" prospects.

This is possible if one of both of the forward and defencemen are cap dumps. If these were valued players then you're expecting an unrealitic return on Luongo.


Well, Franson is worthless to Toronto as a player since he has made it very clear he has no intentions of staying a Leaf. The only value he does have is as trade bait, and since anyone who is interested in him can go-a-courtin' when he becomes a UFA at the end of the season, or maybe they will trade for his rights with a very low-end prospect (ie. a contract dump) or a fairly low draft pick.

As I pointed out earlier, it's merely a crapshoot with the Canucks getting Franson as a throw-in. He will likely view the Canucks situation as being similar to that in which he found himself in Toronto. While he is playing behind a more talented bunch of guys here than in Toronto, he would still be playing in a (at best) bottom-6 pairing for the next 4 - 5 years. I would anticipate he would go UFA and find his fortune elsewhere.

So, the deal would actually be MacArthur/Kulemin, two top prospects, and what-ever the Canucks can get for Franson's rights before he goes UFA (assuming he doesn't sign). Better? :)


1.) Just because Burke (or any other GM) might have made the "best" offer by a certain date doesn't mean that Gillis has to agree to hand Luongo over. This is the kind of fire-sale panic thinking that would have seen Luongo traded out of here back at the draft for a return of something like Komisarek and Lombardi.

I didn't say there was a deadline. I'm saying that the longer this drags out into the regular season, the worse off it will be on the Canucks locker room.


You did not. However, there is an implied "deadline" in your posts which suggest that it should have been done already, and doing it sooner rather than later would be the best course of action.


2.) Just because Luongo was not traded by a general deadline which you have set, does not mean that there has only been cap dumps and other bits of gomi being offered for Luongo.

I didn't say there were just cap dump offers but that might actually be the case since the only team in play until recently was Florida. I was being hypothical saying if every other offer was a cap dump except for one, Gillis would have to consider the non cap dump offer even if it was far less than the value he wanted to get for Luongo.


Gillis would consider the offer, but there would be no reason for him to accept it, other than the pre-mature concerns about this situation being a problem in the room. There is lots of time. The season has yet to start, and when it does I expect to see Luongo fairly soon after being in another city. Best wishes to him, except against the Canucks.


Maybe Gillis has asked for MacArthur, but Burke would rather move Kulemin, so Gillis is holding out.

Is this hypothical?


Of course it is. I picked two guys who are fairly similar yet different enough that there could be reason to choose one over the other depending upon your team needs. One is a LW while the other is listed as a RW. Kulemin is bigger. Both have had some offensive success, but MacArthur is perhaps the better passer. MacArthur has the larger cap hit of the two.


Maybe Gillis has asked for Colborne, not just because he is a big center but because he is closer to be being NHL ready, while Burke has offered Biggs. As Biggs is perhaps 4 - 5 years away from being NHL ready, he is a less desirable prospect for the Canucks, so the teams are at an impasse.

Possibly.


This speaks to one of my points. If Burke acknowledges he needs to give up a prospect to get the deal done, but he doesn't want to give up Colborne (who is perhaps the nost NHL ready guy the Leafs have), then he has to sweeten the deal to get Gillis to leave Colborne off the table. If Burke can get Gillis to leave his top-6 forwards off the table, and also his top prospects (Rielly, Colborne) then Ashton and Biggs (with the throw-in of Franson's rights) could get the deal done. It doesn't help the Canucks that much right now, but it certainly helps the team down the road. Jensen and Kassian with Kesler, Biggs and Ashton with Gaunce could be impressive.


Gillis has asked for a 1st round pick. Burke may have agreed to this, but he may have offered the 2014 1st rather than the 2013 pick. As the 2013 is supposedly a deep draft, Gillis might want that pick more than one from the year after, and Burke does not want to surrender it.

This draft is not as deep as once thought. I heard a scout on the radio say it's better than 2012 and 2011 but 2010 was deeper.


Yeah, that could be true. In any event, I suspect the Burke does not want to move a 1st at all, but if it comes down to it he'd try to move one where he figures it would be as low as possible and in as weak a draft as possible.

And, as per the above comments about prospects, if Burke doesn't move a 1st then he has to give Gillis something else. The likely "something else" would probably be a prospect.


Other than your "belief" that the Canucks can only hope for cap dumps and other trash for Luongo, who is to say that what I have outlined here is not where they currently sit in negotiations?

My intent was saying that no matter what Gillis and Canuck fans think what they should get for Luongo, it's the market that dictates the price. If the market's best offer was substanially less than what Gillis thought he should get, he will either have to hold on to two goalies or consider the offer. I don't know what the best offer is for Luongo. I have a feeling it's a lot less than what Gillis and a majority of Canucks fans think they'll get.


True enough. I happen to think Luongo's value is a lot higher than you or some others do believe it to be and he will be moved. This being said, we likely will never know for certain just what has been offered for Luongo, or just how much higher the winning offer would have gone.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#63 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,877 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 30 October 2012 - 07:48 PM

3.) Once again, while having Luongo here for an extended period of time might not be the best scenario possible, it is not going to be the huge problem which you anticipate. How do I know this? By the very same means that you know that it will be a problem.

I don't know how the impact of the scenario will play out but I know that one or both goalies will be not pleased with the current situation. I also know that every player in the locker room will know that Luongo isn't there for the long term. What these occurences would manifest into I do not know.


Yup. This being said, I believe Luongo is a professional and very classy guy, and he will help to diffuse any rancor from this situation.


Whether or not Gillis gets a better offer than those which he has already received is purely a matter of conjecture. You may be willing to bet that the best he can get might be Kulemin. I'm thinking it will be somewhat better.

I didn't say Kulemin straight up is the best he could get, I was using that as an example. We'll see what he gets.


True enough. It did have the appearance as if you were suggesting a one-for-one deal.


4.) I was unaware that Howson is well versed in the intricacies of the upcoming Luongo deal.

Howson is well versed in getting far less than what he thinks his star player who recently requested a trade is worth.


I thought that was his talent, reardless of what player he was moving out... :P


As it sits, he got for Nash what will probably be a low 1st, and three young guys who are probably going to be roster players for Columbus. As I noted in a previous post, the individual parts will not be as good as the best player, but combined they can make a good contribution.

The point is he thought he would get more.


True enough. That he didn't get more is his failing at making trades. And even if Gillis got what I've been using as an example return for Luongo, there will always be thoughts that the Canucks should have gotten more. Heck, Gillis could get Grabovski, a 1st, Gardiner and Colborne and there would still be people who would say that Gillis should have gotten more.


The other part of the Nash deal is that: a.) his contract was far worse than Luongo's with regard to a cap hit, which eliminated several teams right away, and b.) Nash made it pretty clear that there were a lot of teams to which he would not accept a trade, something which Luongo has not done. The way these two players have handled themselves and their respective situations is drastically different. Nash handcuffed Columbus and a lot of people here have wrongly assumed that Luongo has done the same thing, which is not the case.

a.) Luongo's contract is much longer. b.) There seems to be even less teams that Luongo would accept a trade to. At least Nash provided a list.

