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

#2011 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,940 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:19 PM

If the Canucks are going after Matthias and Ellerby I still think they should target a player with a higher ceiling. Matthias fills a roll on the third line, and Ellerby adds depth on D, but they dont offer much more than that going forward. Even if Bjugstad and Gudbranson are off the table Drew Shore, Alex Petrovic, or Quinton Howden would be a nice piece to add in.

Matthias, Ellerby, and Shore/Petrovic/Howden looks a lot better to me than Matthias, Ellerby, Clemmensen, and a second.

We could figure out the back up roll in a seperate trade.


Agree with you there - I want Petrovic in a deal - imo has exactly the type of skill set that would fit nicely on this team.
  • 0

#2012 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,672 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:19 PM

If the Canucks are going after Matthias and Ellerby I still think they should target a player with a higher ceiling. Matthias fills a roll on the third line, and Ellerby adds depth on D, but they dont offer much more than that going forward. Even if Bjugstad and Gudbranson are off the table Drew Shore, Alex Petrovic, or Quinton Howden would be a nice piece to add in.

Matthias, Ellerby, and Shore/Petrovic/Howden looks a lot better to me than Matthias, Ellerby, Clemmensen, and a second.

We could figure out the back up roll in a seperate trade.


Shore, Petrovic, a pick and Clemmensen would be nice.

regards,
G.
  • 1
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#2013 RockNroLLa.

RockNroLLa.

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,074 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:24 PM

However, since we don't know each other and your situation is an unknown, what choice would we have except to slot anything you say as more rumor? :)

regards,
G.


you could slot it as complete BS :) (and rightfully so). however do you think we could get a top 6 and a great prospect for Lu? or Lu +?
  • 0

#2014 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,672 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:25 PM

Cory Schneider 2-2-0, 3.13 GAA, .897 SV%

No one gives a flying **** about last year's stats anymore, right?


Well, they do when it supports their position, right?

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

#2015 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 818 posts
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:25 PM

What is something that Lu can bring us back for sure? Specifics?


With a bit more toughness/grits on up front and on D, I think Lu can bring us back to round 4 SCF for sure :bigblush:
  • 0

#2016 RockNroLLa.

RockNroLLa.

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,074 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:27 PM

Shore, Petrovic, a pick and Clemmensen would be nice.

regards,
G.


That would be a great return but i dont think they would part with 2 prospects, unless they find that they have too many in a certain position...
  • 0

#2017 RockNroLLa.

RockNroLLa.

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,074 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:31 PM

With a bit more toughness/grits on up front and on D, I think Lu can bring us back to round 4 SCF for sure :bigblush:


yea toughness with size and some offensive ability would be great especially at 3C.

You know when Gillis was in Washington, I thought of your sig, it served me well, but i m sure GMMG accomplished what he intended to.
  • 1

#2018 Dynamic Innovator

Dynamic Innovator

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 153 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 08

Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:32 PM

After 2.6 million posts of Luongo has no value and should be traded for warm pooh and a roll of sock tape or Luongo is the greatest and should be traded for Crosby, Malkin, Letang and a 1st...

What is the consensus on the Canucks actual needs?

A backup is a must. A very good prospect, probably a first line center with size is needed. A player that can contribute right now has to be included.

Given the present lineup when healthy GMMG is looking for a very solid big body, gritty forward, a top center prospect and back up goalie.

Respectfully, I do not believe the Canucks are looking at defensemen, impending UFA's, average small body forwards or any other spare parts.

Edited by Dynamic Innovator, 06 February 2013 - 10:34 PM.

  • 1

#2019 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,672 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:41 PM

you could slot it as complete BS :) (and rightfully so). however do you think we could get a top 6 and a great prospect for Lu? or Lu +?


I don't see a team, which is looking to go far in the playoffs, trading away one of their top-6 players..., unless.

