Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

[Discussion] Roberto Luongo Trade Thread 4.0


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
3455 replies to this topic

#1 Templeton Peck

Templeton Peck

    Faceman

  • Super Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,040 posts
  • Joined: 29-August 05

Posted 03 January 2013 - 05:40 PM

Please use this thread for any discussion of a trade involving Roberto Luongo. Post all news & new information in the other pinned thread.
  • 0
Image and video hosting by TinyPic
Please read the Board Rules.

#2 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,114 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 03 January 2013 - 05:59 PM

Will there be a Luongo trade thread 5.0?
I'm gonna say no, there won't.
Guessing that the insanity will end - CBA will finally be dealt - and Luongo will be traded by page 84 of 4.0....
  • 0

#3 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,946 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 03 January 2013 - 06:05 PM

I say we get a CBA within several days if at all, and then it's one of two things: a deal right away, or a deal around the start of the actual season. I'm not sure we'd hang onto him unless the CBA is so prohibitive that we can't move him or have to buy him out, but I'll guess a trade by page 23, then the boards crash and the thread hardly moves while people try and login.

Should have made a poll. Templeton, should you make a poll?

Edited by elvis15, 03 January 2013 - 06:10 PM.

  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#4 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,561 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 03 January 2013 - 06:06 PM

I think now that if there is any kind of a season (48 games or otherwise), Luongo will remain on the team as Schneider's backup or 1A. Once the playoffs begin then Schneider is in the net full-time.
  • 0

#5 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,114 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 03 January 2013 - 06:08 PM

King:

"Like it or not, there probably won't be many changes to the Canucks until the Sedin's retire. Already married to too many long-term, big-money contracts that are mostly unmoveable."

Ok King let's get it rolling.
We all know a hundred times over that you put Luongo in this category, but him aside, please elaborate on who these unmoveable long term contracts are.
  • 0

#6 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,114 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 03 January 2013 - 06:10 PM

Elvis 15:
"Maybe we buy him [Phaneuf] out? Or there's the other suggestion of bringing back Komisarek to sweeten the deal for the Leafs so we can buy him out instead of them having to.

EDIT: for the sarcasm impaired, that was sarcasm."

+1. Loved it.
  • 0

#7 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,948 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 10

Posted 03 January 2013 - 06:18 PM

Its been my opinion that a deal for Lou has been done in principle pending a new CBA. maybe we'll find out !
  • 0

#8 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 03 January 2013 - 06:30 PM

King:

"Like it or not, there probably won't be many changes to the Canucks until the Sedin's retire. Already married to too many long-term, big-money contracts that are mostly unmoveable."

Ok King let's get it rolling.
We all know a hundred times over that you put Luongo in this category, but him aside, please elaborate on who these unmoveable long term contracts are.


"Unmoveable" may have been the wrong term. What I meant was that the Canucks are filled with guys with multi-year contracts, so there's probably not going to be any large-scale changes like making a big move for a guy like Phaneuf, which was the context of the discussion.

Booth, for example, is technically "moveable", as Florida moved him to us last year, in exchange for expiring contracts. In theory, we might be able to do the same thing, if we really wanted to, and if there's another sucker out there willing to take on Booth (who's more valuable today than he was a year ago, as more of his contract has been consumed). Gillis, though, hasn't shown any urgency in moving guys with bad contracts (Ballard, Malhotra, etc.), so it's unlikely to happen.
  • 0

#9 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 03 January 2013 - 06:32 PM

Its been my opinion that a deal for Lou has been done in principle pending a new CBA. maybe we'll find out !


Yep, probably. I would think/hope that Gillis can see the obvious and huge risks that come with bringing that guy back.
  • 0

#10 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,195 posts
  • Joined: 05-November 12

Posted 03 January 2013 - 06:58 PM

Its been my opinion that a deal for Lou has been done in principle pending a new CBA. maybe we'll find out !


Fortunately, it is your mere opinion!

We will find out indeed!

See what I did there!

!