Both players requested a trade and the request became public. What else did Nash do that handcuffed the Jackets that the Canucks haven't had to deal with with Luongo?


a.) I made the distinction about Nash's cap hit being higher as that would throw off some teams. This being said, the length of Luongo's contract has only been an issue for those looking for sticking points. Under the old CBA, Luongo's contract was not a problem. Under the new CBA, Luongo's contract will not be a problem. So where's the problem?

b.) Haven't we seen several quotes of late where Luongo has said he has preferred destinations, but if a deal can't be worked out with those teams then he will look at what options Gillis will put in front of him. This sounds more like he is leaving all of his options open as to where he could go (except maybe Columbus. No one wants to go there.).


5.) I was also outlining that Burke has to be flexible in his negotiations. If he does not want to make certain assets available then he will have to improve his offer in other areas.

To Toronto: Luongo, a mid-lvl prospect, maybe a 3rd or lower pick

To Vancouver: MacArthur, Colborne, a 1st. If the 1st is for 2014, then the Canucks also get Franson. If the Leafs want to keep Colborne then the Canucks get Ashton and Biggs in his stead.

You are guilty as other people on the boards of trying to slightly improve the Canucks' offer to get a much bigger return. Toronto doesn't need the Canucks' 3rd rounder or mid level prospect. They aren't going to trade their 1st for Luongo. The only thing I see Burke trading his 1st for would be a #1 centre. The return for Luongo isn't going to be close to what you think it will be.


You got that all wrong.

Have you considered this: it's not a question of what Toronto "needs", but rather it's something that is being done to help the Canucks. The Canucks have 48 contracts, the Leafs have 50. If the Canucks bring in four contracts from the Leafs, they will have to send someone out with Luongo to get back to 50. Moving a prospect can do this for the Canucks, while returning little to no cap hit to the Leafs.

My proposals are about Gillis allowing the Leafs to keep some assets which they value more at the cost of them giving up other assets which might not normally be part of the required return for Luongo (an impact roster player, a top prospect and a 1st).


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

#64 ConnorFutureGM

ConnorFutureGM

    Comets Regular

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

Posted 30 October 2012 - 09:58 PM

Yup. This being said, I believe Luongo is a professional and very classy guy, and he will help to diffuse any rancor from this situation.


But will he stay classy indefinitely?

True enough. That he didn't get more is his failing at making trades. And even if Gillis got what I've been using as an example return for Luongo, there will always be thoughts that the Canucks should have gotten more. Heck, Gillis could get Grabovski, a 1st, Gardiner and Colborne and there would still be people who would say that Gillis should have gotten more.


I think people Canuck fans' expectations of possible returns is far greater than what the rest of the league's fans think he is worth. Edmonton and Toronto boards are full of cap dump scenarios.

a.) I made the distinction about Nash's cap hit being higher as that would throw off some teams. This being said, the length of Luongo's contract has only been an issue for those looking for sticking points. Under the old CBA, Luongo's contract was not a problem. Under the new CBA, Luongo's contract will not be a problem. So where's the problem?

b.) Haven't we seen several quotes of late where Luongo has said he has preferred destinations, but if a deal can't be worked out with those teams then he will look at what options Gillis will put in front of him. This sounds more like he is leaving all of his options open as to where he could go (except maybe Columbus. No one wants to go there.).


Luongo's contract length is a problem for teams. They don't know when Luongo is going to retire. If his play dramatically declines at 38 the team he's on will still be on the hook of his contract until he's 43. Another problem is adjusting for flucuations. Having a long term contract like that would make it harder for teams to reshape their salary structure to adapt if a situation were to arise.

I would like to see if Luongo has a list. Right now Gillis is working in the dark, he could workout the best deal ever then Luongo can say no, I'm not going to the Islanders.


Have you considered this: it's not a question of what Toronto "needs", but rather it's something that is being done to help the Canucks. The Canucks have 48 contracts, the Leafs have 50. If the Canucks bring in four contracts from the Leafs, they will have to send someone out with Luongo to get back to 50. Moving a prospect can do this for the Canucks, while returning little to no cap hit to the Leafs.

My proposals are about Gillis allowing the Leafs to keep some assets which they value more at the cost of them giving up other assets which might not normally be part of the required return for Luongo (an impact roster player, a top prospect and a 1st).

It is a question about what other teams would be willing to do. You can't base your trades soley on the Canucks. You are overcomplicating the trade with pieces the other team would not want becasue you want the Canucks to acquire all four of the pieces. The Leafs don't want to trade all 4 of those pieces.

The only way the Canucks are going to get a top prospect and a 1st for Luongo is if the impact roster player is a cap dump (has negative value)

go visit the Oilers and Leafs board and see what they are suggesting for Luongo.
  • 0

#65 ConnorFutureGM

ConnorFutureGM

    Comets Regular

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

Posted 30 October 2012 - 10:08 PM

Well, Franson is worthless to Toronto as a player since he has made it very clear he has no intentions of staying a Leaf. The only value he does have is as trade bait, and since anyone who is interested in him can go-a-courtin' when he becomes a UFA at the end of the season, or maybe they will trade for his rights with a very low-end prospect (ie. a contract dump) or a fairly low draft pick.

As I pointed out earlier, it's merely a crapshoot with the Canucks getting Franson as a throw-in. He will likely view the Canucks situation as being similar to that in which he found himself in Toronto. While he is playing behind a more talented bunch of guys here than in Toronto, he would still be playing in a (at best) bottom-6 pairing for the next 4 - 5 years. I would anticipate he would go UFA and find his fortune elsewhere.

So, the deal would actually be MacArthur/Kulemin, two top prospects, and what-ever the Canucks can get for Franson's rights before he goes UFA (assuming he doesn't sign). Better? :)

Franson is still going to be an RFA. He'd be an RFA for years even if he didn't sign a contract. He has more value than a late pick. At the very least it's a 2nd rounder.

Nice try but I think we're still far off on what we think Luongo's value is.

This speaks to one of my points. If Burke acknowledges he needs to give up a prospect to get the deal done, but he doesn't want to give up Colborne (who is perhaps the nost NHL ready guy the Leafs have), then he has to sweeten the deal to get Gillis to leave Colborne off the table. If Burke can get Gillis to leave his top-6 forwards off the table, and also his top prospects (Rielly, Colborne) then Ashton and Biggs (with the throw-in of Franson's rights) could get the deal done. It doesn't help the Canucks that much right now, but it certainly helps the team down the road. Jensen and Kassian with Kesler, Biggs and Ashton with Gaunce could be impressive.

At the very most, I see the Canucks getting two secondary NHLers and a draft pick or prospect.

At the very least, I see the Canucks getting a draft pick, a prospect and a cap dump.
  • 0

#66 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 31 October 2012 - 03:29 AM

You should be the one removing the blinders if you think keeping both goalies, if we can't find a good deal for Luongo, is a bad thing.


