Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

[Discussion] Roberto Luongo Trade Thread 5.0


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
3019 replies to this topic

#541 vcr1970

vcr1970

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 112 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 12:08 AM

You do realize Canucks are notorious for their slow starts, and they will eventually pick up their pace, resulting in a much greater difference and differential from the Maple Leafs?


You do realize that the Maple Leafs have been very fast starters the prior two seasons, right? So if everything has to be status quo doesn't that mean they will go on a long winning streak right now?

Do you also realize that Vancouver had 1 more playoff win than TO last year?

There's only one winner each year, the rest are losers, and Vancouver was a loser just like TO.
  • 0

#542 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,821 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 27 January 2013 - 12:10 AM

You do realize that the Maple Leafs have been very fast starters the prior two seasons, right? So if everything has to be status quo doesn't that mean they will go on a long winning streak right now?

Do you also realize that Vancouver had 1 more playoff win than TO last year?

There's only one winner each year, the rest are losers, and Vancouver was a loser just like TO.


NIce theory. Share it with the Laffs fans who haven't had a playoff win since the Depression.
  • 0

#543 Millerdraft

Millerdraft

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,509 posts
  • Joined: 02-March 04

Posted 27 January 2013 - 12:11 AM

It has a ton of speed though, and would likely be very solid defensively. I don't see it being that much softer than Chicago's third line of Versteeg - Bolland - Brouwer. Versteeg is soft, and Bolland isn't tough, he's just annoying.

We're not always going to need grit in the playoffs. Sometimes we'll get matchups where we'll need more scoring from the third, which is where the Raymond - Schroeder - Brouwer line would be more effective. Then in more physical matchups we could play the Higgins - Lapierre - Hansen line, or load it up and have a Higgins - Lapierre - Brouwer line. Either way, I think its good to have the option of having more grit with the addition of Brouwer.


Chicago's Cup wiining third line was Ladd-Bolland-Versteeg but no matter. You can certainly argue that Raymond and Versteeg are a was in terms of toughness but if you think Schroeder has anywhere near the same amount of grit that Bolland has, I'm not sure what to say.
  • 0

Kassian.... Taylor Pyatt 3.0

Lies. He's more of a Steve Bernier. Hopefully his talent level goes up so he can become like a Taylor Pyatt.


#544 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

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

Posted 27 January 2013 - 12:13 AM

Well, my reasoning is that Rodin needs some size and experience to insulate him and he's been more successful as a passer than a shooter at the AHL level so far. In this entirely hypothetical scenario (which is completely unrealistic since it's basically projecting a 100% success rate in terms of prospect development), I'm trying to spread out the talent instead of loading up one line. Gaunce is a prototypical checking line centre, imo, hence having him anchor the third line (which has historically been known as a "shutdown" line).


Fair enough, not trying to criticize you too heavily if I came across that way.

I agree on Rodin, although I think he has an adept defensive game to be a solid 3rd liner aswell, and I disagree on Gaunce, he uses his size kind of like Kassian does and he has a really nice wrist shot. Can also play LW as suggested in mine.
  • 0

zackass.png


#545 Millerdraft

Millerdraft

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,509 posts
  • Joined: 02-March 04

Posted 27 January 2013 - 12:25 AM

Fair enough, not trying to criticize you too heavily if I came across that way.

I agree on Rodin, although I think he has an adept defensive game to be a solid 3rd liner aswell, and I disagree on Gaunce, he uses his size kind of like Kassian does and he has a really nice wrist shot. Can also play LW as suggested in mine.


Which is perfect to have against offensive lines that tend to cheat on the offensive side of the game. There is nothing more demoralizing than having a 3rd line outscoring the opposition's 1st line in a 7-game series.
  • 0

Kassian.... Taylor Pyatt 3.0

Lies. He's more of a Steve Bernier. Hopefully his talent level goes up so he can become like a Taylor Pyatt.


#546 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,821 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 27 January 2013 - 12:39 AM

I'm kind of disappointed about some of the trade proposals in this thread, after that dominant performance last night I was riding a high, but you all seem to think we need to revamp the roster.