The only way a top-6 guy would come here in a trade was if he was expendable to that team for any number of reasons. Maybe they have a younger guy who they like more (cap hit, play style, etc). Maybe the guy lost his place due to injury, and the replacement the team put in his place was a better option for them going into the playoffs and beyond. Maybe the guy just wants to be traded and Vancouver is a good fit for him and Luongo a good fit for the other team.

Prospects are a far more likely return for Luongo (IMO). Losing them doesn't hurt the other team's current chances for the playoffs, and if they don't move any of their top prospects in the deal, it won't hurt their future chances.

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

#2020 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,331 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:42 PM

Bjugstad is too young and not skilled enough. It would be a risk to trade for Bjugstad.
I would try aiming for Kessel, if he continues to play unproductively. We may be able to use him for 2nd or 3rd line.

Please tell me you're trolling now, that you'd want to trade for a winger with a $5.4M cap hit this year and next with the hope he'll stay unproductive and be used on our 2nd or 3rd line...

After 2.6 million posts of Luongo has no value and should be traded for warm pooh and a roll of sock tape or Luongo is the greatest and should be traded for Crosby, Malkin, Letang and a 1st...

What is the consensus on the Canucks actual needs?

A backup is a must. A very good prospect, probably a first line center with size is needed. A player that can contribute right now has to be included.

Given the present lineup when healthy GMMG is looking for a very solid big body, gritty forward, a top center prospect and back up goalie.

Respectfully, I do not believe the Canucks are looking at defensemen, impending UFA's, average small body forwards or any other spare parts.

There's always the question of what Gillis feels is our need (or needs, and which he picks as most viable given the trading partner if it is multiple) versus what we think it is, but it's a fair point.

I agree on a backup now that Lack is out, either in this deal or another. An improving forward who can provide top 9 capability, perhaps 3rd line C, or a #5-6 D-man who can do what Ballard does only cheaper if we get an opportunity to move him as a roster player otherwise. I think prospect-wise, a top end talent would be almost essential, but if not then we'd pursue a 1st rounder and a lesser prospect.

Obviously a combination of those rather than all of them, but those are some things I think we'd be looking for.

Edited by elvis15, 06 February 2013 - 10:55 PM.

  • 1

schroedersig2_by_elvis15-d5szksn.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

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

 


#2021 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,672 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:48 PM

That would be a great return but i dont think they would part with 2 prospects, unless they find that they have too many in a certain position...


Florida does have a number of very good center prospects. Petrovic is perhaps the latest of good young d-men in the Panthers' system. Whether they are willing to part with him or Shore remains to be seen.

regards,
G.

Edited by Gollumpus, 06 February 2013 - 11:19 PM.

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

#2022 RockNroLLa.

RockNroLLa.

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,074 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:49 PM

I don't see a team, which is looking to go far in the playoffs, trading away one of their top-6 players..., unless.

The only way a top-6 guy would come here in a trade was if he was expendable to that team for any number of reasons. Maybe they have a younger guy who they like more (cap hit, play style, etc). Maybe the guy lost his place due to injury, and the replacement the team put in his place was a better option for them going into the playoffs and beyond. Maybe the guy just wants to be traded and Vancouver is a good fit for him and Luongo a good fit for the other team.

Prospects are a far more likely return for Luongo (IMO). Losing them doesn't hurt the other team's current chances for the playoffs, and if they don't move any of their top prospects in the deal, it won't hurt their future chances.

regards,
G.


makes sense, but maybe a team like Florida who have said they wanna resign Weiss, might wanna move one of their other top 6 guys. So maybe it means keeping Weiss (reasonable price) and adding Lu while sacrificing a guy like Versteeg. I guess it comes down to who is more valuable to them in their lineup.
  • 1

#2023 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,155 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:55 PM

Bernier has far more upside potential, is 24 years old, and is not signed until 2022. His NHL numbers after 49 career games are promising.

I'm not sure why people seemingly have such difficulties understanding the driving force of this deal, which is only one thing: Roberto Luongo's contract.