So you're saying that he'd get us a better return in the summer of 2013, as a 34 year-old NHL backup with 8 years and $5.3M PY as his contract?
  • 0

#67 Lui's Knob

Lui's Knob

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,999 posts
  • Joined: 13-May 10

Posted 31 October 2012 - 10:56 AM

I'm starting to wonder if and when NHL ever returns if Gillis will have no choice but to keep Luongo and his contract (due to CBA) and perhaps is looking to deal Corey Schneider instead...understanding that he signed a new deal, he would fetch way more than Luongo (rumored to be an impact player, depth player and a pick). If Varlamov got 2 first rounders - the Canucks could quickly stock up the pool of prospects with Schneider, who I could see easily get an impact player along with multiple high picks...and in doing so, you still keep a "decent goalie" plus you have Lack waiting in the wings who has star potential anyways?

I know Luongo has had his troubles but I wonder if by means of driving up Luongo's offer a team might blow Gillis' mind with an offer for Schneider.
  • 0

#68 ConnorFutureGM

ConnorFutureGM

    Comets Regular

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

Posted 31 October 2012 - 01:04 PM

I'm starting to wonder if and when NHL ever returns if Gillis will have no choice but to keep Luongo and his contract (due to CBA) and perhaps is looking to deal Corey Schneider instead...understanding that he signed a new deal, he would fetch way more than Luongo (rumored to be an impact player, depth player and a pick). If Varlamov got 2 first rounders - the Canucks could quickly stock up the pool of prospects with Schneider, who I could see easily get an impact player along with multiple high picks...and in doing so, you still keep a "decent goalie" plus you have Lack waiting in the wings who has star potential anyways?

I know Luongo has had his troubles but I wonder if by means of driving up Luongo's offer a team might blow Gillis' mind with an offer for Schneider.

Schnieder's value would be more but it's not because he's the better goalie, it's because of his age and contract. He could also go to any team in the leauge so there would be bigger market.
  • 0

#69 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,757 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 31 October 2012 - 01:15 PM

Schnieder's value would be more but it's not because he's the better goalie, it's because of his age and contract. He could also go to any team in the leauge so there would be bigger market.

So you're saying that Schneider's value is better only because of his age and contract? Awesome logic there...
  • 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


#70 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,877 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 31 October 2012 - 07:12 PM

But will he stay classy indefinitely?


Well, I guess if depends on how we define indefinately. I think the Luongo would be good for the entire season, assuming the team was doing well and he felt like he was contributing, and for that matter, that the rest of team thought well of his participation. If it looked like he was just going to be parked in the corner and not be given an opportunity to help the team then I suspect everyone would become frustrated with the situation.


I think people Canuck fans' expectations of possible returns is far greater than what the rest of the league's fans think he is worth. Edmonton and Toronto boards are full of cap dump scenarios.


Yeah, but those are Leafs and Oilers fans. It's not nice to mock the afflicted...

Of course they would want to buy low. Who wouldn't want to do so in any transaction? This being said, none of us fans are privy to the thoughts of any GM on what they would really give up for Luongo, versus what they hope they can get away with in a trade for his services.


Luongo's contract length is a problem for teams. They don't know when Luongo is going to retire. If his play dramatically declines at 38 the team he's on will still be on the hook of his contract until he's 43. Another problem is adjusting for flucuations. Having a long term contract like that would make it harder for teams to reshape their salary structure to adapt if a situation were to arise.


Luongo is a valuable asset. He will turn a team like the Leafs into a playoff contender. The only real "difficulty" voiced by others is the term of his contract. As has been pointed out previously, this is only a problem to a team like the Leafs should Luongo not want to retire after the 2017 - 18 season (this is when Luongo's last salary year at $6.7 million ends). He'll be 38.

After this, he has 4 years remaining, one at $3+ million, and three in the $1 million range, with a cap hit of $5.33 million. True, should he want to hang around for the next 4 years to collect an extra $6 million, then it might be a problem. So why might not the Leafs trade him, or waive him to a team which is in need of reaching the cap floor? They have options available to alleviate any such concerns.


I would like to see if Luongo has a list. Right now Gillis is working in the dark, he could workout the best deal ever then Luongo can say no, I'm not going to the Islanders.


Is Gillis working in the dark? How do you know this because I haven't seen anything about Gillis complaining about not knowing what teams are Luongo's list. As far as we know, Luongo may have given Gillis a verbal list, with either TB or Florida at the top of it. After that, Luongo has mentioned several times that he is open to all options placed before him. This does not mean that he will jump at the chance to go to Columbus, but he might be willing to go to another team which we have discarded as being unlikely.


It is a question about what other teams would be willing to do. You can't base your trades soley on the Canucks. You are overcomplicating the trade with pieces the other team would not want becasue you want the Canucks to acquire all four of the pieces. The Leafs don't want to trade all 4 of those pieces.


I'm not basing my trades on the Canucks, and to honest, it looks like you are suggesting that I should figure trades only as the other team would want them to be completed.

What I have suggested, and I thought I was pretty clear about this, is that Toronto has a lot of assets which it does want to keep, and in order to keep those assets out of the discussion, they must give up other assets. The Leafs would not want to trade Kessel, Grabovski, Lupul, Gardiner, Rielly, their 1st round pick, Colborne, Ashton, Biggs, Van Riemsdyk or Phaneuf (maybe others). They would love to get rid of Lombardi, Komisarek, maybe others.

So are you suggesting that because the Leafs do not want to trade any of their valued assets, that Gillis should just accept Lombardi and Komisarek because that's the best he's going to be able to get?

My proposals accept that Burke does not want to give up some assets. So, Burke would have to decide which of these assets are the most valuable to him and be prepared to move some of the rest. If he doesn't want to make any of his top-6 roster players available, then he owes Gillis something for that because that is hurting the Canucks chances for winning now while improving the Leafs' chances in a major way.

If he doesn't want to make top prospects like Rielly, Gardiner or Colborne available, then he owes Gillis something for that. The first two have the potential to be very good d-men while Colborne will likely be a very good center. While not in the NHL as yet, Colborne is very close. This would be very useful to the Canucks right now, and also in the future.

If he doesn't want to make his 2013 1st available, assuming that the 2013 draft specifically is of valuable to Gillis, then Burke owes something for that.

Ashton, Biggs, the 2014 1st, and one of MacArthur/Kulemin, makes up for most of what Burke owes Gillis for allowing him to keep his other, more valuable assets.


The only way the Canucks are going to get a top prospect and a 1st for Luongo is if the impact roster player is a cap dump (has negative value)


Well, if Burke wants to force a cap dump back on to Gillis then he will have to be prepared to accept undesirable assets back from the Canucks.


go visit the Oilers and Leafs board and see what they are suggesting for Luongo.


Sure. I have seen them prior to your suggestion. At one point they were suggesting an even swap of Luongo for Bozak.

Are you suggesting that Burke takes guidance on his moves from the opinions on the Leafs' forums?


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

#71 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,877 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 31 October 2012 - 07:29 PM

Franson is still going to be an RFA. He'd be an RFA for years even if he didn't sign a contract. He has more value than a late pick. At the very least it's a 2nd rounder.