We are extremely deep. At this point we do not need roster players, if we have secondary scoring like we do now without Kesler or Booth in the lineup, on top of having a strong D core, I don't really see a place where we need to improve. I say keep Luongo in the shortened season, it adds greatly to the stability of this roster, when our back up plays the rest of the team doesn't have to compensate.

We don't need another left d (Gardiner), as we have 5 that are more than capable. We don't need another centre (Johansson), as he would be forced into a third line role behind Sedin and Kesler. We don't need another winger, as the options we have with Hansen, Higgins, Burrows, Raymond, Kassian, and Booth are plentiful. In all honesty I can't see how a rookie or young player from a worse team crack our roster.

I also don't like the idea of messing with the chemistry we have in the locker room right now. Every one knows their role, and if we were to acquire someone that could bump one of our current guys down the depth chart I feel that hurts the composition of our roster. For example, last year with the Hodgson trade and the acquisition of Pahlsson, we moved from having 3 scoring lines to 2 and a checking line. Trying to construct a checking line with 20 games left in the season, I felt hurt us badly heading into the playoffs - where we needed secondary scoring.

So let's not trade Luongo for anything that could damage our current composition, trade him for prospects and picks. We will have to get under the cap next year anyway, might as well start with some potential ELCs.


I agree with you that there is no urgency to add to the roster, particularly not an overpayment for an overhyped Gardiner who'd be an odd fit on the third pairing.

But i don't agree that the Pahlsson acquisition hurt the Canucks. I think he played some very good hockey here - the third line imo was the best line for the last month of the season. Higgins, Pahlsson and Hansen were dominant at times, and still chipped in with some scoring despite the shutdown role. The idea was to make life easier for Kesler, who wasn't getting much quarter with Hodgson needing offensive zone starts all the time and not able to use the 3rd line to carry some weight for the 2nd.
I don't think keeping Hodgson would have made any difference whatsoever. The first line was missing Daniel, the second line was hobbling with an injured Kesler, a recovering Raymond, and Booth coming off an knee injury and trying to find chemistry with linemates playing at 50%. With the top two lines in such bad health, the Canucks were going nowhere - I wouldn't put that on a Hodgson trade or Pahlsson changing the chemistry in the locker-room
I'm comfortable with the current roster like you are, and I don't see a guy like Johansson being a very good fit, but if we could add a player like Goc and prospects, or ideally a two way workhorse like Couturier on an ELC (I think people here have gotten carried away with the idea that young players are unattainable) - I think that may be better than prospects alone - and it would probably be preferable to converting Burrows (or Higgins) to center. I also don't think it would necessarily mean sending Schroeder down if/when Kesler returns - it might mean Ebbett or another fourth line winger may be squeezed out, but I could live with that.
  • 0

#547 vcr1970

vcr1970

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 112 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 12:50 AM

NIce theory. Share it with the Laffs fans who haven't had a playoff win since the Depression.


How old are you, 15? The "depression" happened 80 years ago. Please tell me you're not referring to 2008/2009.
  • 0

#548 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 27 January 2013 - 12:53 AM

Better than a 2.5 million dollar fourth liner.

Malhotra and Raymond likely won't be re-signed, so that's your cap space right there.

This may be one of our last few good chances at a cup. We need something to help us go for it now, plus something for the future.

The way Raymond is playing(small sample I know) he would be a lock for another contract here !
  • 0

#549 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,821 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 27 January 2013 - 12:53 AM

How old are you, 15? The "depression" happened 80 years ago. Please tell me you're not referring to 2008/2009.


Did the Leafs make the playoffs in 2008/9?

Ok. The last lockout, but the Depression isn't really any greater embellishment than the claim that the Canucks are losers on par with the Leafs.

Edited by oldnews, 27 January 2013 - 01:09 AM.

  • 0

#550 Provost

Provost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,887 posts
  • Joined: 05-September 03

Posted 27 January 2013 - 12:54 AM

Your just plain wrong, you can say we were beaten up against Boston, but we scored a grand total of 8 goals in 7 games, and the Sedins were in on atleast 5 or 6 of them. And once again the Boston series is overplayed, the only time we didn't match there physicality is after the whistle, check the stats sheets, we probably had 3 or more games where we had just as many hits as they did, the Boston point again being overplayed.