Bernier won't be Luongo.

Luongo is and will always be better. He was far better at Bernier's age than Bernier is, and it's not even comparable.
  • 0

zackass.png


#2024 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,155 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:00 PM

Shouldn't be a surprise. We all agree that Schneider would bring back a lot more than what Luongo would. Well, Bernier is pretty comparable to Schneider. NHL numbers are not as impressive, but they're nonetheless impressive, and he's 2 years younger.

Both were 1st round picks who's NHL careers probably should've been further along by this point, but for the presence of an elite NHL goaltender.

Far lower risk, and higher upside potential.


Unlike Bernier, Schneider has played well enough to overtake the elite goaltender he is playing behind.

And actually there is far, far less risk in getting Luongo, with him you know what you are getting, with Bernier it is nothing but risk and he really isn't an upgrade on Riemer and Scrivens.

And judging by the reports that LA's asking price for Bernier is ridiculously high (probably close if not the same as what we are askign for Roberto) Lu would be the far better choice.

Reimer was taken 99th overall; Bernier was taken 11th. One was a pleasant surprise, one was expected to be a potential franchise goalie (and could well still be).

None of you seem to either understand or accept the fact that Luongo's contract makes him very unattractive to most teams. Just too rich.


Al Montoya was taken 6th Overall,
Devan Dubynk was taken 14th Overall,
Cory Schneider was taken 24th Overall,
Pekka Rinne was taken 258th Overall.

All in the same draft. The "potential" the first 2 had didn't exactly materialize aswell as the other 2 now did it?

Thomas McCollum was taken 30th Overall. Jacob Markstrom was taken in the 2nd Round.

Not sure your point, there are endless examples.

To Buffalo:

G Roberto Luongo
C Manny Malhotra


To Van:

LW Tyler Ennis
G Jonas Enroth
C Joel Armia


Buffalo needs a goaltender and a 1st line center.


No they don't they picked up some guy at the deadline last year who is carrying the 1st line on his back :bigblush:

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 06 February 2013 - 11:06 PM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#2025 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,155 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:08 PM

Bjugstad is too young and not skilled enough. It would be a risk to trade for Bjugstad.
I would try aiming for Kessel, if he continues to play unproductively. We may be able to use him for 2nd or 3rd line.


He's 6'6 and projected to be a 1st liner.

I would be more satisfied trading Lu for him rather than trading Schneider+ and overpaying for Kessel myself.
  • 1

zackass.png


#2026 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,155 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:10 PM

I don't see a team, which is looking to go far in the playoffs, trading away one of their top-6 players..., unless.

The only way a top-6 guy would come here in a trade was if he was expendable to that team for any number of reasons. Maybe they have a younger guy who they like more (cap hit, play style, etc). Maybe the guy lost his place due to injury, and the replacement the team put in his place was a better option for them going into the playoffs and beyond. Maybe the guy just wants to be traded and Vancouver is a good fit for him and Luongo a good fit for the other team.

Prospects are a far more likely return for Luongo (IMO). Losing them doesn't hurt the other team's current chances for the playoffs, and if they don't move any of their top prospects in the deal, it won't hurt their future chances.

regards,
G.


Exactly, I can't see any team giving up a top 6 forward (aside from maybe Florida with Weiss)

The point of these teams getting Lu is to improve there team, not create a hole while filling another one.

We have to look at futures with this and maybe a 3rd line calibre player, but personally I would just focus on futures, and the teams interested have some pretty intriguing ones.
  • 0

zackass.png


#2027 RockNroLLa.

RockNroLLa.

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,074 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:13 PM

Florida does have a number of very good center prospects. Petrovic is perhaps the latest of good young d-men in the Panthers' system. Whether they are willing to paer with him or Shore remains to be seen.

regards,
G.