Nice try but I think we're still far off on what we think Luongo's value is.


Yeah, I had been reading about the last lockout and got a bit ahead of myself there. Franson would be a UFA if the entire season is cancelled, this year is counted as a year of service (as it was last time), and they don't add a year to the RFA service.

His value will be determined if the season has started before Dec. 1, when he would have to sign here or be unable to play in the NHL for the rest of this season. If things are going prior to Dec. 1 then he might bring a 2nd. If he doesn't sign then he will be worth less.


At the very most, I see the Canucks getting two secondary NHLers and a draft pick or prospect.

At the very least, I see the Canucks getting a draft pick, a prospect and a cap dump.


So the deal could be on the high end (in your opinion), two of Bozak/Kulemin/MacArthur, and a pick of some level (a 2nd?) or a prospect (such as?),

or

a pick of some level (maybe a 2nd?), a prospect (such as?), and someone like Lombardi?


I like my fantasy trades better than yours... :P


regards,
G.

Edited by Gollumpus, 31 October 2012 - 07:34 PM.

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

#72 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,877 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 31 October 2012 - 07:32 PM

So you're saying that he'd get us a better return in the summer of 2013, as a 34 year-old NHL backup with 8 years and $5.3M PY as his contract?


So you're saying that Gillis should trade Luongo for the first offer of a 5th round pick or an outrageous cap dump?

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

#73 Pineapples

Pineapples

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,300 posts
  • Joined: 15-June 10

Posted 31 October 2012 - 08:33 PM

So you're saying that he'd get us a better return in the summer of 2013, as a 34 year-old NHL backup with 8 years and $5.3M PY as his contract?


Who said we have to trade him by then? A lot can happen in a year, as we saw last year regarding this situation.
  • 0

Pineapple_jumps.gifPineapple_jumps.gif

 


#74 ConnorFutureGM

ConnorFutureGM

    Comets Regular

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

Posted 31 October 2012 - 09:33 PM

So you're saying that Schneider's value is better only because of his age and contract? Awesome logic there...

What has Schneider done exactly?

A total of 76 career games isn't enough to give him a track record of greatness.

1. Well, I guess if depends on how we define indefinately. I think the Luongo would be good for the entire season, assuming the team was doing well and he felt like he was contributing, and for that matter, that the rest of team thought well of his participation. If it looked like he was just going to be parked in the corner and not be given an opportunity to help the team then I suspect everyone would become frustrated with the situation.

2. Of course they would want to buy low. Who wouldn't want to do so in any transaction? This being said, none of us fans are privy to the thoughts of any GM on what they would really give up for Luongo, versus what they hope they can get away with in a trade for his services.

3. Luongo is a valuable asset. He will turn a team like the Leafs into a playoff contender. The only real "difficulty" voiced by others is the term of his contract. As has been pointed out previously, this is only a problem to a team like the Leafs should Luongo not want to retire after the 2017 - 18 season (this is when Luongo's last salary year at $6.7 million ends). He'll be 38.

4. After this, he has 4 years remaining, one at $3+ million, and three in the $1 million range, with a cap hit of $5.33 million. True, should he want to hang around for the next 4 years to collect an extra $6 million, then it might be a problem. So why might not the Leafs trade him, or waive him to a team which is in need of reaching the cap floor? They have options available to alleviate any such concerns.

5. Is Gillis working in the dark? How do you know this because I haven't seen anything about Gillis complaining about not knowing what teams are Luongo's list. As far as we know, Luongo may have given Gillis a verbal list, with either TB or Florida at the top of it. After that, Luongo has mentioned several times that he is open to all options placed before him. This does not mean that he will jump at the chance to go to Columbus, but he might be willing to go to another team which we have discarded as being unlikely.

6. I'm not basing my trades on the Canucks, and to honest, it looks like you are suggesting that I should figure trades only as the other team would want them to be completed. What I have suggested, and I thought I was pretty clear about this, is that Toronto has a lot of assets which it does want to keep, and in order to keep those assets out of the discussion, they must give up other assets. The Leafs would not want to trade Kessel, Grabovski, Lupul, Gardiner, Rielly, their 1st round pick, Colborne, Ashton, Biggs, Van Riemsdyk or Phaneuf (maybe others). They would love to get rid of Lombardi, Komisarek, maybe others. So are you suggesting that because the Leafs do not want to trade any of their valued assets, that Gillis should just accept Lombardi and Komisarek because that's the best he's going to be able to get? My proposals accept that Burke does not want to give up some assets. So, Burke would have to decide which of these assets are the most valuable to him and be prepared to move some of the rest. If he doesn't want to make any of his top-6 roster players available, then he owes Gillis something for that because that is hurting the Canucks chances for winning now while improving the Leafs' chances in a major way. If he doesn't want to make top prospects like Rielly, Gardiner or Colborne available, then he owes Gillis something for that. The first two have the potential to be very good d-men while Colborne will likely be a very good center. While not in the NHL as yet, Colborne is very close. This would be very useful to the Canucks right now, and also in the future. If he doesn't want to make his 2013 1st available, assuming that the 2013 draft specifically is of valuable to Gillis, then Burke owes something for that. Ashton, Biggs, the 2014 1st, and one of MacArthur/Kulemin, makes up for most of what Burke owes Gillis for allowing him to keep his other, more valuable assets. Well, if Burke wants to force a cap dump back on to Gillis then he will have to be prepared to accept undesirable assets back from the Canucks.

7. Yeah, I had been reading about the last lockout and got a bit ahead of myself there. Franson would be a UFA if the entire season is cancelled, this year is counted as a year of service (as it was last time), and they don't add a year to the RFA service. His value will be determined if the season has started before Dec. 1, when he would have to sign here or be unable to play in the NHL for the rest of this season. If things are going prior to Dec. 1 then he might bring a 2nd. If he doesn't sign then he will be worth less.

8. So the deal could be on the high end (in your opinion), two of Bozak/Kulemin/MacArthur, and a pick of some level (a 2nd?) or a prospect (such as?),

or

a pick of some level (maybe a 2nd?), a prospect (such as?), and someone like Lombardi?

1. Disagree. Luongo would not be comfortable the entire season as Scheider's backup. He may tolerate for a bit if he feels Gillis is close but I imagine Luongo wanting to play rather than sit and watch someone else in his net.

2. Please read what you just wrote any aply it to thy self.

3. It's 10 years for a goalie who has looked shaky. If he was a lock as a great goalie the Canucks wouldn't be trading him.

4. You're forgetting the new rules the NHL wants to put in the new CBA ie teams on waivers count against the cap.

5. You're right, I don't know if Luongo gave a list or not but there seems to be less teams in the mix than there was for Nash.

6. We need to establish Luongo's value. You agree that the market dictates Luongo's value but then you pull this value you have for Luongo out of the air.

7. I don't think Franson would be in RFA status if he signed a one year deal this year. It's 7 years of service or 27 right? He'd be 26 and only played in the NHL for 4 seasons.

