Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

VAN - FLA


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
135 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 08 December 2012 - 11:34 AM

I say offensively Jensen is better, skating is probably around the same, both are about the same size, Biggs is probably heavier and he's more nasty but Jensen has better offensive ability.

It's just what kind of player you prefer really.


Is it? Because two posts earlier, you said this:

Jensen > Biggs
(Shouldn't have to explain those two, pretty obvious)


So which one is it?

#92 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 08 December 2012 - 11:42 AM

Chicago (Crawford at $2.5+ million, and one year left after this season)), Columbus (all three of the listed goalies will be RFA's at the end of this year), Detroit (Howard is a UFA at the end of this season), Edmonton (Dubnyk maybe can have a case made for him), Phoenix (both goalies are UFA's after this season), San Jose (Niemi? I could see the Sharks unloading the remaining term of his contract to make way), maybe the Islanders or Flyers if they buy out a contract under the bew CBA. And then there's the Leafs, the Panthers and the Bolts.


Chicago would make sense, but the chances of us dealing with them are low. Lu will not waive his NTC to go to Columbus, probably not to Brooklyn, either. Detroit would not be interested - Jimmy Howard will be extended. Phoenix has Mike Smith and will presumably extend him. Edmonton is a division rival - unlikely. San Jose would then have to do something with Niemi - already heavily invested, like I said - which would be very difficult to do.

Philly's not going to be buying out Bryzgalov 1 year into his deal. If Florida won't even give us Nick Bjugstad for him, how badly do you think they want him? And why are you assuming that Tampa wants him?

#93 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,964 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 08 December 2012 - 12:52 PM

Calling Jensen better than Biggs is laughable. You have literally zero basis from which to form that opinion. Neither are NHLers right now, Biggs was drafted 7 spots higher, and they've put up basically identical OHL stats. You really have a problem with overvaluing Vancouver Canuck players.

Even calling Hodgson better than Kadri is premature. Give Kadri a full year in the NHL first. Kadri had better AHL numbers than Hodgson did in 2010-11.

Dude you are so freakin blind its not even funny. Where a player gets drafted doesn't mean squat until he starts producing in the NHL. And don't even try to say that Kadri is better than Hodgson. Cody is miles better. Come talk to me or Smashian when Biggs lights up pro leagues like how Jensen is in the Swedish Elite League right now.

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


   ryan kesler is going to the chicago blackhawks ...       quote me on it


#94 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,484 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 08 December 2012 - 02:47 PM

Calling Jensen better than Biggs is laughable. You have literally zero basis from which to form that opinion. Neither are NHLers right now, Biggs was drafted 7 spots higher, and they've put up basically identical OHL stats. You really have a problem with overvaluing Vancouver Canuck players.

Is it? Because two posts earlier, you said this:

Jensen > Biggs
(Shouldn't have to explain those two, pretty obvious)


So which one is it?


For me Jensen > Biggs. Jensen is playing against Men, You say Biggs is equaling Jensen stats identically, but what u don't take into account is that those are Jensen's old stats. He has improved alot more, infact he's playing in a higher level of hockey, and for how bad his team is, he's not doing that bad.

I would say Jensen > Biggs.

Biggs is mean, and tough kind of like Kassian but less offensive upside IMO, he has offensive skill yes, but not as much as Jensen, they are both big size wise, Biggs is tough around the net, that's where he is most effective offensively. He has leadership yes, he needs to work on his acceleration, and though he is tough he needs to work on his defensive play. Biggs is prjected to be a 2nd/3rd PWF, but I would lean a bit closer the 2nd line.

Jensen offensive skill is really something, a great wrist shot. He has higher upside than Biggs IMO. He skates well, he has hands, good vision, a classic finisher and skates well for his size. Needs to work on defensive play and consistentcy. Projects to be a 1st/2nd line forward, or you could say lower tier 1st line forward.


I think it is a matter of preference, I take Jensen because to be able to get that size, with that scoring ability doesn't happen all that often, and he has really taken off, more than Biggs has since the draft IMO. I see the upside as greater.

Even calling Hodgson better than Kadri is premature. Give Kadri a full year in the NHL first. Kadri had better AHL numbers than Hodgson did in 2010-11.


I have been defending Kadri, as you know you have been too.

Hodgson is better than Kadri right now, that's what I was getting at. I'm sure most people would choose Hodgson since Kadri is a question mark but who knows long term. If I had to pick right now I would take Coho.

As for Lu/Lecvavalier, the problem is that there simply aren't many teams that are in the market for a goalie. You can't counter that fundamental reality with any sort of statistic. Supply/demand will always trump all. Demand is low. That carries consequences.