The very important point that you are missing is that we don't lack offense at all. We have been amongst the highest scoring teams in the league for the past several years. Our bread and butter is outscoring the opposition. It is simply the facts and not opinion.

With the exact same roster that is chock full of offense, we can't score goals in some of our playoff rounds. It is not that we don't have offence... it is that they are unable to make their offensive plays suddenly. You need to consider why that is. It is because they are played much more physically and don't have the room to make fancy, skilled plays.

The counter to that and the way to make room is to have more physical players... it is not to add another non-physical offensive player who will also not have room to make his plays. You have to build a balanced team that complements each other... not just try to throw the guys who score the most goals all together and hope for the best.

Our team is in need to a reasonably talented and very physical player on our 3rd line who is capable of playing meaningful minutes. Someone in the mold of a Chris Neil/Clutterbuck. He makes room for our skilled guys and has the added benefit of taking away room from the opposition's skilled players.

The other addition required to complement our existing guys is to find a very mean right hand D who punishes opposing forwards who want to dipsy doodle around our zone. If Ballard is the guy who dishes out the hardest hits on your D... you are in a little bit of trouble. I say that as someone who has been defending Ballard since he got here. He is doing everything he can to help the team but is a little miscast as our tough 3rd pairing guy.

Edited by Provost, 27 January 2013 - 12:59 AM.

  • 1
Protons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic!

#551 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

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

Posted 27 January 2013 - 12:57 AM

How old are you, 15? The "depression" happened 80 years ago. Please tell me you're not referring to 2008/2009.


He's saying tell that to Leafs fans who haven't made the playoffs in 8 years. and were the only one who didn't in the last era of the NHL.
  • 0

zackass.png


#552 AnInconvenienceBrah

AnInconvenienceBrah

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 486 posts
  • Joined: 21-April 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:00 AM

I would love a Kadri for Luongo deal, isn't this the deal the Leafs have on the table for us? Cause if it is we really should do it, Kadri can help now and be a solid part of the future.
  • 0

#553 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,200 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:12 AM

Any season lost to a lockout shall henceforth (and retroactively!) be known as "The Depression".

Edited by The Bookie, 27 January 2013 - 01:12 AM.

  • 1

#554 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

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

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:23 AM

The very important point that you are missing is that we don't lack offense at all. We have been amongst the highest scoring teams in the league for the past several years. Our bread and butter is outscoring the opposition. It is simply the facts and not opinion.

With the exact same roster that is chock full of offense, we can't score goals in some of our playoff rounds. It is not that we don't have offence... it is that they are unable to make their offensive plays suddenly. You need to consider why that is. It is because they are played much more physically and don't have the room to make fancy, skilled plays.

The counter to that and the way to make room is to have more physical players... it is not to add another non-physical offensive player who will also not have room to make his plays. You have to build a balanced team that complements each other... not just try to throw the guys who score the most goals all together and hope for the best.

Our team is in need to a reasonably talented and very physical player on our 3rd line who is capable of playing meaningful minutes. Someone in the mold of a Chris Neil/Clutterbuck. He makes room for our skilled guys and has the added benefit of taking away room from the opposition's skilled players.

The other addition required to complement our existing guys is to find a very mean right hand D who punishes opposing forwards who want to dipsy doodle around our zone. If Ballard is the guy who dishes out the hardest hits on your D... you are in a little bit of trouble. I say that as someone who has been defending Ballard since he got here. He is doing everything he can to help the team but is a little miscast as our tough 3rd pairing guy.


We don't lack offense? We don't lack offense in the regular season (although in the last half of last season we struggled and relied soley on goaltending to carry us) What do we want? Another Presidents Trophy or a Stanley Cup? When it comes down to when it matter the most we have lacked offense.

That's not opinion that's stats, of the 8 goals we scored in 7 games, only 3 of those came without one of the Sedins or Burrows factoring on it.

Then against LA, only 2 of the 8 goals we scored came without the Sedins or Burrows factoring on it.