8. You were right on how I think the trades would go high and low end.
  • 0

#75 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 01 November 2012 - 03:51 AM

So you're saying that Gillis should trade Luongo for the first offer of a 5th round pick or an outrageous cap dump?


I never said that. I was asking for an explanation as to how a 34 year-old NHL backup in 2013 would be more valuable than a 33 year-old NHL starter in 2012. The answer is that he's not. The Canucks will just be even more desperate in 2013, which should be plainly obvious to anyone.
  • 0

#76 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,877 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 01 November 2012 - 01:48 PM

I never said that. I was asking for an explanation as to how a 34 year-old NHL backup in 2013 would be more valuable than a 33 year-old NHL starter in 2012. The answer is that he's not. The Canucks will just be even more desperate in 2013, which should be plainly obvious to anyone.


Okay, so are you are on side with Gillis being patient and waiting for the best deal, or are you saying that Luongo should be moved out of town for to the first team that dangles a 5th round pick and cap dump contract under Gillis' nose?

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

#77 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,877 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 01 November 2012 - 03:19 PM

1. Disagree. Luongo would not be comfortable the entire season as Scheider's backup. He may tolerate for a bit if he feels Gillis is close but I imagine Luongo wanting to play rather than sit and watch someone else in his net.

2. Please read what you just wrote any aply it to thy self.

3. It's 10 years for a goalie who has looked shaky. If he was a lock as a great goalie the Canucks wouldn't be trading him.

4. You're forgetting the new rules the NHL wants to put in the new CBA ie teams on waivers count against the cap.

5. You're right, I don't know if Luongo gave a list or not but there seems to be less teams in the mix than there was for Nash.

6. We need to establish Luongo's value. You agree that the market dictates Luongo's value but then you pull this value you have for Luongo out of the air.

7. I don't think Franson would be in RFA status if he signed a one year deal this year. It's 7 years of service or 27 right? He'd be 26 and only played in the NHL for 4 seasons.

8. You were right on how I think the trades would go high and low end.


1.) I don't expect that he would like it, however, I believe that if the team was playing very well, and he (Luongo) felt like he was contributing, then he could bear it a lot longer than if he was just sitting in the press box.

I have great doubts that this situation will go on for as long as you are fearing it might. If it gets near the trade deadline and he still hasn't been moved, then I may start to become concerned.

2.) Hmm, acknowledge that the other team wouldn't want to pay "top dollar" for Luongo. Check. Note that fans are not privy to insider information about deals. Check.

My proposals have looked at this trade from both sides. The difference is that you would sell at the first offer that came along because you are afraid of what might happen, and you look only at the negatives of Luongo (such as they are). I look at Luongo's positives (while being aware of his "negatives") and I still get back a reasonable return. Further, I acknowledge that Burke would not wish to move certain assets, and I work around those, once again getting a reasonable return. The biggest differences are that I am not panic selling, and I am not starting from a negative value position when placing a value on Luongo.

And why do you not apply your advice to thy self? I am accused of looking at deals only from a Canucks perspective, something which is not true BTW. You, on the other hand seem to be looking at this potential deal only from the *other* team's perspective. You suggest that the best Gillis can hope for might be Lombardi and a couple of other minimal assets (see #8) for one of the best goales in the world. Luongo will be here for the rest of his career if that is all Gillis can expect.

Try lookiing at your low end offer from Vancouver's perspective. Explain how trading Luongo for Lombardi, a 2nd round pick and a prospect who would likely never play for the Canucks, is a good deal for now and going forward. Explain how it would be good for the team spirit to move Luongo for pretty much nothing and therefore not providing any help to a Cup run. Yes, that won't cause any problems in the locker room.

Is Vancouver supposed to be happy with getting rid of Luongo's "terrrible" contract as the center piece of this deal? Yeah, the Canucks would have all of this extra cap space, right? So what? How will it help when UFA's see how Gillis did nothing to improve his team with this deal. I'm sure that the "Webers" "Suters", and "Parises" of future years will jump at the chance to play here.

And if you think that a lot of UFA's already don't want to play here, this result would drive away the rest of them.

3.) Yeah, and on some nights the team in front of him hasn't looked that good either. They get to go to the bench after they've screwed up, so folks tend to "forget" about those failings.

Yeah, there's 10 years left on the contract. If you want to run to the negative high ground, then this could be an issue for a team. I strongly suspect that Luongo will retire after 6 years. Otherwise, as has been noted before, he could very likely find another home with a team with a self imposed salary cap who are trying to reach the cap floor.

As to the Canucks trading him, isn't it a sound business decision? Schneider is younger, cheaper and has shown a lot of potential. The management, the coaches and the team have confidence in him. This does not diminish Luongo's ability or value, as much as you claim it does so as to support your side of this discussion. Does it hurt some? Sure. A bit. Does it hurt his value enough that an acceptable return goes from a quality roster player, a top prospect and a 1st to Lombardi, a 2nd and a low-mid prospect? No.

4.) Well, that would only be if he was not picked up, no? In any event, the waiver concept was a throw-in. If any team would want Luongo for a back-up job and his high cap hit, then they would likely (and very happily) trade for him, using a low end prospect. A contract for a contract deal.

5.) There seems to be less because pretty much everyone is focussing on Florida, TB and the Leafs. Columbus is written off because, well c'mon, it's Columbus! Phoenix like are automatically eliminated for financial reasons. And yet other teams are written off (by the fans and media) because, "he wouldn't want to play there", not that they have any first hand knowledge on the subject.

As mentioned, Luongo looks/sounds to open to a lot more destinations than all of the usual suspects.

6.) Hardly out of the air. I have explained why the market, in this case the Leafs should place the value which I showed upon Luongo. I even indicated why they should give up some of the assets which I have suggested. Any contrary offer which I have seen boils down to: "Luongo contract =/= good. Trade for best pile of crap we can find." They do not address Luongo's ability, and the difference he will make to this other team, both in the regular season and the playoffs.

Value for value is what I did. And as yet, there has not been any kind of significant counter to my proposal.

7.) Yeah, maybe about Franson's RFA status. In any event, this doesn't do much to improve his worth to the Leafs. His greatest value would likely be having his rights as a throw-in on some significant deal (like the Luongo deal). Pretty much everything I've erad indicates he has little interest in returning to the Leafs.

8.) Re-read #2 above. I like to think I'm closer to what the final result will be, but sure, you may be. I hope not. :)


regards,
G.

Edited by Gollumpus, 01 November 2012 - 06:02 PM.

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

#78 ConnorFutureGM

ConnorFutureGM

    Comets Regular

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

Posted 01 November 2012 - 08:30 PM

Ok, Gollumpus

Lets try to find his value.

Gillis has said he wants a top 6 forward, a prospect and a 1st. IMO that is the absolute high point. He's not going to ask for less than what he really wants and the market isn't hot enough for Luongo to start an all out bidding war.

What teams are legitimately in play for Luongo? To me it's Toronto and Florida with maybe Chicago and Edmonton.

Now each team is going to want to pay the least amount possible.