Edited by Canucks_Hockey_101, 03 January 2013 - 07:01 PM.

  • 0

#11 WolfxHaley

WolfxHaley

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 947 posts
  • Joined: 07-January 10

Posted 03 January 2013 - 07:17 PM

Fortunately, it is your mere opinion!

We will find out indeed!

See what I did there!

!

?
  • 0

Posted Image


#12 Noheart

Noheart

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,810 posts
  • Joined: 01-June 12

Posted 03 January 2013 - 07:28 PM

Not cool at all

Edited by Noheart, 03 January 2013 - 07:34 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

BEASTLY!!!

#13 Noheart

Noheart

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,810 posts
  • Joined: 01-June 12

Posted 03 January 2013 - 07:32 PM

Fortunately, it is your mere opinion!

We will find out indeed!

See what I did there!

!


"See what I did there!" Is like giving yourself a nickname.

Not cool at all bro
  • 0
Posted Image

BEASTLY!!!

#14 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,114 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 03 January 2013 - 07:32 PM

"Unmoveable" may have been the wrong term. What I meant was that the Canucks are filled with guys with multi-year contracts, so there's probably not going to be any large-scale changes like making a big move for a guy like Phaneuf, which was the context of the discussion.

Booth, for example, is technically "moveable", as Florida moved him to us last year, in exchange for expiring contracts. In theory, we might be able to do the same thing, if we really wanted to, and if there's another sucker out there willing to take on Booth (who's more valuable today than he was a year ago, as more of his contract has been consumed). Gillis, though, hasn't shown any urgency in moving guys with bad contracts (Ballard, Malhotra, etc.), so it's unlikely to happen.


Oh I see - by "married to too many long term, big money contracts" you were talking about one contract - the 2 and 1/2 years left on Booth's "long term" contract...

So your point was basically a baseless embellishment.

Every team if filled with guys with "multi-year" contracts. What GM, coach, or even player/agent for that matter wants to be dealing with endless 1 year contracts to be renegotiated every year after year?




I
  • 0

#15 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,114 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 03 January 2013 - 07:45 PM

Its been my opinion that a deal for Lou has been done in principle pending a new CBA. maybe we'll find out !


I'm not quite clear about what exactly 101 did there, but the days immediately after the CBA will cerainly be interesting.
If there is an agreement in principle it was reached when teams weren't supposed to be discussing players.
I hope things kind of play out like this - Toronto had made a 'secret' offer that they were under the impression would land Luongo as soon as the lockout ends. The lockout ends, someone else outbids Toronto, and the Leafs wind up with the leftovers of whoever else lands Luongo. :bigblush:
  • 0

#16 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,742 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:14 PM

I'm not quite clear about what exactly 101 did there, but the days immediately after the CBA will cerainly be interesting.
If there is an agreement in principle it was reached when teams weren't supposed to be discussing players.
I hope things kind of play out like this - Toronto had made a 'secret' offer that they were under the impression would land Luongo as soon as the lockout ends. The lockout ends, someone else outbids Toronto, and the Leafs wind up with the leftovers of whoever else lands Luongo. :bigblush:


Assuming there is some kind of agreement, it could be that Gillis and Burke agreed to some basics of a deal prior to the lockout and left a few other parts up in the air pending the new CBA being signed (also not necessarily anticipating that the lockout would go on for as long as it has).

So, it might have been Luongo to Toronto for Kadri, Bozak, and a pick of some sort (this is just for example purposes only and it's a low return in my opinion). Once the CBA was signed, Gillis would know if he really needs to accept some cap back to the Canucks, and Burke would be able to add something to what is coming back to the Canucks to pay for the cap dump.

Gillis might also want to re-visit whether Bozak was part of the deal considering he'd pretty much just be a rental at this point, or Burke might want to re-think having Kadri in the deal.

Something like that perhaps is what he means? I'd also assume that this would mean that Gillis could be handcuffed if someone showed up with a better offer, unless he was willing to break this gentleman's agreement witih Burke.