That's not what we were arguing about, we were arguing about Lu vs Lecavalier, and It's clear Lu has more value.

Your kinda sidetracking.

A tandem is a stunningly foolish idea that I've explained many times. In short, one will invariably outplay the other, leaving one as the starter and one as the backup. Whoever's the backup suddenly has very little value, and we still have > $9M invested in goaltenders. Utterly foolish.


No that didn't happen last year did it? Both goalies still are at the same skill level, I don't see why it would happen this year.

It's a stuningly foolish idea to hang roberto out to dry as the back-up because then his value will go down, if he comes in and the time is split equally he will be able to play alot and play at a good level, and will retain value, and will probably get himself moved sooner since MG isn't giving him away.

Reimer was injured. This wasn't a Ryan Kesler, I-had-a-bad-year-so-I'll-tell-everyone-I-was-injured situation, he only played in 34 games. If Burke acquires Luongo, he's effectively given up on Reimer. Which might happen, but my point is that he's really not under that much pressure to do so, because a reasonable case can be made to try out Reimer some more.


He wasn't injured if he only played 34 games, he got injured, rested enough so that he was 100% when he got back (unlike Kesler) and that's proven by his low GP total.

Then he came back and wasn't what everyone thaught, he stepped into a situation where they needed him and he failed. He's not the guy they need to hang there playoff hopes on.

And as for Daly, yes it does matter. What it tells you is that the lifetime contracts are what the owners are "willing to die on a hill" to avoid. What kind of signal does that give you as to what the sort of demand for Luongo will be, around the league, knowing that they're desperately wanting to get rid of the lifetime contract? Think about it.


Yes in the future, it still doesn't make much sense, how this effects Lu. We are the one's who are ultimately going to be punished for the contract. No one else, why does it matter? I don't see a reason honestly. They want Lu cause of his ability, the contract isn't the greatest but there are options. And anything that happens with future contracts really doesn't affect this. Either way it is the owner's message because they were the one's stupid enough to sign those contracts. Not the GM's, if they see Lu as something they want/need they will still go after him.

U need to explain this better I don't see how it affects Lu, or anyone with one of these contracts for that matter.

zackass.png


#95 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 09 December 2012 - 09:41 AM

No that didn't happen last year did it? Both goalies still are at the same skill level, I don't see why it would happen this year.

It's a stuningly foolish idea to hang roberto out to dry as the back-up because then his value will go down, if he comes in and the time is split equally he will be able to play alot and play at a good level, and will retain value, and will probably get himself moved sooner since MG isn't giving him away.


It didn't happen last year because Luongo was the clear #1, and most people - probably Schneider himself, too - thought that it was just a matter of time before Schneider was to be traded elsewhere.

And again, "splitting time" is not realistic. One will invariably outplay the other, and be given the lion's share of games. This will have a negative effect no matter who the "winner" of the spot is.

Yes in the future, it still doesn't make much sense, how this effects Lu. We are the one's who are ultimately going to be punished for the contract. No one else, why does it matter? I don't see a reason honestly. They want Lu cause of his ability, the contract isn't the greatest but there are options. And anything that happens with future contracts really doesn't affect this. Either way it is the owner's message because they were the one's stupid enough to sign those contracts. Not the GM's, if they see Lu as something they want/need they will still go after him.

U need to explain this better I don't see how it affects Lu, or anyone with one of these contracts for that matter.


It matters because it sends a signal that these owners/GMs don't want to touch these lifetime contracts. They're locked out right now for essentially this very reason. That would suggest that owners/GMs would not be very thrilled about the idea of taking on a pre-existing lifetime contract in trade.

#96 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,484 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 09 December 2012 - 01:58 PM

It didn't happen last year because Luongo was the clear #1, and most people - probably Schneider himself, too - thought that it was just a matter of time before Schneider was to be traded elsewhere.

And again, "splitting time" is not realistic. One will invariably outplay the other, and be given the lion's share of games. This will have a negative effect no matter who the "winner" of the spot is.


Lu wasn't the clear #1, he came into the season as the #1 but that changed into a clear tandem as the season went along.

And I don't know how you think one will get the bigger share, if both are playing well why wouldn't we alternate them till Lu is moved, so that Lu keeps him value up and so both stay fresh while we still have them, when you think about it that really doesn't make alot of sense.

It matters because it sends a signal that these owners/GMs don't want to touch these lifetime contracts. They're locked out right now for essentially this very reason. That would suggest that owners/GMs would not be very thrilled about the idea of taking on a pre-existing lifetime contract in trade.