Florida does not need Luongo. They know he wants to go there but they have the best goalie prospect in the league in Markstrom and they got good, cheap goaltending from Theodore and Clemmensen. Florida is also a budget team so anything coming in has to have equal dollars going out. What value would they get from acquring Luongo? Not much since they already have decent goaltending and a potential franchise goalie in the making. What it gives them is a "big" trade to gain fan interest, that's about it.

Florida offers a cap dump and a B level prospect. Anything more would not be worth it to them.

Toronto headed by Burke has been a disaster. They have been unable to find players to fill key positions like #1 centre, #1 goaltender and #1 defenceman. The Leafs need a goaltender and Luongo would fit that bill but Burke has also been quite outspoken against long term contracts. i see Burke having interest in Luongo if he feels he's getting him at a bargain price. With that being said, Burke's need to get the Leafs into the playoffs will likely make him the highest bidder.

Toronto offers Franson, Bozak, Kadri/Colborne, 2nd, Lomardi. Burke will need to send a bad contract back to receive what he deems a bad contract. You can take out Lombardi but then also take out Kadri/Colborne or the 2nd.

Chicago's goaltending was shkay last season after having solid goaltending from Crawford the year before. Crawford still has two more seasons before he becomes a UFA. Chicago is a team with a model that doesn't spend a lot on goaltending and they won a cup with that model. Their defence is relatively deep along with their forwards. With the rivalry both teams will not want to lose this deal.

Chicago offers Frolik, Beach, 1st. Might be a conditional 1st on this year or the next.

Edmonton has been in the basement for a few seasons but are looking to get back into the playoff mix. They have loads of talent but aren't going to be selling the future at the for the present. They have Dubnyk who has been improving every season and whose numbers weren't fall off Luongo's last season. They would like to add more stability in net but not at a major cost of the future.

Horcoff, Omark, 2014 1st FOR Luongo
  • 0

#79 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,757 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 01 November 2012 - 08:48 PM

Ok, Gollumpus

Lets try to find his value.

Gillis has said he wants a top 6 forward, a prospect and a 1st. IMO that is the absolute high point. He's not going to ask for less than what he really wants and the market isn't hot enough for Luongo to start an all out bidding war.

What teams are legitimately in play for Luongo? To me it's Toronto and Florida with maybe Chicago and Edmonton.

Now each team is going to want to pay the least amount possible.

Florida does not need Luongo. They know he wants to go there but they have the best goalie prospect in the league in Markstrom and they got good, cheap goaltending from Theodore and Clemmensen. Florida is also a budget team so anything coming in has to have equal dollars going out. What value would they get from acquring Luongo? Not much since they already have decent goaltending and a potential franchise goalie in the making. What it gives them is a "big" trade to gain fan interest, that's about it.

Florida offers a cap dump and a B level prospect. Anything more would not be worth it to them.

Toronto headed by Burke has been a disaster. They have been unable to find players to fill key positions like #1 centre, #1 goaltender and #1 defenceman. The Leafs need a goaltender and Luongo would fit that bill but Burke has also been quite outspoken against long term contracts. i see Burke having interest in Luongo if he feels he's getting him at a bargain price. With that being said, Burke's need to get the Leafs into the playoffs will likely make him the highest bidder.

Toronto offers Franson, Bozak, Kadri/Colborne, 2nd, Lomardi. Burke will need to send a bad contract back to receive what he deems a bad contract. You can take out Lombardi but then also take out Kadri/Colborne or the 2nd.

Chicago's goaltending was shkay last season after having solid goaltending from Crawford the year before. Crawford still has two more seasons before he becomes a UFA. Chicago is a team with a model that doesn't spend a lot on goaltending and they won a cup with that model. Their defence is relatively deep along with their forwards. With the rivalry both teams will not want to lose this deal.

Chicago offers Frolik, Beach, 1st. Might be a conditional 1st on this year or the next.

Edmonton has been in the basement for a few seasons but are looking to get back into the playoff mix. They have loads of talent but aren't going to be selling the future at the for the present. They have Dubnyk who has been improving every season and whose numbers weren't fall off Luongo's last season. They would like to add more stability in net but not at a major cost of the future.

Horcoff, Omark, 2014 1st FOR Luongo

Absolutely horrible deal. Horcoff is overpayed, Omark isn't even Oiler property anymore, and the 1st in 2014 is useless.

Gagner/Hemsky, Curtis Hamilton and 2013 1st for Luongo matches his value much better than that.
  • 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


#80 ConnorFutureGM

ConnorFutureGM

    Comets Regular

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

Posted 01 November 2012 - 09:32 PM

Absolutely horrible deal. Horcoff is overpayed, Omark isn't even Oiler property anymore, and the 1st in 2014 is useless.

Gagner/Hemsky, Curtis Hamilton and 2013 1st for Luongo matches his value much better than that.

Edmonton isn't going to trade next year's 1st unless there's conditions on it.
  • 0

#81 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:31 AM

Okay, so are you are on side with Gillis being patient and waiting for the best deal, or are you saying that Luongo should be moved out of town for to the first team that dangles a 5th round pick and cap dump contract under Gillis' nose?


I think he needs to figure out the team's that have interest and that Lu is willing to go to, set a deadline to move him, and allow them to bid. Use them against eachother, take the highest offer and move on.

Lu's value will go nowhere but down as our backup, it'll be bad for this team to have him around, and there's really just no benefit to "waiting" for this magical, perfect deal that may not EVER come around. And then it's a waiver situation.
  • 0

#82 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:39 AM

Gagner/Hemsky, Curtis Hamilton and 2013 1st for Luongo matches his value much better than that.


You really just don't get it. I actually thought that Conor's deals were even too high - especially the Toronto one - but this is just insane.

I'll try to be succinct. This trade is not about how good Roberto Luongo is. He has asked out. He is being traded. This affects his value. Remember when Sheldon Souray wanted out of Edmonton? Nobody wanted to touch that contract, so he was waived and spent a year in the AHL - not because he wasn't good enough to play in the NHL, but because the context of the deal - terms of contract, mostly - made nobody want him. Same with Wade Redden. Luongo's probably not quite at that level, but he's just not that hot a commodity, because of his age and his contract.

You are going to be extremely disappointed when he actually gets traded if you're actually expecting something like the above.

Edited by King of the ES, 02 November 2012 - 03:41 AM.

  • 0

#83 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,877 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 04 November 2012 - 08:26 AM

Ok, Gollumpus

Lets try to find his value.

Gillis has said he wants a top 6 forward, a prospect and a 1st. IMO that is the absolute high point. He's not going to ask for less than what he really wants and the market isn't hot enough for Luongo to start an all out bidding war.

What teams are legitimately in play for Luongo? To me it's Toronto and Florida with maybe Chicago and Edmonton.


OK, ConnorFutureGM

Yes, let's try to find Luongo's value.

I believe Gillis asking for a top-6 forward, a top prospect and a 1st is meant as a guideline to what Gillis sees as Luongo's value. If he got back a different package with similar value I believe he'd be okay with it. A top-2 d-man, a quality prospect (say a guy who will make the NHL as a 2/3 tweener, and a 1st) would probably get the deal done. A top-9 forward, with two high-end prospects, an additional decent contract/prospect and a 2nd might also get the deal done (the value of the 2 prospects likely would be greater than that of a top prospect and a 1st that could be around 15 - 20th.