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

#17 Noheart

Noheart

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,810 posts
  • Joined: 01-June 12

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:28 PM

I am completely convinced that if Luo gets traded he will go to a left field team that can give us a reliable goaltender

To San Jose
Luo
Higgins
3rd

To Van
Niemi
Clowe
1st

Of corse all of you homers will say we are overpaying but in reality both teams need to feel they are getting the upper hand.
SJ is more desperate than we are to keep the window open. I don't think Clowe likes SJ he constantly lays that out in interviews. He would help this team and MG would be all over locking him up.
You wanna buy out a goalie? I think neimi would be an easier buy and probably relatively easy to move when lack is ready
Higgins is awesome but Clowe is more awesome both UFA's

We give SJ short term cap relief they give us long term cap relief.

We will not get high end prospects for Luo or capspace
it will involve a money exchange. So MG can help the team now and a contender can fit Luo in.

The buy out is kind of an interesting tool. We could take a big contract from a team that cannot afford a buyout in exchange for prospects. Like a DePetro. I can't imagine what the islanders would give to unload that sucker. Not saying Luongo would be part of that but it would be another way to acquire youth rather than using Luo.

Edited by Noheart, 03 January 2013 - 11:38 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

BEASTLY!!!

#18 westcoast

westcoast

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,391 posts
  • Joined: 21-January 03

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:34 PM

I've wondered all day if new teams could be interested in luongo due to the chance to ditch the goalie they have.
  • 0

#19 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,198 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 04 January 2013 - 03:42 AM

Assuming there is some kind of agreement, it could be that Gillis and Burke agreed to some basics of a deal prior to the lockout and left a few other parts up in the air pending the new CBA being signed (also not necessarily anticipating that the lockout would go on for as long as it has).

So, it might have been Luongo to Toronto for Kadri, Bozak, and a pick of some sort (this is just for example purposes only and it's a low return in my opinion). Once the CBA was signed, Gillis would know if he really needs to accept some cap back to the Canucks, and Burke would be able to add something to what is coming back to the Canucks to pay for the cap dump.

Gillis might also want to re-visit whether Bozak was part of the deal considering he'd pretty much just be a rental at this point, or Burke might want to re-think having Kadri in the deal.

Something like that perhaps is what he means? I'd also assume that this would mean that Gillis could be handcuffed if someone showed up with a better offer, unless he was willing to break this gentleman's agreement witih Burke.


regards,
G.


Honestly if Kadri was in the deal before I doubt Burke would change his mind on that know, I know Sven brought that up in Ari's thread but I have replied and explained why I think he could be expendable from their standpoint.

Plus they have to give us something right, Kadri's value is kinda waivering so if they aren't going to commit to giving him full time they should trade him while his value is still high, cause you get that with prospects, they can reach a point where they can go from developing and still having upside to being stuck where they are at, and as much as I like Kadri I think he is coming alot closer to that stage in Toronto than say he would be here.
  • 0

zackass.png


#20 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 04 January 2013 - 04:29 AM

To San Jose
Luo
Higgins
3rd

To Van
Niemi
Clowe
1st


Not a bad proposal, actually. Though I would think that SJ are not as "desperate to keep their window open" as you suggest. I would think/hope that management would have enough vision to realize that they're probably now in "treading water" mode until a more serious rebuild can take place. Is Lou so much better than Niemi that he would make that team a contender again? Not in my opinion, no.
  • 0

#21 Ossi Vaananen

Ossi Vaananen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,852 posts
  • Joined: 25-April 12

Posted 04 January 2013 - 04:34 AM

Well round 4... I hoped I would never see the day...

I suppose we should acknowledge the topic as to whether a shortened season would necessitate keeping Luongo around, if only for the condensed schedule. I'm not opposed to it, though it does make us desperate to move him before the salary cap reduction next year.
  • 0

2d7ye0p.jpg

 

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#22 onesmallleap

onesmallleap

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 382 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 07

Posted 04 January 2013 - 09:20 AM

this seems more like a 3.01 beta thread... :sick:
  • 0

#23 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,800 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 04 January 2013 - 09:31 AM

While we're at it; why don't we trade for three more left wingers, 5 more left D and 4 goalies? We'll get Niemi, a pick we can use to draft a goalie, a prospect and maybe SJ can acquire the rights to Hasek to include him so the deal works...