Secondary scoring has totally been an issue. Go look at the 2011 Playoffs, look at the amount of goals scored by forwarrds not named Sedin, Kesler or Burrows.

Again I think your physical argument, taking away chances, exc. is being blow out of preportion, the game is still hockey, the intensity and physicality is racheted up but it's the exact same sport, exact same game, plays don't throw things, the big guys don't skate 100x's faster to prevent chances, you still get quality scoring opportunites and we haven't finished, adding guy who can't score in favor those who can and are playing well does not help that.

The key to playoffs is Goaltending, now matter what style you play, whether it is an offensive style that pushes the place, or a more physical style, or more defensive style, the key is goaltending and it always has been. It doesn't surprise me the last 2 Conn Smythe winners have been goaltenders, are success isn't going to hinge on whether Raymond and Schroeder our in our line-up it is going to hinge on how well Cory Schneider plays.

Besides you are acting as if we are extremely soft, which we aren't just another case of our softness and other teams toughness being blow out of preportion, the Sedins aren't soft, we have Kassian, we have Kesler, we have Booth, we have Higgins, we have Hansen, Manny, Lappierre, Volpatti, Weise, Exc. Not every team is chalk full of guys who are mainly grit. LA had Voynov, if he gritty? LA had Williams who isn't all that gritty, even Boston had Seguin, is he gritty? Chicago had Versteeg & Kane, Detriot had tons of "soft guys".

Once again, that's not what determines playoff success, it all comes down to goaltending. You can be successful with any style and since 2011 this team has been constantly being changed to be able to play every style. We can play a defensive style, we can play a offensive style, we have the players to play a tough gritty style, just scratch JS and Raymond and throw Weise and Volpatti in.

Now back to the regular point.

What exactly do you want to trade Raymond for, what is your proposed deal? Just give me some idea, because it is hard to assess your theory without knowing what it entitles.
  • 0

zackass.png


#555 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,821 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:39 AM

I'd love to see Chris Neil or Clutterbuck on the roster as well. I'd be hesitant to move Raymond for them - would prefer to offer futures which likely wouldn't get a deal done. I also wouldn't mind the Canucks going after a young player like Patrice Cormier who hasn't yet caught on the Jets roster.

Edited by oldnews, 27 January 2013 - 01:44 AM.

  • 0

#556 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:41 AM

Talk about spewing sillyness.
There is a buyout period after this season and after next season, so 4 years down the road you cannot buy a player out. It is the 5,3 million cap hit for the next 10 years is the problem with Lu's contract.


and are those 2 years where he's probably not worth it (39/40) where you pay him what 6 million total more than what he's worth not worth making the playoffs for 4-5 years? having a run? and what if he's still able, look at brodeur 3ga in 4 games at 41...I am sure the playoffs are worth 6 milllion to alot of teams there buddy...

so what now? hmm...

Edited by BuretoMogilny, 27 January 2013 - 01:44 AM.

  • 0

#557 allkill326

allkill326

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,270 posts
  • Joined: 30-May 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:45 AM

You do realize that the Maple Leafs have been very fast starters the prior two seasons, right? So if everything has to be status quo doesn't that mean they will go on a long winning streak right now?

Do you also realize that Vancouver had 1 more playoff win than TO last year?

There's only one winner each year, the rest are losers, and Vancouver was a loser just like TO.


You aren't a Canucks fan, are you? I think your subjectivity is trying to cloud the fact Vancouver is a top team in the West, and probably, the entire league. They have won two consecutive Presidents' Trophy titles. I think, without further explaining Vancouver's accomplishments, evidence is quite conclusive that Vancouver is clearly better than Toronto.

So, what brought you in the Canucks forum, anyway?
  • 0
Posted Image

#558 goblix

goblix

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,028 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:46 AM

and are those 2 years where he's probably not worth it (39/40) where you pay him what 6 million total more than what he's worth not worth making the playoffs for 4-5 years? having a run? and what if he's still able, look at brodeur 3ga in 4 games at 41

so what now? hmm...