Now each team is going to want to pay the least amount possible.


I'll take that as a given. However, just because the buyer wants to pay the least amount possible does not mean that the seller has to accept that offer. Combine this with the fact that there are other potential buyers (including some of which we are unaware) will result in the winning bid being higher than you suggest.


Florida does not need Luongo. They know he wants to go there but they have the best goalie prospect in the league in Markstrom and they got good, cheap goaltending from Theodore and Clemmensen. Florida is also a budget team so anything coming in has to have equal dollars going out. What value would they get from acquring Luongo? Not much since they already have decent goaltending and a potential franchise goalie in the making. What it gives them is a "big" trade to gain fan interest, that's about it.

Florida offers a cap dump and a B level prospect. Anything more would not be worth it to them.


1.) Don't kid yourself. Florida does need Luongo. Theodore (36) and Clemmenson (35) are both on their last legs, even though they are still very serviceable for the short term. How good they will be after the number of subtractions from last year's team remains to be seen (Allen, Garrison, Kulikov - RFA, McCabe, Wideman are out, Kuba is in).

Markstrom has the potential to be a very good goalie. This being said, he is young (22), inexperienced (8 games) and he has had injury issues (knee).

Where Luongo fits in this picture is the time period between now and when Markstrom becomes NHL ready. Is Tallon that confident that Theodore/Clemmenson can carry the Panters for perhaps the next 4 years (assuming Markstrom develops at a similar pace to Schneider)?

And having Luongo as the starter for the next 4 years wouldn't be a bad thing, followed by 2 years where they share duties or Luongo plays more of a back-up role. After that, Luongo likely retires, or the Panthers move him to another team which wants Luongo as a player or just for his high salary cap/low actual salary.

As to your Florida offer, I is way short of the mark. Further, they don't have a lot of cap dump left in Florida. Tallon has swept the place out pretty good. About the only guy left who would qualify as a cap dump would be Jovanovski, and I believe he is still very popular with Tallon. Assuming he's the guy, Vancouver has no significant need of him (age, injury history, 35+ contract, and I believe he is a left-side d-man). What could be done to make him more acceptable in this trade? Ballard could become part of this deal. He is younger, a better skater (what with Jovanovski's injury issues and age), has a good offensive upside (which he hasn't had too much of a chance to show while he has been here, and he costs about the same), and is also a left-side d-man.

The Panthers will also no longer need at least one Theodore or Clemmenson. I suspect that Clemmenson will be the guy moved, mostly because he has two years of contract left to Theodore one. Whichever of the two comes here can act as back-up to Schneider for one year (and then be moved out for Lack).

The Panthers will not want to trade Bjugstad. Gillis will push hard for him. If he decides he can live without this kid, Gillis will look at picking up other assets. Petrovic is a prospect who is showing a lot of promise. He has decent size, and a bit of a mean streak. He will need another 2 - 3 years in the minors, but he could be quite good.

My deal (assumes Gillis doesn't make any other acquisitions, like Arnott, to fill team needs):

to Florida - Luongo, (Ballard), 2nd, Sauve, mid-level prospect (contract dump, if needed)

to Vancouver - (Jovanovski), Clemmenson, Goc, Petrovic, 2013 1st (or Bengtsson and Howden)


If Jovanovski isn't in the deal, then remove Ballard. It doesn't really change the cap hit exchange all that much.

If Tallon doesn't want to trade his 1st, then the deal morphs to include Bengtsson and Howden, and the Canucks would move back an additional, lesser prospect/contract. If he wants to keep his top prospect (Bjugstad) and his 1st then he has to pay a price.

This deal doesn't address the 2nd line RW spot, but that might well be filled by Kassian. The team might not need Goc at 3C if we assume that Gillis is interested in Arnott, and signs him for a year, or Gillis trusts that Malhotra can come back to form from two years ago. If that is the case, then Goc could be replaced with another prospect (Howden or Bengtsson?).


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

#84 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,877 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 04 November 2012 - 09:47 AM

Continuing on...

Toronto headed by Burke has been a disaster. They have been unable to find players to fill key positions like #1 centre, #1 goaltender and #1 defenceman. The Leafs need a goaltender and Luongo would fit that bill but Burke has also been quite outspoken against long term contracts. i see Burke having interest in Luongo if he feels he's getting him at a bargain price. With that being said, Burke's need to get the Leafs into the playoffs will likely make him the highest bidder.

Toronto offers Franson, Bozak, Kadri/Colborne, 2nd, Lomardi. Burke will need to send a bad contract back to receive what he deems a bad contract. You can take out Lombardi but then also take out Kadri/Colborne or the 2nd.


Burke may not like the idea of him signing players to long term contracts, but that won't stop him from trading for a player he needs who has a long term contract.

As to your offer, Franson is potentially of little value even though he has the potential to be a very good player. As mentioned previously, he may well not want to play here (even though he is a BC boy). If he was to be included in the deal, then he would not be a centerpiece, and I would think that Gillis would want to talk to him first (via his current team etc) and see if he sees himself as a Canuck. If a contract can be worked out, then I'd be okay pickiing him up, but I'm not too optimistic.

Bozak could be a good addition. This assumes that Gillis doesn't want to stick with Malhotra as 3C for the last year of his contract, or, that he has already got an agreement in the works with Arnott (which got put on hold).

If it's a choice of Kadri or Colborne then it's Colborne, no second thoughts. I suspect that Burke will not want to move his top center prospect, so Gillis will either have to push for a long time (and possibly win) or look at alternatives.

2nd round pick is meh.

Lombardi as cap dump may or may not happen.


As I see it, Gillis is giving in far too much in your proposal. He's allowing Burke to keep his 2013 1st, he's taking back a very bad contract/player, he's taking Franson who may well not want to play here, and all he really has to show for it is Colborne (who I suspect Burke will not deal). You're also sticking the Canucks with an extra contract of which they would have to get rid before the season started.

If Burke doesn't want to move one of his top-6 forwards, then MacArthur or Kulemin (assuming Gillis thinks the Kassian is still not ready for top-6 duties) could be included as the "roster player" for which Gillis has asked. Kulemin has two years at less of a cap hit left on his deal to MacArthur's one. MacArthur looks to be the more reliable scorer. Bozak is also a candidate to be in the deal if Gillis either doesn't have faith that Malhotra is back to form or that a deal hasn't been worked out for Arnott. In any event, Burke is asking Gillis to take something less than the asking price, so he owes Gillis one.

Assuming Burke doesn't want to trade Colborne (which I believe is the case), then Carter Ashton could be inserted into the deal, but Burke owes Gillis one because he is being asked to take less of a return.

Assuming Burke doesn't want to trade his 2013 1st, then the 2014 or 2015 could substituted, or, assuming Burke doesn't want to give either of those up (which I'm assuming will be the case) then he has to toss in Biggs.

