Gollumpus Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 One of the most fundamental truths of negotiations is that he who cares less, wins. Mike Gillis will be a lot more eager to get rid of Luongo than anybody will be to acquire him. This puts him in a terrible position. He can put on a front that he's happy to keep both 'tenders, but other GMs just aren't that stupid. There is simply no chance in hell that Gillis/Vancouver will want to allocate $5.3M of cap space to their backup goaltender - and, no, they're not going to split the duty 50/50. In football, if you have two QB's, you have none. Not much different in hockey with goaltenders. This would just create two justifiably disgruntled goalies. Awful idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 Look at his Twitter avatar. No signal there, eh? Denial is a river in Africa, pal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 And once again, you automatically assume that Luongo will not be traded in a timely fashion. Can you perhaps wait at least a week after the season begins before starting in with the "OMG, when are they ever going to trade Luongo?" comments? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 Once again, pal, you failed to address the question I asked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 Uh, he wasn't proposing a trade, he was pointing out what Jaroslav Halak was traded for; Lars Eller and Ian Schultz. Which is again something for you to consider, in light of your Purcell/Aulie/1st idea. Montreal had two goalies, and they needed to move one (sound familiar?). They got Lars Eller and Ian Schultz. Eller's OK - he's Jannik Hansen - Ian Schultz is a 3rd round pick who will probably never see the NHL. So, again, if all that Montreal could get for a 25 year-old that led his team to the ECF in stunning fashion as an 8th seed was a Jannik Hansen-comparable and a mid-to-low level prospect, how in the world do you expect Mike Gillis to land Teddy Purcell, Keith Aulie, and a 1st round pick for 33 year-old Roberto Luongo, with 9 years remaining on his contract? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 That's an assumption right there. How do you know that they're such good friends? You really consume the crap that Gillis et. al. feeds you through the media like it's gospel, don't you? You are simply clueless if you think that the two goalies would be OK with an arrangement like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 Luongo is shaky in the playoffs and even the most blind fanboy should be able to see that. You referenced round 1 against Chicago in 2011 a couple times. Did you forget about our 3-0 series lead? There was no way that series should've gone 7 games. You say without Luongo that we would've been out in that very same 1st round, we were one goal away from that and it was largely due to Luongo's annually shaky playoff performance. Chances are we dont make the playoffs in '07 without Luongo, however he did benefit from AV's strictly defense first system. With Schneider on the team in '11 and '12, whether or not we win the PT is debatable. In '11 we did win by a landslide. Again with 2011, we almost didn't make it out of round 1 in large part because of Luongo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Florida needs him? They must have had a horrible season last year without him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Wrong. I think he will be traded in a timely fashion, which I've already said many times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 What is the question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Meh, US election results are on. Can you believe that most of the folks south of the border don't even care about hockey? regards, G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riviera82 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 This is so laughable, because anyone who watched the games that season would realize that Luongo won AV the Jack Adams trophy, I don't even know how it is debatable. That wasn't a playoff team, it was just Lu. The skater roster had gotten worse after a season in which we missed the playoffs. And who was more benefical to our success? Luongo or AV? Luongo is the clear correct choice. As for the rest, I guess you also didn't see the terrible play by our players, go back and watch the full highlights in games 4 and 5? and you will see how terribly we played and how much better than Hawks were playing than we were. Your argument is just another case of: When we lose it is all Roberto's fault, when we win it is inspite of Roberto. Which really is an age old argument that niether side will ever win, you just have to be able to realize that it is a team sport, and you have to look at everyone's play before you assess the blame to one person, which people in this city clearly don't do enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Also Luongo is much more proven than Halak is, thus will get a higher return for Vancouver than what Halak got for Montreal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 If you believe that Luongo will be traded in a timely fashion, why are you so concerned about his continued presence on the team? It is a major harping point on your part. Just out of curiosity, how do you define "in a timely fashion"? Hours after the new CBA is signed? A day? A week? A month? From the tone of some of your posts, if Luongo was around for perhaps a week(?), then things would go south for the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Oh OK, so are you saying that Luongo would get a higher return than Schneider would? Much more proven, right? Not how it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 I never even said Luongo would get a better return than Schneider, I said he'd get a better return than Halak. Poor reading comprehension to say the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 You said that he'd get a better return than Halak because he's more proven. That being the case, then, it would logically follow that he'd also get a better return than Schneider, since he also is more proven than him. Do you see the flawed logic that you've offered? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 So Luongo did not benefit whatsoever from AV's defense first system, understood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 That being the case, then, it would logically follow that he'd also get a better return than Schneider, since he also is more proven than him. Do you see the flawed logic that you've offered? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 He was talking about Halak's value then vs Luongo's now, he never said anything about Schneider Schneider's scenerio is different than both, so it's not really a good comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.