That's not the reason we are locked out, it was about money but at this point it is about power IMO.

And it's only the owner's, but I find it funny that right before the lockout so many rushed to sign these deals, so maybe they don't hate them so much after all.

zackass.png


#97 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,966 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 09 December 2012 - 11:39 PM

Chicago would make sense, but the chances of us dealing with them are low. Lu will not waive his NTC to go to Columbus, probably not to Brooklyn, either. Detroit would not be interested - Jimmy Howard will be extended. Phoenix has Mike Smith and will presumably extend him. Edmonton is a division rival - unlikely. San Jose would then have to do something with Niemi - already heavily invested, like I said - which would be very difficult to do.


The point of my list was to show that there are a lot of teams which are not that heavily invested in their goaltending, contrary to something you suggested earlier. All of the teams I listed have goalies who will be UFA's, RFA's or have assets which could likely be unloaded were they to acquire Luongo.

How likely this will be is perhaps small, but is not nil as you suggest. For example, Niemi could be traded, and since his contract is so much better than Luongo's, the Sharks won't have any trouble moving him, right?


Philly's not going to be buying out Bryzgalov 1 year into his deal. If Florida won't even give us Nick Bjugstad for him, how badly do you think they want him? And why are you assuming that Tampa wants him?


It may not be too likely that Philadelphia will buy out Brygalov, but yah never know.

Why do you throw out Bjugstad's name as though he's chopped liver? I don't see it as any great surprise that Tallon would want to try and hold on to Bjugstad, as he could be a top-6 center for the Panthers (behind Huberdeau). Of course Tallon will do everything he can to make sure he doesn't have to give him up in a deal for Luongo.

And why wouldn't TB want Luongo? Are you really so sure that Yzerman feels comfortable going with Lindback as his starter, or perhaps having him share goaltender duties with Garon or Roloson (assuming either of them are around next year)?

Don't make me break out the Quint song again.

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

#98 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,484 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 10 December 2012 - 12:02 AM

If we have to trade him to Florida this is what I would be interested in that is a resonable possibility: (* = High priority)

- Quinton Howden. he's a pretty good prospect, nothing expectional but should be a useful 2nd or 3rd liner one day with a useful skillset. Would be a nice addition to our prospect pool.

- *Alex Petrovic. I want this guy in the deal if we trade with FLA, has all the chops of a good two-way top 4 defensmen with some added grit and chippyness.

- Shawn Mattias. I don't want him to be the main piece, because I think he is overrated, but he wouldn't be bad as a throw-in.

- *Early Round picks (1-3). If we could get a 1st that would be amazing with this deep draft, but if we can't I would like to get a 2nd atleast, and maybe a 3rd aswell. There will be some good prospect avaliable when those picks roll around.

- *Jack Skille. More of just a throw in but he would be really nice on the 4th line, an upgrade on Weise forsure IMO, he's big, hits hard. Skates really well, a strong fast skater who can get in on the forecheck quickly and apply pressure, isn't afraid to fight. and also brings more offense than our current other options. But really the size with the skating ability he has is why I want him.

Other lesser notables:
- Sean Bergenheim (We don't need another 2nd/3rd liner, but playoff ability is intriguing)
- Marcel Goc (Not my #1 choice for 3C, would like more offense, but he isnt a bad choice either)
- Mike Matheson (Don't know much about him, but a good prospect is always nice to get)
- Keaton Ellerby (We don't need D, but he is a nice young NHL player with some more upside still)


My Proposition in terms of an offer:

To Van: Alex Petrovic, Quinton Howden, Jack Skille, 2nd.
To Fla: Roberto Luongo (Possible additional pieces)



Not alot there to me other' than picks/prospects. Toronto is a better trade partner if your looking at getting roster players in return. (or just looking at our return in general) But both have some young pieces I have my eye on.

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 10 December 2012 - 12:16 AM.

zackass.png


#99 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 10 December 2012 - 07:58 AM

If we have to trade him to Florida this is what I would be interested in that is a resonable possibility: (* = High priority)

- Quinton Howden. he's a pretty good prospect, nothing expectional but should be a useful 2nd or 3rd liner one day with a useful skillset. Would be a nice addition to our prospect pool.

- *Alex Petrovic. I want this guy in the deal if we trade with FLA, has all the chops of a good two-way top 4 defensmen with some added grit and chippyness.

- Shawn Mattias. I don't want him to be the main piece, because I think he is overrated, but he wouldn't be bad as a throw-in.

- *Early Round picks (1-3). If we could get a 1st that would be amazing with this deep draft, but if we can't I would like to get a 2nd atleast, and maybe a 3rd aswell. There will be some good prospect avaliable when those picks roll around.