Gillis will likely have to take back a cap dump contract in this deal. Lombardi isn't a bad choice amongst those which could be had. Toronto will also have to take a couple of contract dumps back from Vancouver due to the number of the guys being moved to here.

The "one" Burke owes Gillis would be Franson's rights as a toss in. They are pretty much useless to the Leafs, and maybe also to the Canucks, except in trade value for a pick/prospect. He'd be a risk, but if he worked out it could help set the Canucks defence for a good many years. If Burke doesn't want to include Franson then a 2nd round pick.

Burke will want something else back for all the young talent he is losing. I would propose Schroeder be the guy who gets moved, along with 2 other mid-level prospects (likely both forwards but not Gaunce, Jensen or Mallet, or not Connauton if d-men are discussed)

to Toronto - Luongo, Schroeder, 2 other prospects/(contract dumps) as noted above, maybe a 3rd

to Vancouver - (one of MacArthur/Kulemin/Bozak, depending on team needs at the time of the trade), Ashton, Biggs, Lombardi (cap dump for one year), rights to Franson or a 2nd.

- MacArthur/Kulemin/Bozak plays, Ashton and Biggs go to the AHL/juniors, Franson hopefully comes to sign and play, and Lombardi maybe plays some or is in the press box or sent to the minors, depending on how things look with the new CBA etc.


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

#85 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 04 November 2012 - 09:57 AM

1.) Don't kid yourself. Florida does need Luongo. Theodore (36) and Clemmenson (35) are both on their last legs, even though they are still very serviceable for the short term.


And Luongo, at 33, is what? Just about to enter his prime?
  • 0

#86 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,877 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 04 November 2012 - 11:07 AM

Chicago's goaltending was shkay last season after having solid goaltending from Crawford the year before. Crawford still has two more seasons before he becomes a UFA. Chicago is a team with a model that doesn't spend a lot on goaltending and they won a cup with that model. Their defence is relatively deep along with their forwards. With the rivalry both teams will not want to lose this deal.

Chicago offers Frolik, Beach, 1st. Might be a conditional 1st on this year or the next.


So, how's that whole not spending a lot of money on goaltending model been working out for Chicago? To be fair, the team that took the Cup in 2010 had a lot of talented young guys who have since moved on due to cap considerations. They were a one-off who still have a presence only because of a very good core. If they want to go deep into another Cup run then they will need a goalie. Luongo could do that for them.

I don't see the attraction of Frolik. He had a couple of good years in Florida, but for the last three he's been injured and/or under performing. I'm not sure I'd take him. Assuming the Hawks don't want to (or can't) move certain roster players in this deal (Toews, Sharp, Stalberg, Kane, Hossa, Bolland, Seabrook, Keith, Oduya, Montador, Rozsival) it gets a bit difficult to find a roster player I'd take.

Hjalmarsson might be the only option open here. Bolland would be nice to get, but I doubt the Hawks part with him.

Beach is a prospect I believe Gillis would like to acquire.

I agree with your reservations about the 1st, however, should the Hawks get Luongo that pick could be pretty far down the line, so they may not care as much as we think they might.

to Chicago - Luongo, maybe a d-man prospect or pick

to Vancouver - Hjalmarsson, Beach, 1st.

If the Hawks won't be parted with Hjalmarsson then make it McNeill, Hayes or Olsen, Beach, 1st. I'd even go with taking both of Hayes and Olsen and letting the Hawks keep the 1st. This revised deal doesn't do much for the Canucks right now. The hole on the right side could be filled by Kassian, and a deal could be worked out for Arnott.


Edmonton has been in the basement for a few seasons but are looking to get back into the playoff mix. They have loads of talent but aren't going to be selling the future at the for the present. They have Dubnyk who has been improving every season and whose numbers weren't fall off Luongo's last season. They would like to add more stability in net but not at a major cost of the future.

Horcoff, Omark, 2014 1st FOR Luongo


I do not believe Gillis would move Luongo to Edmonton. There are too many untouchables or unwantables on that team.

Horcoff is not going to interest Gillis (and I believe he has a NMC in effect), and Omark (regardless of his status) is also not going to be very interesting to Gillis. I doubt that the Oilers would part with their 1st. Even with Luongo, their 1st will still (at least for this year) be in the middle of the pack. The following year is the pick they would probably like to trade away in a deal for Luongo.

Of the guys on the Oilers, Gagner looks to be the closest thing to an asset which Gillis would want that the Oilers might be willing to give up. And how much better has he been than what Schroeder is projected to become? I think he can be a 15 - 18 goal guy in the NHL.

Were Luongo moved there, I could see the deal being for something like

To Edmonto - Luongo, Schroeder, maybe a d-man prospect (not Connauton)

to Vancouver - Gagner, Klefbom 1st (2014)

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

#87 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,877 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 04 November 2012 - 11:10 AM

And Luongo, at 33, is what? Just about to enter his prime?


Well, he is a better goalie than either of the two guys currently in Florida. He has been injury free for his career. He keeps himself in shape. And as an elite goalie, I'd say he is "still" in his prime.


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

#88 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,877 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 04 November 2012 - 11:43 AM

Gillis has said he wants a top 6 forward, a prospect and a 1st. IMO that is the absolute high point. He's not going to ask for less than what he really wants and the market isn't hot enough for Luongo to start an all out bidding war.

What teams are legitimately in play for Luongo? To me it's Toronto and Florida with maybe Chicago and Edmonton.


To that list I'd also add Tampa Bay.

Yserman may talk about being comfortable with Linback as his starter, however, I don't buy it.

Linback is younger and has less NHL experience (38 games) than Schneider (68 games), and we have folks around here moaning about how risky it is for Gillis to go with such an inexperienced goalie.

I believe TB is still in the hunt and are just lying in the weeds in hopes that they can sneak in at the last minute and out-bid teams like Toronto and not be out bid in turn.

to TB - Luongo, d-man prospect, maybe a 2nd

to Vancouver - Purcell, Aulie, 1st

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

#89 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 04 November 2012 - 12:32 PM

to TB - Luongo, d-man prospect, maybe a 2nd

to Vancouver - Purcell, Aulie, 1st


So Tampa's going to trade a 27 year-old that just had a career season of 65 points, and who they just signed to a 3-year extension in July, as well as an intriguing defenceman with upside that they traded a 1st round pick for (Ashton), and an additional first to the Canucks for a guy that the Canucks have to get rid of?

You. Are. Dreaming.
  • 0

#90 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,757 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 04 November 2012 - 12:41 PM

So Tampa's going to trade a 27 year-old that just had a career season of 65 points, and who they just signed to a 3-year extension in July, as well as an intriguing defenceman with upside that they traded a 1st round pick for (Ashton), and an additional first to the Canucks for a guy that the Canucks have to get rid of?

You. Are. Dreaming.

You are dreaming if you think we are gonna get crap for Luongo. Lu's an elite goalie, and one of the best in the game. You're gonna have to give up value if you wanna get a goalie of Luongo's calibre.
  • 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





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.