I mean really, our depth is in goal, on left D (Edler, Hamhuis, Garrison, Ballard) and on left wing (Danny, Burrows, Booth, Raymond, Higgins, prospect Jensen). Hansen is our top natural RW followed by prospect Kassian. You can decide whether your happy with our depth at centre. And Tanev is our 2knd best natural right D, which is scary. For all our fast skating, good passing D we lack both a bone cruncher, are desperately short on right handed shots and miss a guy that can lug the puck against pressure not just pass it.

So first lets trade Lou for a UFA, then lets not bother to actually address any team needs!

:picard:

I am completely convinced that if Luo gets traded he will go to a left field team that can give us a reliable goaltender

To San Jose
Luo
Higgins
3rd

To Van
Niemi
Clowe
1st

Of corse all of you homers will say we are overpaying but in reality both teams need to feel they are getting the upper hand.
SJ is more desperate than we are to keep the window open. I don't think Clowe likes SJ he constantly lays that out in interviews. He would help this team and MG would be all over locking him up.
You wanna buy out a goalie? I think neimi would be an easier buy and probably relatively easy to move when lack is ready
Higgins is awesome but Clowe is more awesome both UFA's

We give SJ short term cap relief they give us long term cap relief.

We will not get high end prospects for Luo or capspace
it will involve a money exchange. So MG can help the team now and a contender can fit Luo in.

The buy out is kind of an interesting tool. We could take a big contract from a team that cannot afford a buyout in exchange for prospects. Like a DePetro. I can't imagine what the islanders would give to unload that sucker. Not saying Luongo would be part of that but it would be another way to acquire youth rather than using Luo.


Edited by Canuck Surfer, 04 January 2013 - 10:03 AM.

  • 0

#24 Noheart

Noheart

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,810 posts
  • Joined: 01-June 12

Posted 04 January 2013 - 10:47 AM

While we're at it; why don't we trade for three more left wingers, 5 more left D and 4 goalies? We'll get Niemi, a pick we can use to draft a goalie, a prospect and maybe SJ can acquire the rights to Hasek to include him so the deal works...

I mean really, our depth is in goal, on left D (Edler, Hamhuis, Garrison, Ballard) and on left wing (Danny, Burrows, Booth, Raymond, Higgins, prospect Jensen). Hansen is our top natural RW followed by prospect Kassian. You can decide whether your happy with our depth at centre. And Tanev is our 2knd best natural right D, which is scary. For all our fast skating, good passing D we lack both a bone cruncher, are desperately short on right handed shots and miss a guy that can lug the puck against pressure not just pass it.

So first lets trade Lou for a UFA, then lets not bother to actually address any team needs!

:picard:


I'm not the GM it's an example of what could happen.
We will exchange salary and because we have a long way to go to be cap compliant in a few years a pending UFA may be an option.
You can let him walk if he doesn't fit you team or you can have exclusive negotiating to resign him. He is a upgrade to Higgins, clearly.

For those that think MG is not going to do a return favor for his trading partner, your living in a dream world.

Lack has cute little blogs and stuff which is great but Remember, he will be our starter If Cory is Injured, is he ready? Possibly, but that's pretty debatable. If Cory went down in the playoffs would you be more comfortable with say Neimi? Or Lack? Ya... I'm going to bet a short term vet backup is on the way back in whatever deal we get. If not, one will be acquired after.


  • 0
Posted Image

BEASTLY!!!

#25 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,247 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 04 January 2013 - 10:53 AM

I'm not the GM it's an example of what could happen.
We will exchange salary and because we have a long way to go to be cap compliant in a few years a pending UFA may be an option.
You can let him walk if he doesn't fit you team or you can have exclusive negotiating to resign him. He is a upgrade to Higgins, clearly.