Ya I don't understand people, he's 42 when the contract is over, Goalie careers don't usually start until they are 24 at the least and more commonly at 26. Likewise goalies have a longer age shelf life than players do, MG drew up this contract knowing that.
  • 0

#559 allkill326

allkill326

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,270 posts
  • Joined: 30-May 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:47 AM

Ya I don't understand people, he's 42 when the contract is over, Goalie careers don't usually start until they are 24 at the least and more commonly at 26. Likewise goalies have a longer age shelf life than players do, MG drew up this contract knowing that.


I dont understand why you don't understand goalies such as Martin Brodeur had their peak careers in early-thirties, and, in fact, Marty still plays well, despite being forty years old.
  • 0
Posted Image

#560 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,479 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:48 AM

I'd love to see Chris Neil or Clutterbuck on the roster as well. I'd be hesitant to move Raymond for them - would prefer to offer futures which likely wouldn't get a deal done. I also wouldn't mind the Canucks going after a young player like Patrice Cormier who hasn't yet caught on the Jets roster.

Neil or Clutterbuck would be perfect for this team. I think there's a chance we can get one and I think that would be Clutterbuck. But just imagine if we somehow got both.
  • 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


#561 Pistachios

Pistachios

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,059 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:49 AM

I think TOR is out for the foreseeable future. Reimer & Scrivens are playing well enough that Nonis is going to stick with developing these two young goaltenders rather than trade away away any strong prospects.

So far no teams are tanking goal tending wise, but WSH is getting close. Neuvirth made some good saves against NJ so he wasn't a total siv. The next 5 games will be interesting to see though.
  • 0

0au3Jj.gif


#562 Brendan Gaunce

Brendan Gaunce

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,168 posts
  • Joined: 22-June 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:50 AM

Luongo is going to the Capitals for Laich and some other details I don't know yet, book it
  • 0

Posted Image


#563 goblix

goblix

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,028 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:52 AM

You do realize that the Maple Leafs have been very fast starters the prior two seasons, right? So if everything has to be status quo doesn't that mean they will go on a long winning streak right now?

Do you also realize that Vancouver had 1 more playoff win than TO last year?

There's only one winner each year, the rest are losers, and Vancouver was a loser just like TO.


Even though you are correct that there is only one winner and anything else is less than enjoyable, there is a big difference of making the playoffs and not making the playoffs. If you make it to the playoffs you at least have a chance of winning the Cup. 0% chance if you don't make it to the post-season.

So yes there is still a distinction between the two and clearly vancouver has been better in this regard.
With that said I'm not a Toronto hater, I root for any canadian team specially in the east because an all canadian final would be awesome.
  • 0

#564 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

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

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:53 AM

I'd love to see Chris Neil or Clutterbuck on the roster as well. I'd be hesitant to move Raymond for them - would prefer to offer futures which likely wouldn't get a deal done. I also wouldn't mind the Canucks going after a young player like Patrice Cormier who hasn't yet caught on the Jets roster.


I say wait and if Higgins doesn't pick it up, and Raymond plays the way he has, maybe offer Higgins for Clutterbuck.

To Minnesota: Chris Higgins, Kevin Connaution

To Vancouver: Cal Clutterbuck, Tyler Graovac

2 birds with 1 stone for us, as we would bring in more energy in physicality in Clutterbuck aswell as Tyler Graovac who has been playing very well with Brendan Gaunce.

They get Higgins who aside from this slump has been very good for us, and it would add more scoring perhaps in the area Clutterbuck would play, with still maintain some grit and two way play. And then a defensemen (which is probably the weakest part of their organization) who will likely be capable of cracking there line-up next year.

As for us we can target Dimitry Orlov in a Luongo trade to Washington and that would give us an upgrade on Connaution for next year.

