Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Gonz

Cory Schneider interview in the Province

Recommended Posts

Circumstantial maybe, but knowing Luongos character and him being booted in the playoffs must be be fairly good evidence that he wanted to be traded.

I say that opinions would be different right afterwards because they have infact changed from being pro-cory to pro-luongo and I dont see any reasoning for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, but him asking them to explore other options , is that really an assumption that he asked to be traded? Does it make sense for gillis to tell him hes being traded and for him to say this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hilarious.

Does no one get my point?

I'm not assuming anything.

Exploring other options is gillis using a euphemism for wanting to be traded.

These forums are seriously retarded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's a miserable night for the "wanted Cory to get blown out" clique, but better luck next game, I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hilarious.

Does no one get my point?

I'm not assuming anything.

Exploring other options is gillis using a euphemism for wanting to be traded.

These forums are seriously retarded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hilarious.

Does no one get my point?

I'm not assuming anything.

Exploring other options is gillis using a euphemism for wanting to be traded.

These forums are seriously retarded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hilarious.

Does no one get my point?

I'm not assuming anything.

Exploring other options is gillis using a euphemism for wanting to be traded.

These forums are seriously retarded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I lol'd at the guy for trying to say that Luongo asked for a trade and he had proof. He does have minor circumstantial evidence to lead him to his conclusion though. But I think I lol'd harder at the 3 pages of people arguing with him for no reason and offering no counter evidence other then you don't know what OPTIONS means. Don't agree with his conclusion? Fine, just seems stupid to fill up 3 pages of a thread arguing the definition fo a word. You guys are calling him out on what he thinks, but just being awefully cruel with no reason that I can think of other then your looking into your trolling options. Someone else said it best, longevity does not equal credability on these boards. It seem the higher the post count, the less you want to talk about hockey and the more you want to be a spell check.

maybe try going here, it is probably a better suit for you: www.argueitout.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I lol'd at the guy for trying to say that Luongo asked for a trade and he had proof. He does have minor circumstantial evidence to lead him to his conclusion though. But I think I lol'd harder at the 3 pages of people arguing with him for no reason and offering no counter evidence other then you don't know what OPTIONS means. Don't agree with his conclusion? Fine, just seems stupid to fill up 3 pages of a thread arguing the definition fo a word. You guys are calling him out on what he thinks, but just being awefully cruel with no reason that I can think of other then your looking into your trolling options. Someone else said it best, longevity does not equal credability on these boards. It seem the higher the post count, the less you want to talk about hockey and the more you want to be a spell check.

maybe try going here, it is probably a better suit for you: www.argueitout.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I lol'd at the guy for trying to say that Luongo asked for a trade and he had proof. He does have minor circumstantial evidence to lead him to his conclusion though. But I think I lol'd harder at the 3 pages of people arguing with him for no reason and offering no counter evidence other then you don't know what OPTIONS means. Don't agree with his conclusion? Fine, just seems stupid to fill up 3 pages of a thread arguing the definition fo a word. You guys are calling him out on what he thinks, but just being awefully cruel with no reason that I can think of other then your looking into your trolling options. Someone else said it best, longevity does not equal credability on these boards. It seem the higher the post count, the less you want to talk about hockey and the more you want to be a spell check.

maybe try going here, it is probably a better suit for you: www.argueitout.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question, if you have a goalie signed to a 12 year contract with a no trade clause and you never asked him (as Gillis claims) to waive the ntc... why would Gillis just start shopping him for a trade?

And at the end of the day, who cares who said what? Lui is the goalie who was and still may be being shopped around and he did say it was time to move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question, if you have a goalie signed to a 12 year contract with a no trade clause and you never asked him (as Gillis claims) to waive the ntc... why would Gillis just start shopping him for a trade?

And at the end of the day, who cares who said what? Lui is the goalie who was and still may be being shopped around and he did say it was time to move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because he said he's waive his NTC. Obviously a conversation happened.

I'd also say he probably still is being shopped around. Two great goalies with good contracts but not so good we can keep both. Gotta go with youth if it keeps you strong in goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two great goalies that are respected by their teamates, coaches and GM (apparently not so much by their fans). You play them 50/50; it's as simple as that.

What a bonus for AV able to pick and choose what games his #1s will play. He knows the goalies well and also knows which team they are best against. Next year it won't be that easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh look, someone talking about the thread topic. At least those on the last three pages have been conversing (for the most part - Taco Bell, the level of retardation one was experiencing and something about movies aside) about what the thread tangent ended up being about....the fact that Luo has never asked for a trade out of Vancouver.......as is shown by the lack of evidence despite some people's assertion that he has asked for a trade. Those. Words. Do. Not. Exist. ...which is the point that was being made.

Circumstantial evidence is not proof of the claim that was being made and that's what was being discussed.

Your observations are incorrect and are nothing more than a passive/aggressive attempt to get your shots in after being bested in other discussion/debate here on the board. I highly doubt that your post count and registration are exactly truthful as far as them being the time of your actual arrival here on CDC goes so you really don't have much credibility in adding some of the comments in your post content.

If someone is going to make a claim of fact, it is up to them to cite their sources and back up said 'facts'. If one is unable to do so, they can expect to be called out on it. It has always been thus on CDC, as you should well know. End of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.