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

#91 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 04 November 2012 - 01:55 PM

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.


Not when the only alternative for Vancouver is not trading him, which is not an option.
  • 0

#92 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,794 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 04 November 2012 - 02:07 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.


Gee, I thought what I had was enough.

Would adding Connolly to my proposal make it a fairer deal?

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

#93 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,486 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 04 November 2012 - 02:11 PM

Not when the only alternative for Vancouver is not trading him, which is not an option.

Actually, that is an option, you're just too blind to see it. Again, what's wrong with keeping one of the best tandem's in the league together if we can't find a good deal for Lu?
  • 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


#94 ConnorFutureGM

ConnorFutureGM

    Comets Regular

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

Posted 04 November 2012 - 03:07 PM

Actually, that is an option, you're just too blind to see it. Again, what's wrong with keeping one of the best tandem's in the league together if we can't find a good deal for Lu?

When fanboys say it's an option holding on to Luongo they take no account of how Luongo and Schneider would feel about the situation and what it would manifest into.
  • 0

#95 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,794 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 04 November 2012 - 03:46 PM

When fanboys say it's an option holding on to Luongo they take no account of how Luongo and Schneider would feel about the situation and what it would manifest into.


When people are so caught up with one position being the "right one", they fail to see any possibilities other than the one to which they have given their allegiance.

regards,
G.
  • 1
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#96 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 04 November 2012 - 04:23 PM

Actually, that is an option, you're just too blind to see it. Again, what's wrong with keeping one of the best tandem's in the league together if we can't find a good deal for Lu?


Nothing, if the goal is to have a distracted, thoroughly annoyed locker room, and two disgruntled goalies.

Edited by King of the ES, 04 November 2012 - 04:23 PM.

  • 0

#97 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,342 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 04 November 2012 - 04:40 PM

When people are so caught up with one position being the "right one", they fail to see any possibilities other than the one to which they have given their allegiance.

regards,
G.


+1

Thank godness someone has some sense.
  • 0

zackass.png


#98 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 04 November 2012 - 05:45 PM

+1

Thank godness someone has some sense.


Right, and the guy with "sense" is the one expecting a 65 point-getter, a high-end D prospect, and a 1st round pick for Roberto Luongo.

Like I said, happy dreaming.
  • 0

#99 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,342 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 04 November 2012 - 06:26 PM

Right, and the guy with "sense" is the one expecting a 65 point-getter, a high-end D prospect, and a 1st round pick for Roberto Luongo.

Like I said, happy dreaming.


So Purcell, Aulie and a 1st.

Yeah not bad actually, well first off as I have said many times Tampa Bay isn't in the market for Luongo, but i'm not gunna go into that again.

His deal is better than your deal.
  • 0

zackass.png


#100 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,486 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 04 November 2012 - 06:40 PM

Right, and the guy with "sense" is the one expecting a 65 point-getter, a high-end D prospect, and a 1st round pick for Roberto Luongo.

Like I said, happy dreaming.

Keith Aulie is no where near a 'high-end D prospect'. You're just saying that to push the argument in your favour. He's a good D prospect, not high-end. You'd think Toronto would've kept him if he was what you say he is.
  • 1

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


#101 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 04 November 2012 - 07:06 PM

His deal is better than your deal.


Of course it is, from the Canucks' perspective. The problem is that it would never happen.
  • 0

#102 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 04 November 2012 - 07:09 PM

Keith Aulie is no where near a 'high-end D prospect'. You're just saying that to push the argument in your favour. He's a good D prospect, not high-end. You'd think Toronto would've kept him if he was what you say he is.


Yzerman thought high enough of him to trade his 2009 1st round pick for him, Carter Ashton.

If you think Jordan Schroeder's "high-end", then Keith Aulie must be, too.
  • 0

#103 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,342 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 04 November 2012 - 07:39 PM

Of course it is, from the Canucks' perspective. The problem is that it would never happen.


Yeah well I would rather propose something that won't be accepted the way it is, but has the base to be worked into something. rather than propose something where we get fleeced like you did.

Yzerman thought high enough of him to trade his 2009 1st round pick for him, Carter Ashton.

If you think Jordan Schroeder's "high-end", then Keith Aulie must be, too.


29th overall pick, yeah Ashton is a real gem too.

Aulie isn't high end, he's a good young player but he isn't high end, for me high end is like Jake Gardiner.
  • 0

zackass.png


#104 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,794 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 04 November 2012 - 10:03 PM

Nothing, if the goal is to have a distracted, thoroughly annoyed locker room, and two disgruntled goalies.