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 27 January 2013 - 01:56 AM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#565 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,479 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:53 AM

Luongo is going to the Capitals for Laich and some other details I don't know yet, book it

I'd love to get Laich. I hope we can try and grab Brouwer as well

Sedin - Sedin - Kassian
Booth - Kesler - Schroeder
Burrows - Laich - Brouwer
Higgins - Lapierre - Hansen
Raymond, Malhotra, Weise, Volpatti

That third line sounds amazing
  • 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


#566 allkill326

allkill326

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,270 posts
  • Joined: 30-May 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:53 AM

Luongo is going to the Capitals for Laich and some other details I don't know yet, book it


Don't spread ridiculous rumors. Laich is a well-rounded player, and WSH would not give up the likes of Laich for Luongo.
Besides, WSH is not desperate for a veteran goalie. They have Neuvirth and Holtby.
  • 0
Posted Image

#567 allkill326

allkill326

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,270 posts
  • Joined: 30-May 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:54 AM

I say wait and if Higgins doesn't pick it up, and Raymond plays the way he has, maybe offer Higgins for Clutterbuck.

To Minnesota: Chris Higgins, Kevin Connaution

To Vancouver: Cal Clutterbuck, Tyler Graovac

2 birds with 1 stone for us, as we would bring in more energy in physicality in Clutterbuck aswell as Tyler Graovac who has been playing very well with Brendan Gaunce, they get a defensemen who will likely be capable of cracking there line-up next year, as for us we can target Dimitry Orlov in a Luongo trade to Washington and that would give us an upgrade on Connaution for next year.


I highly doubt Washington will aim for Luongo.
  • 0
Posted Image

#568 vcr1970

vcr1970

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 112 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:57 AM

You aren't a Canucks fan, are you? I think your subjectivity is trying to cloud the fact Vancouver is a top team in the West, and probably, the entire league. They have won two consecutive Presidents' Trophy titles. I think, without further explaining Vancouver's accomplishments, evidence is quite conclusive that Vancouver is clearly better than Toronto.

So, what brought you in the Canucks forum, anyway?


I'm a fan of hockey...... I just don't like it when one team gets ripped for no reason. I was at a pub today watching the TO game and every time the Rangers scored the place went nuts..........they didn't like the Rangers, they just liked that TO was losing. it's not even because they hate TO, they are just programmed to think that way from what they hear from everyone else.

A few years ago I was in Calgary when the Canucks played game 7 of the Cup Finals. You would've thought I was in Boston. Every time the Bruins scored the place went nuts. Not a single Canuck fan in the house. Again, I would've thought that some people in Calgary would pull for a Cdn. team to win............again nothing............for no reason.

That's what drives me nuts........why can't people see and accept that a deserving team that plays well, deserves to win. You should always pull for your home team but why the other teams have to suck, just because...........drives me nuts.
  • 0

#569 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:57 AM

I think you may need a little brush up on the "sell high, buy low" principle.

We have seen a whole lot of Raymond over the years and he has had fairly limited success. If he isn't scoring, he is of no use to the team at all... we actually have two players like that already in our top 6 and they both have the last name Sedin. Thankfully they are players that actually score all the time, Raymond will never be in that class and there will always be long stretches where he is of no use on the ice... especially considering he would be on the 3rd line in a healthy roster.

While he is on a high, you get something that complements our core better. Maybe read the rationale in my post that you quoted.


I do think Mayray may be on the verge of a breakthrough, his play has changed. I personally would rather see Booth moved with Lou to bring back more of an offensive player with grit/size than get rid of may ray. I agree, if he's not scoring he's too small to be helpful but his training seems to have really paid off.

The guy is not falling over at every hit, winning pucks, skating great, going to the net, sniping shots (don't forget the scrimmage), and has the type of speed that pushes players back.

Booth on the other hand, was brought in for his size,speed and scoring. I dont see him scoring much, he isn't a banger, and he really doesn't seem to have chemistry with anyone, especially kesler, as they are both head down and shoot.

Raymond seems to have better chemistry with a number of players so move booth and replace him with what he was supposed to bring.
  • 1

#570 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

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

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:58 AM

I highly doubt Washington will aim for Luongo.


The goaltending they have gotten for the most part hasn't given them a chance to win, if this continues they will likely be in the market, and don't forget there owners loves making hockey decisions, so he will have a voice in whether they target goaltending or not.

Either way, we can use Corrado or sign someone, what do you think of the MIN deal?
  • 0

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.