They will probably ask for Lu and a 1st for that deal, but perhaps MG could get that package for Lu and Raymond.
  • 1

#2028 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,155 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:14 PM

Please tell me you're trolling now, that you'd want to trade for a winger with a $5.4M cap hit this year and next with the hope he'll stay unproductive and be used on our 2nd or 3rd line...


There's always the question of what Gillis feels is our need (or needs, and which he picks as most viable given the trading partner if it is multiple) versus what we think it is, but it's a fair point.

I agree on a backup now that Lack is out, either in this deal or another. An improving forward who can provide top 9 capability, perhaps 3rd line C, or a #5-6 D-man who can do what Ballard does only cheaper if we get an opportunity to move him as a roster player otherwise. I think prospect-wise, a top end talent would be almost essential, but if not then we'd pursue a 1st rounder and a lesser prospect.

Obviously a combination of those rather than all of them, but those are some things I think we'd be looking for.


I don't think we need to replace Ballard he is playing great, no reason to change something that is working very very well.

A backup is a need, although there are other options through separate trade. (Wish we had signed Ellis now)

Then futures, I don't think we need a 3C, Schroeder is proving plenty capable of playing and contributing in this league, I wouldn't mind getting one though but if its that or a better prospect or something along those lines then I would take the better futures.

We have depth, we really don't have any holes in our line-up, if we can add someone like Matt Perreault as a throw in (Whos value is at an all time low) then great, but I would like a top prospect/young player or a good prosepct/young player and a 1st.
  • 0

zackass.png


#2029 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,672 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:17 PM

makes sense, but maybe a team like Florida who have said they wanna resign Weiss, might wanna move one of their other top 6 guys. So maybe it means keeping Weiss (reasonable price) and adding Lu while sacrificing a guy like Versteeg. I guess it comes down to who is more valuable to them in their lineup.


True, but if they are looking to be Cup contenders this year, what do they have on their team to replace Versteeg if they move him in a deal for Luongo? Might they not want a top-6 guy in return? Who do the Canucks have who is a top-6 guy who might be moved?

Sedin, Sedin, Kesler, Burrows, and Kassian would not be moved. Florida got rid of Booth so they would likely not want to take him back. The rest of the Canucks' forwards aren't really top-6 material (at least not on a long term basis).

I don't see Versteeg coming here.


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

#2030 RockNroLLa.

RockNroLLa.

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,074 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:57 PM

True, but if they are looking to be Cup contenders this year, what do they have on their team to replace Versteeg if they move him in a deal for Luongo? Might they not want a top-6 guy in return? Who do the Canucks have who is a top-6 guy who might be moved?

Sedin, Sedin, Kesler, Burrows, and Kassian would not be moved. Florida got rid of Booth so they would likely not want to take him back. The rest of the Canucks' forwards aren't really top-6 material (at least not on a long term basis).

I don't see Versteeg coming here.


regards,
G.


Great post! Very Intelligent to realize that they would want a forward back!

the young cheap player that would satisfy that would be Raymond. However, even with Versteeg coming way and Theodore coming off the books. They would still be taking on about 3 mil more in salary (Lu is actually making 6.7 next season).

This is where I think the salary dump player comes in and this is probably where MG is like give us added value (In additon to the prospect we ll be getting) for that and Florida is like "no we are already taking more salary, so its only fair."

Edited by iluvbc, 07 February 2013 - 12:05 AM.

  • 1

#2031 theminister

theminister

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,118 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 03

Posted 07 February 2013 - 12:26 AM

That would be a great return but i dont think they would part with 2 prospects, unless they find that they have too many in a certain position...