And once again, you do not know how anyone on the team will react to the situation should Luongo remain with the team for a an extended period of time. You are making an assumption. Your assumptions are not facts.

Further, you assume that Luongo will *not* be traded in a timely fashion.

I think he will be gone fairly soon after the new CBA is signed. And even if he were not traded by the deadline, how the team is performing would help shape how they feel about the situation. If the Canucks were bumped from the playoffs (or missed the playoffs entirely), with Luongo still here and not contributing, then there could be an argument made for your point of view. On the other hand, what if the team went all the way through and won the Cup, with Luongo being the "back-up" and providing a valuable contribution?


Right, and the guy with "sense" is the one expecting a 65 point-getter, a high-end D prospect, and a 1st round pick for Roberto Luongo.

Like I said, happy dreaming.


You continue to under value what Luongo will bring back in a trade. This being said, my proposals are a more valid starting point for Gillis and another GM to discuss a deal, rather than, "Here's some old socks. Give us Luongo." And what is to be gained from trading Luongo for next to nothing? Maybe a bit of cap space after the cap dump contract moves on in a few years, and a happy locker room, assuming the guys on the team are still happy with the worthless acquisitions you suggest Gillis will get for Luongo.

It's also ironic that you demand that Gillis should trade Luongo as quickly as possible, yet you claim that Gillis will not be able to get anything of significant value for Luongo, which will mean that he will not be traded. And so the cycle goes around.


Of course it is, from the Canucks' perspective. The problem is that it would never happen.


And fortunately, neither will your proposals.


regards,
G.
  • 1
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#105 ConnorFutureGM

ConnorFutureGM

    Comets Regular

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

Posted 04 November 2012 - 11:44 PM

And once again, you do not know how anyone on the team will react to the situation should Luongo remain with the team for a an extended period of time. You are making an assumption. Your assumptions are not facts.

Further, you assume that Luongo will *not* be traded in a timely fashion.

I think he will be gone fairly soon after the new CBA is signed. And even if he were not traded by the deadline, how the team is performing would help shape how they feel about the situation. If the Canucks were bumped from the playoffs (or missed the playoffs entirely), with Luongo still here and not contributing, then there could be an argument made for your point of view. On the other hand, what if the team went all the way through and won the Cup, with Luongo being the "back-up" and providing a valuable contribution?

You continue to under value what Luongo will bring back in a trade. This being said, my proposals are a more valid starting point for Gillis and another GM to discuss a deal, rather than, "Here's some old socks. Give us Luongo." And what is to be gained from trading Luongo for next to nothing? Maybe a bit of cap space after the cap dump contract moves on in a few years, and a happy locker room, assuming the guys on the team are still happy with the worthless acquisitions you suggest Gillis will get for Luongo.

It's also ironic that you demand that Gillis should trade Luongo as quickly as possible, yet you claim that Gillis will not be able to get anything of significant value for Luongo, which will mean that he will not be traded. And so the cycle goes around.

You accuse others of assuming and having unrealistic trade proposals while your proposals and assumptions are exactly the same except much to far in the Canucks' favor.

Your sole reasoning on your proposals is Gillis's wish list to Santa and that Luongo would be happy as Schneider's backup indefinitely.

What if I told you that Brian Burke said the most he would trade for Luongo is Komisarek, a cap dump for a cap dump? You would completely dismiss this idea even if every other GM in the league was saying that's what they would offer for Luongo.

Your logic is circular and one sided.
  • 0

#106 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,486 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 04 November 2012 - 11:50 PM

You accuse others of assuming and having unrealistic trade proposals while your proposals and assumptions are exactly the same except much to far in the Canucks' favor.

Your sole reasoning on your proposals is Gillis's wish list to Santa and that Luongo would be happy as Schneider's backup indefinitely.

What if I told you that Brian Burke said the most he would trade for Luongo is Komisarek, a cap dump for a cap dump? You would completely dismiss this idea even if every other GM in the league was saying that's what they would offer for Luongo.

Your logic is circular and one sided.

Gollumpus's proposals are pretty much what Luongo should easily get. Your proposals on the other hand, are absolute crap and are almost insulting to a goalie of Lu's calibre.
  • 1

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


#107 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,342 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 05 November 2012 - 12:46 AM

You accuse others of assuming and having unrealistic trade proposals while your proposals and assumptions are exactly the same except much to far in the Canucks' favor.


Okay which of these two deals is more slanted in either teams favour

King of ES's deal: Luongo + Ballard for Paajarvi

Gollumpus's deal: Purcell + Aulie + 1st for Luongo + Sauve


It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that Gollumpus's deal is much more realistic and much closer to a legitamite deal than King's is.