- *Jack Skille. More of just a throw in but he would be really nice on the 4th line, an upgrade on Weise forsure IMO, he's big, hits hard. Skates really well, a strong fast skater who can get in on the forecheck quickly and apply pressure, isn't afraid to fight. and also brings more offense than our current other options. But really the size with the skating ability he has is why I want him.

Other lesser notables:
- Sean Bergenheim (We don't need another 2nd/3rd liner, but playoff ability is intriguing)
- Marcel Goc (Not my #1 choice for 3C, would like more offense, but he isnt a bad choice either)
- Mike Matheson (Don't know much about him, but a good prospect is always nice to get)
- Keaton Ellerby (We don't need D, but he is a nice young NHL player with some more upside still)


My Proposition in terms of an offer:

To Van: Alex Petrovic, Quinton Howden, Jack Skille, 2nd.
To Fla: Roberto Luongo (Possible additional pieces)



Not alot there to me other' than picks/prospects. Toronto is a better trade partner if your looking at getting roster players in return. (or just looking at our return in general) But both have some young pieces I have my eye on.


Yes if we 'have' to trade him to FLA

we all know you have a love fest mancrush on Kadri lol

Your point about better trade partner is ludicrous.

The high end prospects FLA has relative to Tor is so glaring the fact you can't see that tells us one thing. You must be a Leaf fan hoping to get rid of that Flake Kadri by trading him to the Nux.

Edited by BuretoMogilny, 10 December 2012 - 07:59 AM.


#100 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,484 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 10 December 2012 - 08:58 AM

Yes if we 'have' to trade him to FLA

we all know you have a love fest mancrush on Kadri lol

Your point about better trade partner is ludicrous.

The high end prospects FLA has relative to Tor is so glaring the fact you can't see that tells us one thing. You must be a Leaf fan hoping to get rid of that Flake Kadri by trading him to the Nux.


:picard: :picard: :picard: I take it you haven't learned how to read yet...

Not alot there to me other' than picks/prospects. Toronto is a better trade partner if your looking at getting roster players in return. (or just looking at our return in general) But both have some young pieces I have my eye on.



As you can see I was elduing to Toronto having more roster players avaliable to us that make sense, I do address that both have nice prospects.

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 10 December 2012 - 08:58 AM.

zackass.png


#101 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 10 December 2012 - 09:38 AM

:picard: :picard: :picard: I take it you haven't learned how to read yet...




As you can see I was elduing to Toronto having more roster players avaliable to us that make sense, I do address that both have nice prospects.


Yes well all know you feel we should trade an all star goalie for a soft and delicate flower named Kadri. He just needs to be treated nicey nicey and he'll score many points in the NHL because he has in the AHL. That meany Burke, that meany Wilson, that meany Eakins...if they were just nicey nicey to Kadri he'd score 70 pts a year and be the guy they desperately still need down the middle. Its all bc they aren't nicey nice and are playing politics because they don't like him. They don't want a 70 pt center in Toronto...

Or......mmmmmaybe they do and he's JUST NOT IT.

LMAO!

Edited by BuretoMogilny, 10 December 2012 - 09:40 AM.


#102 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,966 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 10 December 2012 - 10:16 AM

My Proposition in terms of an offer:

To Van: Alex Petrovic, Quinton Howden, Jack Skille, 2nd.
To Fla: Roberto Luongo (Possible additional pieces)


I do like Petrovic, and while Howden is a bit of step down from Bjugstad, he ain't bad.

Skille is a good 3rd/4th liner but I'd rather the Canucks tried to get Matthias to address the 3C situation.

If there is a pick involved, I'd still prefer a 1st, although I don't see Tallon wanting to give up the 2013 1st, but I would be okay with him handing over the 2014 1st.

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

#103 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 10 December 2012 - 10:30 AM

I do like Petrovic, and while Howden is a bit of step down from Bjugstad, he ain't bad.

Skille is a good 3rd/4th liner but I'd rather the Canucks tried to get Matthias to address the 3C situation.

If there is a pick involved, I'd still prefer a 1st, although I don't see Tallon wanting to give up the 2013 1st, but I would be okay with him handing over the 2014 1st.

regards,
G.


Hasn't FLA pretty much said they are out of the Lou trade game?

Edited by BuretoMogilny, 10 December 2012 - 10:31 AM.


#104 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,964 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 10 December 2012 - 10:33 AM

If we have to trade him to Florida this is what I would be interested in that is a resonable possibility: (* = High priority)

- Quinton Howden. he's a pretty good prospect, nothing expectional but should be a useful 2nd or 3rd liner one day with a useful skillset. Would be a nice addition to our prospect pool.