For those that think MG is not going to do a return favor for his trading partner, your living in a dream world.

Lack has cute little blogs and stuff which is great but Remember, he will be our starter If Cory is Injured, is he ready? Possibly, but that's pretty debatable. If Cory went down in the playoffs would you be more comfortable with say Neimi? Or Lack? Ya... I'm going to bet a short term vet backup is on the way back in whatever deal we get. If not, one will be acquired after.

I'd be ok with Niemi in net in the playoffs if Schneider went down. Remember Niemi just won the Cup not that long ago and has a 7-2 playoff series record.
  • 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


#26 Rivera

Rivera

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 79 posts
  • Joined: 11-September 08

Posted 04 January 2013 - 01:01 PM

I am completely convinced that if Luo gets traded he will go to a left field team that can give us a reliable goaltender

To San Jose
Luo
Higgins
3rd

To Van
Niemi
Clowe
1st

Of corse all of you homers will say we are overpaying but in reality both teams need to feel they are getting the upper hand.
SJ is more desperate than we are to keep the window open. I don't think Clowe likes SJ he constantly lays that out in interviews. He would help this team and MG would be all over locking him up.
You wanna buy out a goalie? I think neimi would be an easier buy and probably relatively easy to move when lack is ready
Higgins is awesome but Clowe is more awesome both UFA's

We give SJ short term cap relief they give us long term cap relief.

We will not get high end prospects for Luo or capspace
it will involve a money exchange. So MG can help the team now and a contender can fit Luo in.

The buy out is kind of an interesting tool. We could take a big contract from a team that cannot afford a buyout in exchange for prospects. Like a DePetro. I can't imagine what the islanders would give to unload that sucker. Not saying Luongo would be part of that but it would be another way to acquire youth rather than using Luo.


I've been thinking about this too Noheart. The amnesty buyout would open up the market for Luongo, and I actually like the offer you proposed. Although I hope somehow we can send him to Philly and pry out Couturier. I'm dreaming I know. Hahahaha
  • 0

#27 thad

thad

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,184 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 04 January 2013 - 01:44 PM

I take back anything I've ever said about Lu. I strapped on the pads last night and hit a local outdoor rink and holy crap that's hard. I can barely move today lol
  • 0

#28 sampy

sampy

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,046 posts
  • Joined: 05-May 07

Posted 04 January 2013 - 02:18 PM

I take back anything I've ever said about Lu. I strapped on the pads last night and hit a local outdoor rink and holy crap that's hard. I can barely move today lol


By far the hardest position on the ice. I played goal for 10 years growing up and now as an adult I play forward, way easier.
  • 0

#29 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,195 posts
  • Joined: 05-November 12

Posted 04 January 2013 - 03:00 PM

While we're at it; why don't we trade for three more left wingers, 5 more left D and 4 goalies? We'll get Niemi, a pick we can use to draft a goalie, a prospect and maybe SJ can acquire the rights to Hasek to include him so the deal works...

I mean really, our depth is in goal, on left D (Edler, Hamhuis, Garrison, Ballard) and on left wing (Danny, Burrows, Booth, Raymond, Higgins, prospect Jensen). Hansen is our top natural RW followed by prospect Kassian. You can decide whether your happy with our depth at centre. And Tanev is our 2knd best natural right D, which is scary. For all our fast skating, good passing D we lack both a bone cruncher, are desperately short on right handed shots and miss a guy that can lug the puck against pressure not just pass it.

So first lets trade Lou for a UFA, then lets not bother to actually address any team needs!

:picard:


Great post. I agree.
  • 0

#30 thad

thad

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,184 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 04 January 2013 - 03:02 PM

By far the hardest position on the ice. I played goal for 10 years growing up and now as an adult I play forward, way easier.


No kidding. I'd rather be a Ryan Johnson shot blocking champion on the 4th line than pick my ass up off the ice every ten seconds with that gear on. I thought I was gonna puke I was so out of breath.
  • 0




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.