Your sole reasoning on your proposals is Gillis's wish list to Santa and that Luongo would be happy as Schneider's backup indefinitely.


Where are you getting this information??? He never said that, your just making stuff up to try to put a point behind your "unreasonable" argument.

And futhurmore, what this comment you just made, and the one he acctually made in his post, aren't even in the same context. Your refering to different things.


What if I told you that Brian Burke said the most he would trade for Luongo is Komisarek, a cap dump for a cap dump? You would completely dismiss this idea even if every other GM in the league was saying that's what they would offer for Luongo.

Your logic is circular and one sided.


This is pretty hypocritical of you to say.

Your logic is anything you say goes, it doesn't matter if it is in context with the original post or not, if you say something, your right.


Okay so now onto this last part. (Btw I didn't know you were that close to Brian Burke & the other GM's that they would tell you that information, oh wait, it's purley your speculation in a hypothetical situation that isn't likely at all). So really I'm not even sure what that was about since it is just your speculation about an unrealistic hypothetical situation.

And if your really underrating Roberto that much, then I suggest watching and paying attention to hockey a little more, cause then you would realize that Komisarek is overpaid for what he provides, and that he can barley stay in line-up.

Where as Luongo provides a good enough level of play to warrant the money he gets.

Basiclly, one is a 5th, 6th or 7th defensemen that is overpaid, and the other is a star goalie that in my honest opinion (after watching ever single game last year) was the best player on the president trophy winners.

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 05 November 2012 - 12:48 AM.

  • 1

zackass.png


#108 ConnorFutureGM

ConnorFutureGM

    Comets Regular

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

Posted 05 November 2012 - 01:36 AM

I thought that deal of Luongo, Ballard FOR Paajarvi was off. The Oilers would be taking 9.5 mil in salary back and what is considered two bad contracts for Paajarvi.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist? Tell me using logic and reason why Gollumps deal makes more sense.

Gollumps has said several times that Luongo would be fine as being a backup to Schneider.

You're mistaken on Luongo's value compared to salary. Luongo is being paid as a difference maker goaltender, has he ever brought the Canucks to a level higher than they were? Look at Kiprusoff in Calgary, he makes a difference. Without Kiprusoff, Calgary would have likely been a lottery team. If anything, Luongo's shakyness has lessened the success the Canucks should have gotten. Luongo could not stop the puck when he needed to in the playoffs.

So teams see this goalie on the Canucks who is shaky. Since been in the NHL he never really brought a team to the next level, carrying them on his back. They also see attached to this shaky goalie a big contract. Teams are going to have to commit to a a goalie who gets paid like a difference maker for the next 10 years. Whatever team taking him on is taking a big risk.

The best I've ever seen Luongo play was in the WJC. Canada only got 2nd that year but he was unbelievable.
  • 0

#109 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,486 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 05 November 2012 - 01:45 AM

I thought that deal of Luongo, Ballard FOR Paajarvi was off. The Oilers would be taking 9.5 mil in salary back and what is considered two bad contracts for Paajarvi.

You think the only reason why that atrocious deal is off because the Oilers would be taking back $9.5 million of salary??? You are either

A) a troll
B ) retarded
C) A Luongo hater
D) All of the above

Edited by Steven Stamkos' Mullet, 05 November 2012 - 01:45 AM.

  • 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


#110 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 05 November 2012 - 05:03 AM

29th overall pick, yeah Ashton is a real gem too.


Is Nick Jensen a real gem? 29th overall pick in 2011.

Something tells me that you'll think he's far better and far more valuable than Ashton. :lol:
  • 0

#111 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 05 November 2012 - 05:07 AM

And once again, you do not know how anyone on the team will react to the situation should Luongo remain with the team for a an extended period of time. You are making an assumption. Your assumptions are not facts.


And you are also making an assumption that there wouldn't be any of these locker room problems that I've mentioned. So, yes, we're both making assumptions.

It's also ironic that you demand that Gillis should trade Luongo as quickly as possible, yet you claim that Gillis will not be able to get anything of significant value for Luongo, which will mean that he will not be traded. And so the cycle goes around.


Not really. The point is that Gillis really doesn't have a choice. He has to move Luongo - whether it's the day of the new CBA, whether it's the summer of 2013, he has to move him. Because of this fact, the idea of bringing back a return of Purcell, Aulie, and a 1st is nothing more than a pipe dream.
  • 0

#112 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 05 November 2012 - 05:09 AM

Gollumpus's proposals are pretty much what Luongo should easily get. Your proposals on the other hand, are absolute crap and are almost insulting to a goalie of Lu's calibre.