- *Alex Petrovic. I want this guy in the deal if we trade with FLA, has all the chops of a good two-way top 4 defensmen with some added grit and chippyness.

- Shawn Mattias. I don't want him to be the main piece, because I think he is overrated, but he wouldn't be bad as a throw-in.

- *Early Round picks (1-3). If we could get a 1st that would be amazing with this deep draft, but if we can't I would like to get a 2nd atleast, and maybe a 3rd aswell. There will be some good prospect avaliable when those picks roll around.

- *Jack Skille. More of just a throw in but he would be really nice on the 4th line, an upgrade on Weise forsure IMO, he's big, hits hard. Skates really well, a strong fast skater who can get in on the forecheck quickly and apply pressure, isn't afraid to fight. and also brings more offense than our current other options. But really the size with the skating ability he has is why I want him.

Other lesser notables:
- Sean Bergenheim (We don't need another 2nd/3rd liner, but playoff ability is intriguing)
- Marcel Goc (Not my #1 choice for 3C, would like more offense, but he isnt a bad choice either)
- Mike Matheson (Don't know much about him, but a good prospect is always nice to get)
- Keaton Ellerby (We don't need D, but he is a nice young NHL player with some more upside still)


My Proposition in terms of an offer:

To Van: Alex Petrovic, Quinton Howden, Jack Skille, 2nd.
To Fla: Roberto Luongo (Possible additional pieces)



Not alot there to me other' than picks/prospects. Toronto is a better trade partner if your looking at getting roster players in return. (or just looking at our return in general) But both have some young pieces I have my eye on.

I like this a lot. Howden and Petrovic alone would be a solid return for Luongo.

And BuretoMogilny, cut it with the childish behaviour. Smashian doesn't have a 'man crush' on Kadri, none of us do. We're just simply stating that we would prefer him in a package for Luongo.

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


   ryan kesler is going to the chicago blackhawks ...       quote me on it


#105 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 10 December 2012 - 11:36 AM

Lu wasn't the clear #1, he came into the season as the #1 but that changed into a clear tandem as the season went along.

And I don't know how you think one will get the bigger share, if both are playing well why wouldn't we alternate them till Lu is moved, so that Lu keeps him value up and so both stay fresh while we still have them, when you think about it that really doesn't make alot of sense.


Spin it however you want, the split last year amongst goaltender starters on the Canucks was 66/34 in Luongo's favour. Schneider was the clear backup until the playoffs, which ended up being the changing of the guard for the Canucks (and probably the last game that we'll see Luongo in our uniform).

To your point about "both playing well", even if that were to happen, it would still turn into a circus a la Team Coco v. Team Leno. Basically nothing good can result from that strategy - and the likelihood of them both playing at an equal level that one doesn't assert himself as the clear starter would be low.

#106 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 10 December 2012 - 11:38 AM

Why do you throw out Bjugstad's name as though he's chopped liver? I don't see it as any great surprise that Tallon would want to try and hold on to Bjugstad, as he could be a top-6 center for the Panthers (behind Huberdeau). Of course Tallon will do everything he can to make sure he doesn't have to give him up in a deal for Luongo.


Bjugstad's a total question mark. I'm not calling him "chopped liver", but he doesn't excite me as at this point he'd be a complete roll of the dice. It'd make more sense for these Canucks to target a guy like Bozak.

And why wouldn't TB want Luongo? Are you really so sure that Yzerman feels comfortable going with Lindback as his starter, or perhaps having him share goaltender duties with Garon or Roloson (assuming either of them are around next year)?


We've been through this many times already. Look at what they gave up to get him. Is that something that a lot of other teams pay to acquire a backup?

Edited by King of the ES, 10 December 2012 - 11:39 AM.


#107 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,966 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 10 December 2012 - 12:12 PM

Hasn't FLA pretty much said they are out of the Lou trade game?


It has been mentioned. And you're never seen a GM publicly express one position while working on the exact opposite? I am not saying Luongo will be traded to Florida. This thread is for speculative purposes and that is what we are doing.

BTW: what name were you using 3 years ago when you were telling everyone on these forums about Schneider?


Bjugstad's a total question mark. I'm not calling him "chopped liver", but he doesn't excite me as at this point he'd be a complete roll of the dice. It'd make more sense for these Canucks to target a guy like Bozak.


You'd prefer to trade for a guy with maybe half a year at most left on his contract rather than acquire Bjugstad? Well okay, that's your preference.