Actually, overall Florida is going to be in a contract crunch this offseason with regards to the 50 limit. They had a ton of picks through the first 3 rounds in 2011 and they will need to sign them or lose their rights in July. It makes a lot of sense that they would be interested in a multi contract/rights deal for a proven player ir two. What and who for who is debatable naturally.
  • 1

small.pngNEW YORK ISLANDERS ROSTER - CDC GM LEAGUEsmall.png


2013 CDCGML CUP CHAMPIONS


#2032 allkill326

allkill326

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 07 February 2013 - 12:31 AM

Dealing an overpaid, but young, budding players, such as Ellerby would make sense, if the Panthers are set on acquiring Luongo. Panthers would want to increase their depth with young talent to bolster their offensive and defensive lineup for future considerations. They would not want to give up too much for Luongo. If they need to give up significant assets, they might as well find suitable goalies through trade with other teams or free agency.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2033 theminister

theminister

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,118 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 03

Posted 07 February 2013 - 12:33 AM

Shore, Petrovic, a pick and Clemmensen would be nice.

regards,
G.

While that package is a better return in future potential I am firmly of the belief MG is targeting his roster for this year which is one of the reasons this deal is hard to make until a suitor bows out of the playoff race. Saying that, after viewing Shore and Petrovic twice this year, if the Nucks can grab those two plus a roster player I think they should jump on it. I've said as much a couple of times in one of the Lou threads. I'm glad to see Smashian agree with that now because he didn't at the time (two months ago).
  • 0

small.pngNEW YORK ISLANDERS ROSTER - CDC GM LEAGUEsmall.png


2013 CDCGML CUP CHAMPIONS


#2034 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,331 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 07 February 2013 - 12:37 AM

I don't think we need to replace Ballard he is playing great, no reason to change something that is working very very well.

A backup is a need, although there are other options through separate trade. (Wish we had signed Ellis now)

Then futures, I don't think we need a 3C, Schroeder is proving plenty capable of playing and contributing in this league, I wouldn't mind getting one though but if its that or a better prospect or something along those lines then I would take the better futures.

We have depth, we really don't have any holes in our line-up, if we can add someone like Matt Perreault as a throw in (Whos value is at an all time low) then great, but I would like a top prospect/young player or a good prosepct/young player and a 1st.

My thinking is we'll have to lose a contract above and beyond moving Luongo, which is why I suggest looking at moving Ballard. I know you're high on his play this year, and I think he's done reasonably well, but not enough to consider keeping a #5 D-man at over $4M going into next season.

Gillis and Gilman have surprised before but if they get a good offer for Ballard that isn't likely to be repeated before the deadline, I think they consider it at least.

Schroeder is great, but not as sure how well he'll do as a 3rd line checking center against the top teams just yet. I'd prefer to use what we have there though and look at bringing in a defenceman on a good contract to fill out our 3rd pairing. Orlov, Petrovic, Despres are names that have been floating around (not all in Luongo deals obviously) and would be great.

I'd like to see a significant propsect for future as I don't think we have that all but guaranteed top line forward, but I'd be happy to get a D as mentioned and go for a backup and pick along with it.
  • 0

schroedersig2_by_elvis15-d5szksn.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

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

 


#2035 theminister

theminister

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,118 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 03

Posted 07 February 2013 - 12:42 AM

That package does address a lot of our holes. +1

I'm still hopeful for a piece with a higher ceiling (although I suppose Ellerby could become one of the league's defensive beasts - he's only 24).

I can see that point of view too but the option to grab a bonafide top pairing D or 1st line player may not be there for the taking. If not, then building controllable, young organizational depth that fits our wants, size and grit, with a lower ceiling makes sense if we are able to grab an extra body or two. It may even mean the Canucks can have that real 4th line we've been missing. I'll also add that a mid 40s pick for 2013 will likely have excellent potential in its own right. Late 2nds may be a gold mine this year fir a team who has a weak prospect system.
  • 0

small.pngNEW YORK ISLANDERS ROSTER - CDC GM LEAGUEsmall.png


2013 CDCGML CUP CHAMPIONS


#2036 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,155 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 07 February 2013 - 12:51 AM

My thinking is we'll have to lose a contract above and beyond moving Luongo, which is why I suggest looking at moving Ballard. I know you're high on his play this year, and I think he's done reasonably well, but not enough to consider keeping a #5 D-man at over $4M going into next season.