Again, you simply do not understand the context of this deal, and you would be wise to prepare yourself for some serious, serious disappointment when the trade actually goes down, if you're expecting a package like what Gollumpus has proposed.
  • 0

#113 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 05 November 2012 - 05:11 AM

Okay which of these two deals is more slanted in either teams favour

King of ES's deal: Luongo + Ballard for Paajarvi

Gollumpus's deal: Purcell + Aulie + 1st for Luongo + Sauve


The deal above was something that I wrote in passing. Still reasonable, IMO.

However, my actual Luongo proposal was Luongo + Tanev to Chicago for Leddy + Frolik + Beach.
  • 0

#114 ConnorFutureGM

ConnorFutureGM

    Comets Regular

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

Posted 05 November 2012 - 10:19 AM

You think the only reason why that atrocious deal is off because the Oilers would be taking back $9.5 million of salary??? You are either

A) a troll
B ) retarded
C) A Luongo hater
D) All of the above

Ballard is a negative value contract like Horcoff, Komisarek, Lecavalier, Gomez, etc
  • 0

#115 ConnorFutureGM

ConnorFutureGM

    Comets Regular

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

Posted 05 November 2012 - 10:21 AM

The deal above was something that I wrote in passing. Still reasonable, IMO.

However, my actual Luongo proposal was Luongo + Tanev to Chicago for Leddy + Frolik + Beach.

I see the reasoning behind it but I havent seen a team take that much salary in one deal.
  • 0

#116 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,342 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 05 November 2012 - 04:52 PM

Is Nick Jensen a real gem? 29th overall pick in 2011.

Something tells me that you'll think he's far better and far more valuable than Ashton. :lol:


:picard: :picard: :picard: :picard:

And Ashton was the 29th pick overall in 09? What's your point??

And yeah he is a real gem because he has exceeded expectations and already looks like he will turn out far better then players chosen before him.

And just to compare the two since Ashton is "far more valuable" apparently:

Ashton has 2 points in 8 games and has been in there top 6 pretty much the entire time.

Jensen has 11 points in 19 games, and that is against hard competition (I have to say Sweden is probably a bit tougher than the AHL) And also not to mention that his coach for whatever reason has had him on the 4th line for about the last 5 games (I dont know the exact number), possibly more and he was leading the team is scoring at the time (goes to show how smart that coach is) and his team is in Last in the entire league, and he is/was (before getting demoted) still ripping it up like that.

So Jensen is 2 years younger, playing against the same level of competition (possibly harder), and is doing better on a worse team than Ashton.

You really shouldn't base anything off Draft Order, even though is this case that part of your argument didn't work out so well either.
  • 0

zackass.png


#117 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,342 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 05 November 2012 - 04:56 PM

The deal above was something that I wrote in passing. Still reasonable, IMO.

However, my actual Luongo proposal was Luongo + Tanev to Chicago for Leddy + Frolik + Beach.


If by reasonable you mean highway robbery for them than I agree.


And I wouldn't do that Chicago deal. Frolik is worse than Raymond, Beach seems to be a bust, Leddy is a pretty good young player but do you really want to hand Luongo to our arch rival, making them much better than the deal would make us? No it would be a career killer for MG.

This deal would hinder us more than it would help us, no way I would trade Lu there unless a star player came back which won't happen, and that's why Chicago is an unrealistic trading partner.
  • 1

zackass.png


#118 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,342 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 05 November 2012 - 04:59 PM

And you are also making an assumption that there wouldn't be any of these locker room problems that I've mentioned. So, yes, we're both making assumptions.


Actually he's not making any assumptions, only you are.

Because Cory and Lu are good friends, and we already seen first hand that it can work without issue if it has too, not to mention everyone in the room likes both. As Mike Gillis said, it can work because we have seen it work, what better proof is there?
  • 0

zackass.png


#119 ConnorFutureGM

ConnorFutureGM

    Comets Regular

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

Posted 05 November 2012 - 10:48 PM

Actually he's not making any assumptions, only you are.

Because Cory and Lu are good friends, and we already seen first hand that it can work without issue if it has too, not to mention everyone in the room likes both. As Mike Gillis said, it can work because we have seen it work, what better proof is there?

Why if Schneider and Luongo are such good friends did Luongo ask for a trade?
  • 0

#120 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,342 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 05 November 2012 - 11:37 PM

Why if Schneider and Luongo are such good friends did Luongo ask for a trade?


Because he realizes that Schneids is a starter now, so one of them has to go eventually, his relationship with the fans has reached a new level of hate, and it's best for him and for the organization.

It has nothing to do with there friendship, they are still great friends, I'm not sure what point you are trying to make.
  • 1

zackass.png





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.