I see Bjugstad having a much higher ceiling than Bozak who has topped out as a 3C (borderline 2C). Is Bjugstad the next Crosby? Nope, but he could be a pretty good top-6 forward on this team in a few years time. I do think Bozak is an okay player who would likely help the Canucks right now, however, just from the perspective of getting the most return for Luongo, it would have to be Bjugstad.


We've been through this many times already. Look at what they gave up to get him. Is that something that a lot of other teams pay to acquire a backup?


And once again, I am not disputing that TB expects Lindback to be their starter, somehere down the road.

For right now however, I suspect that Yzerman is a bit nervous about his goalie situation. People may say he has the right idea, but that will be of little consequence when the core of his team (some of which are already getting long in the tooth) have lost a step or have moved on.

Even if Yzerman doesn't go after Luongo, he going to have to do something other than re-sign Garon and hope that it all works out.

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

#108 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 10 December 2012 - 01:04 PM

It has been mentioned. And you're never seen a GM publicly express one position while working on the exact opposite? I am not saying Luongo will be traded to Florida. This thread is for speculative purposes and that is what we are doing.

BTW: what name were you using 3 years ago when you were telling everyone on these forums about Schneider?




You'd prefer to trade for a guy with maybe half a year at most left on his contract rather than acquire Bjugstad? Well okay, that's your preference.

I see Bjugstad having a much higher ceiling than Bozak who has topped out as a 3C (borderline 2C). Is Bjugstad the next Crosby? Nope, but he could be a pretty good top-6 forward on this team in a few years time. I do think Bozak is an okay player who would likely help the Canucks right now, however, just from the perspective of getting the most return for Luongo, it would have to be Bjugstad.




And once again, I am not disputing that TB expects Lindback to be their starter, somehere down the road.

For right now however, I suspect that Yzerman is a bit nervous about his goalie situation. People may say he has the right idea, but that will be of little consequence when the core of his team (some of which are already getting long in the tooth) have lost a step or have moved on.

Even if Yzerman doesn't go after Luongo, he going to have to do something other than re-sign Garon and hope that it all works out.

regards,
G.


Look back and figure it out yourself you're a smart guy

#109 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,966 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 10 December 2012 - 01:44 PM

Look back and figure it out yourself you're a smart guy


Why yes, I am. And why don't you tell us what name you were using at that time?

Is there something to hide? Are you embarassed by things you said at that time? Or are you merely BS'ing about things you claim to have said 3 years ago?

It should be a simple matter for you to dredge these old posts up and show everyone that you were indeed correct. C'mon, show us all how smart you are. :)

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

#110 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 10 December 2012 - 01:54 PM

And once again, I am not disputing that TB expects Lindback to be their starter, somehere down the road.


When? 2022?

If you acquire Luongo, kiss that "somewhere down the road" scenario goodbye.

#111 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,484 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 10 December 2012 - 03:20 PM

Spin it however you want, the split last year amongst goaltender starters on the Canucks was 66/34 in Luongo's favour. Schneider was the clear backup until the playoffs, which ended up being the changing of the guard for the Canucks (and probably the last game that we'll see Luongo in our uniform).

To your point about "both playing well", even if that were to happen, it would still turn into a circus a la Team Coco v. Team Leno. Basically nothing good can result from that strategy - and the likelihood of them both playing at an equal level that one doesn't assert himself as the clear starter would be low.


Okay well we dont agree about last season. Thats not a big deal anyways. The point is if we have both why wouldnt you give them split time?

- both stat fresh
- Lu's value doesnt decrease (which means he will prob be moved sooner)
- Schnieder is fresh for the playoffs


Why wouldnt u do it if you have both? And the atmosphere wouldnt be any different than it already has been. Both are good and we all know that, everyone has faith in either guy so i dont see anyreason why we wouldnt wait a bit if the right deal doesnt come along right away

zackass.png


#112 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 10 December 2012 - 03:38 PM

Why yes, I am. And why don't you tell us what name you were using at that time?

Is there something to hide? Are you embarassed by things you said at that time? Or are you merely BS'ing about things you claim to have said 3 years ago?

It should be a simple matter for you to dredge these old posts up and show everyone that you were indeed correct. C'mon, show us all how smart you are. :)

regards,
G.


Nope nothing embarrasing just tired of getting into it with adolescents. Look for them yourself and look for posts where someone said those points and was attacked and is no longer on the board. That will give you enough. And maybe it was two years ago but it was before all the contraversy started.

Regards.

Edited by BuretoMogilny, 10 December 2012 - 03:40 PM.