Gillis and Gilman have surprised before but if they get a good offer for Ballard that isn't likely to be repeated before the deadline, I think they consider it at least.

Schroeder is great, but not as sure how well he'll do as a 3rd line checking center against the top teams just yet. I'd prefer to use what we have there though and look at bringing in a defenceman on a good contract to fill out our 3rd pairing. Orlov, Petrovic, Despres are names that have been floating around (not all in Luongo deals obviously) and would be great.

I'd like to see a significant propsect for future as I don't think we have that all but guaranteed top line forward, but I'd be happy to get a D as mentioned and go for a backup and pick along with it.


We can deal Ballard in the offseason if we must, right now it doesn't make sense, could be the best shot at a cup in this era. Having Ballard finally found his game is a huge advantage for us on the 3rd pair.

I don't think the 3rd line will be a checking line if Raymond and JS are on it, my guess it that the 4th line with Lappy, Manny and whoever else (Higgins?) would be the checking/3B line.

I would like to get one too, I think our D is pretty good & adding a top notch prospect there would be nice, but adding a top notch forward prospect would be even better, although I do like some D prospects and I have made that pretty clear. (Petrovic and Orlov, lol)

Still, a really solid young forward like Kadri, Bjugstad, or Johansson would be great for us, just not sure if guys like this would be available.
  • 0

zackass.png


#2037 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,940 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 07 February 2013 - 01:50 AM

Dealing an overpaid, but young, budding players, such as Ellerby would make sense, if the Panthers are set on acquiring Luongo. Panthers would want to increase their depth with young talent to bolster their offensive and defensive lineup for future considerations. They would not want to give up too much for Luongo. If they need to give up significant assets, they might as well find suitable goalies through trade with other teams or free agency.


? Ellerby is on an ELC making $700k - you may be mistaking him with Gudbranson?
  • 0

#2038 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 07 February 2013 - 02:30 AM

Unlike Bernier, Schneider has played well enough to overtake the elite goaltender he is playing behind.

And actually there is far, far less risk in getting Luongo, with him you know what you are getting, with Bernier it is nothing but risk and he really isn't an upgrade on Riemer and Scrivens.

And judging by the reports that LA's asking price for Bernier is ridiculously high (probably close if not the same as what we are askign for Roberto) Lu would be the far better choice.



Al Montoya was taken 6th Overall,
Devan Dubynk was taken 14th Overall,
Cory Schneider was taken 24th Overall,
Pekka Rinne was taken 258th Overall.

All in the same draft. The "potential" the first 2 had didn't exactly materialize aswell as the other 2 now did it?

Thomas McCollum was taken 30th Overall. Jacob Markstrom was taken in the 2nd Round.

Not sure your point, there are endless examples.



No they don't they picked up some guy at the deadline last year who is carrying the 1st line on his back :bigblush:


It's equally highly risky to pick Schneider. Afterall, Luongo is less risky because you know what you're getting.

Right?
  • 0

#2039 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,155 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 07 February 2013 - 02:42 AM

It's equally highly risky to pick Schneider. Afterall, Luongo is less risky because you know what you're getting.

Right?


Different situation, we are talking about a team in need of a goaltender that they know can step in and play.

And Schneider is in the same boat as Luongo, both are starters, both are reliable, you know what you are getting with both. There isn't any risk in either guy.
  • 0

zackass.png


#2040 needtogetswole

needtogetswole

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 645 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 07

Posted 07 February 2013 - 04:01 AM

Different situation, we are talking about a team in need of a goaltender that they know can step in and play.

And Schneider is in the same boat as Luongo, both are starters, both are reliable, you know what you are getting with both. There isn't any risk in either guy.


I wouldn't say Schneider is proven yet... we'll see after a heavy workload - we can't make these assumptions early - even though we named him our #1 goalie...
  • 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.