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.
Others are assuming what will happen should Luongo not be traded in a timely fashion. They do not know how the team will react in this situation. They do not know, or chose to ignore the previous history these team mates have with one another. Rather, they just assume that the team will go to hell if Luongo isn't moved within a minute of the new CBA being signed (yes, that's an exaggeration). Have there been teams which have had a situation similar to Luongo's? Sure. Have some of those situations turned ugly? Sure. Have all of them been bad experiences? Not to my knowledge, and those who disagree with my position do not know either.
The bad one's tend to get remembered rather more than those where results are amicable.
I am assuming anything it is no where near as much as others. I've looked at the relationships on this team, and they have been very good from what we've seen. I acknowledged that there could be a problem if things dragged on for too long, but also noted that how the team handled the situation depended upon their results during the season. The better the results, the easier the relationships would likely be .
Am I assuming? Perhaps. I prefer to think of my position as one of informed opinion.
Your sole reasoning on your proposals is Gillis's wish list to Santa and that Luongo would be happy as Schneider's backup indefinitely.
My proposals do favor the Canucks more than some others. This being said, they are not blindly in favor of the Canucks. I started at Gillis' suggested return in the deal (aka "Santa's wish list"), accepted that the other team had assets which they would not want to move, and looked for alternatives which would still give a good return for Luongo.
Further, as noted previously, I do not suggest that Luongo would be happy as the back-up for an indefinite period of time. I suggest that he would likely be traded much sooner rather than later, however, should he remain with the team for an extended period then the results of the team would mitigate the feelings about his presence. If the team was doing well, and Luongo was contributing, then there would likely be little to no griping to be heard.
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.
As has been noted by Smashian Kassian, I'd want to know how you knew about such an offer. And you would be correct, I would dismiss this offer. Luongo is worth his "bad" contract, while komisarek is very overpaid for the value he provides. also, were this the only return the Canucks could hope to get for Luongo, then it would be far more beneficial to keep Luongo and wait until someone was willing to drastically overpay to get him.
A top-6 forward, a top prospect and a 1st might be a good start...
Your logic is circular and one sided.
Not sure how my logic is circular or one-sided. As noted, I've looked at both team's needs and what they would want to give up in the deal. Does it provide the Canucks with more of a return than a bucket of used pucks? Yup.
What I would like to see is someone do a break down of why they believe Luongo will bring back such a bad return. The top "reasons" look to be:
1.) Luongo has asked to be traded - I don't recall that he has.
2.) Luongo's "bad" contract - I don't believe that it is.
3.) Gillis must dump him quickly for peace in the locker room - likely would only a problem if the situation were to linger for an extended period of time, *and* the team's performance was poor.
And what I'd like to see would be a trade proposal (Luongo for ?), how you came to the conclusion that Luongo is worth such a low return, and how that lousy return would benefit the team.