#113 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 10 December 2012 - 04:04 PM

Okay well we dont agree about last season. Thats not a big deal anyways. The point is if we have both why wouldnt you give them split time?

- both stat fresh
- Lu's value doesnt decrease (which means he will prob be moved sooner)
- Schnieder is fresh for the playoffs


What if he is clearly outplayed by Schneider? Then what?

#114 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,484 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 10 December 2012 - 04:32 PM

Yes well all know you feel we should trade an all star goalie for a soft and delicate flower named Kadri. He just needs to be treated nicey nicey and he'll score many points in the NHL because he has in the AHL. That meany Burke, that meany Wilson, that meany Eakins...if they were just nicey nicey to Kadri he'd score 70 pts a year and be the guy they desperately still need down the middle. Its all bc they aren't nicey nice and are playing politics because they don't like him. They don't want a 70 pt center in Toronto...

Or......mmmmmaybe they do and he's JUST NOT IT.

LMAO!


He doesn't need your nicey nicey crap. A fair shot is more what I was saying.

zackass.png


#115 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,484 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 10 December 2012 - 04:34 PM

I do like Petrovic, and while Howden is a bit of step down from Bjugstad, he ain't bad.

Skille is a good 3rd/4th liner but I'd rather the Canucks tried to get Matthias to address the 3C situation.

If there is a pick involved, I'd still prefer a 1st, although I don't see Tallon wanting to give up the 2013 1st, but I would be okay with him handing over the 2014 1st.

regards,
G.


Im not sold on Mattias as a good 3C, I would take Lappy over him anyday. To me if we bring him in he would be a 4th liner, and the reason I included Howden is so we get another prospect aswell since Bjugstad seems unavailable to me.

We could swap out Howden + 2nd for Mattias + 1st but quite frankly I would take Howden over Mattias anyday.

zackass.png


#116 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 10 December 2012 - 04:36 PM

He doesn't need your nicey nicey crap. A fair shot is more what I was saying.


Again.

If you don't think having an open door to a spot - ie no one really ahead of you at the NHL level, basically saying rookie if you're good enough you stick is not a fair shot...I don't really know what you're expecting them to do.

then the same thing in year 2

then year three shows up to AHL camp out of shape

he's played 50 games and has had the door wide open to take a position. Its not like Coho here who had to play 3rd line, not get the offensive minutes/opptys

if kadri had the skills, they would have given it to him because simply the leafs NEED that....

your arguments really don't make sense when you distill it down but whatever dude. you think kadri is good i don't

Edited by BuretoMogilny, 10 December 2012 - 04:36 PM.


#117 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,484 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 10 December 2012 - 04:36 PM

What if he is clearly outplayed by Schneider? Then what?


Great his value is higher, or else we keep him for awhile longer.

What if he is the backup, plays amazing, earns the more starts, and clearly out plays Schneider?


That could very well happen in your idea aswell, that point really didn't do anything against my point, cause it qualifies against yours aswell.

zackass.png


#118 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,484 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 10 December 2012 - 04:43 PM

Again.

If you don't think having an open door to a spot - ie no one really ahead of you at the NHL level, basically saying rookie if you're good enough you stick is not a fair shot...I don't really know what you're expecting them to do.

then the same thing in year 2

then year three shows up to AHL camp out of shape

he's played 50 games and has had the door wide open to take a position. Its not like Coho here who had to play 3rd line, not get the offensive minutes/opptys

if kadri had the skills, they would have given it to him because simply the leafs NEED that....

your arguments really don't make sense when you distill it down but whatever dude. you think kadri is good i don't


Your right it's not like Coho. Coho didn't get critized by the coaching staff & managment everytime he turned the puck over or made a defensive error.

It's not like Coho. Coho was given many chances to play on the team, Gillis pushed him to make the team as much as he possibly could. He did less in the AHL than Kadri ever has and yet Gillis still tried to get him here as much as possible.

And if you don't think Coho got the offensive minutes your blind, they made it specificly so that he would be put into offensive situations as MG said.


And if you really think the spot has been wide open for him, and he has had a fair shot, why is it that he gets a PPG in the AHL, yet the only time he gets called up is when they are so badly injured, that everyone else in the AHL has been called up, so they have to call him up. Why is that? He plays better than players in the AHL, yet they get the call up to the big leagues first. explain how that's fair. Then also explain why he was sent down when they were winning, he was one of there better players and he was a +.

Please explain those, I would love to hear what kind of explanation you can come up with.


Bottom line is for whatever reason It's not fair, if Kadri was given the chance Coho was with our team he probably would have done just as much.

zackass.png


#119 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 10 December 2012 - 04:50 PM

Your right it's not like Coho. Coho didn't get critized by the coaching staff & managment everytime he turned the puck over or made a defensive error.

It's not like Coho. Coho was given many chances to play on the team, Gillis pushed him to make the team as much as he possibly could. He did less in the AHL than Kadri ever has and yet Gillis still tried to get him here as much as possible.

And if you don't think Coho got the offensive minutes your blind, they made it specificly so that he would be put into offensive situations as MG said.


And if you really think the spot has been wide open for him, and he has had a fair shot, why is it that he gets a PPG in the AHL, yet the only time he gets called up is when they are so badly injured, that everyone else in the AHL has been called up, so they have to call him up. Why is that? He plays better than players in the AHL, yet they get the call up to the big leagues first. explain how that's fair. Then also explain why he was sent down when they were winning, he was one of there better players and he was a +.

Please explain those, I would love to hear what kind of explanation you can come up with.


Bottom line is for whatever reason It's not fair, if Kadri was given the chance Coho was with our team he probably would have done just as much.


Coho was given offensive minutes once he started complaining and wanting a trade to up his value. I am not blind you are. In fact Mike Gillis STATED IN AN INTERVIEW THAT THE CANUCKS HAD POSITIONED COHO TO LOOK GOOD FOR A TRADE. I am blind? really wow ok, so you know more than what came out of MG;s mouth now.

So that's now MG, Burke, Wilson and Eakins you know better than hey?

Coho not critisized? LMAO...WOW REVISIONIST HISTORY? Didn't AV say the kid lied about his back because he was scared that he had to admit he wasn't ready????

Offensive minutes means Tavares minutes buddy, first/second line. The leafs gave Kadri that, not 4 mins a game that CoHo got first year, then 3rd line 2nd year, and yet he couldn't do it.

You have no idea what you are talking about. I feel like I am speaking to a retarded clam.

Learn to read and to think

http://blogs.theprov...-an-nhl-scorer/


"Then, as Gillis explained at his press conference Tuesday, “We built [Hodgson] into something we could move.”

Few forget Hodgson’s scoring pace in the days leading up to the deadline. He had eight goals and five assists in 25 games, a rate consistent with many NHL second-liners, and made more impressive because he had just turned 22.

But few remember the situations Hodgson was placed in to help him succeed. Most notably, his defensive zone time was cut by 77 per cent.

“That was by design,” admitted Gillis, who made specific reference to the limited number of defensive zone faceoffs Hodgson was on the ice for in the days leading up to his trade. “We put Cody on the ice in every offensive situation we could.”

From late-December to the trade deadline, Hodgson was on the ice for nearly as many offensive faceoffs as Henrik Sedin. By taking away puck-moving responsibilities from the kid, he could focus on scoring, which played into the Canucks’ hands.

A pair of months later, the Canucks had successfully turned Hodgson into a tradeable asset — something he hadn’t been at the start of the season."

Case closed you lose.

Edited by BuretoMogilny, 10 December 2012 - 04:59 PM.


#120 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 10 December 2012 - 04:57 PM

Your right it's not like Coho. Coho didn't get critized by the coaching staff & managment everytime he turned the puck over or made a defensive error.

It's not like Coho. Coho was given many chances to play on the team, Gillis pushed him to make the team as much as he possibly could. He did less in the AHL than Kadri ever has and yet Gillis still tried to get him here as much as possible.

And if you don't think Coho got the offensive minutes your blind, they made it specificly so that he would be put into offensive situations as MG said.


And if you really think the spot has been wide open for him, and he has had a fair shot, why is it that he gets a PPG in the AHL, yet the only time he gets called up is when they are so badly injured, that everyone else in the AHL has been called up, so they have to call him up. Why is that? He plays better than players in the AHL, yet they get the call up to the big leagues first. explain how that's fair. Then also explain why he was sent down when they were winning, he was one of there better players and he was a +.

Please explain those, I would love to hear what kind of explanation you can come up with.


Bottom line is for whatever reason It's not fair, if Kadri was given the chance Coho was with our team he probably would have done just as much.


I love your last line read the article I gave you once you learn a bit more about your silly comments and lack of understanding of reality...you really live in lala fruity land don't you?

Only gets called up when players are badly injured? Maybe that says something about his ability????

LOOK YOU DON'T GET IT NO ONE IS OUT TO GET NAZEM KADRI. ITS A COMPETITIVE INDUSTRY, IF YOURE GOOD YOU PLAY, IF YOU'RE NOT YOU DON'T

Figure it out man. no more responses to your blatant stupidity and lack of ability to sit in reality.




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.