Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

[Discussion] Roberto Luongo Trade Thread 6.0


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
3104 replies to this topic

#931 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 06 March 2013 - 09:25 PM

I think we're reading 2 different articles, we clearly interpret it very differently. At no point did I interpret any of the information you did. He's talking about EV SV% and team sh%, you're talking about overall SV% - clearly 2 very different ideas. I never got the inference that he was trying to make AV or Gillis look 'simple'.

The author used advanced stats linking to historical data to show how important Luongo has been to the teams success over last few years. And how he's been the better goaltender this yr despite the small sample size. He states he still thinks Schneider will be a future star - but that his trade value/contract is better for a team like Van who's window he thinks is closing. Not sure how that's weak - whether you agree or not.

Never has Lou's performance during the season been an issue.He gets it done. Where the issue is his inconsistance from game to game during the playoffs and under pressure. We could make the playoffs with 80 % of todays NHL goalies.
  • 0

#932 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,379 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 06 March 2013 - 09:28 PM

Pretty clear we interpret the article very differently. These stat guys use EV SV% cause roughly 75% of games are played at EV. So they think it's a more accurate way to evaluate goaltenders. They also say that shorthanded SV% fluctuates every year for goaltenders - that every yr a different goaltender is better in this category. He didn't just use this seasons small sample size, he used the previous 5 yrs for data as well. He's not cherry picking.

"As for who you move or keep in the offseason, I’m in Schneider’s camp." This is an ambiguous statement as he does state whether he thinks Schneider should be moved or kept in the offseason.

Again, I don't see any of this article as a weak. You may not agree, you clearly don't - but he's done due diligence.


If the Canucks even strength sv% last year was .929, and Luongo's was .929, then wouldn't that suggest that Schneider's was .929?

And the year before? Schneider's sv % was .929, and Luongo's .928 - if Luongo's ev sv% was .934, and the team's was .932, then we are really talking about splitting hairs here - and Schneider's better short handed sv % has been consistently equal or better than Luongo's over the three seasons (doesn't seem to fluctuate as much as other samples) - equally hair-splitting. There simply aren't five years to compare the two, but there are two years (and a tiny sample from 2009/10 where Schneider was .915 and Luongo .913) - and it leaves very little to suggest that Luongo is a better goaltender or that the Canucks are making the wrong decision, assuming he knows what that decision will be.

In any event - do you honestly believe that the decision to start Schneider in game 3 has forced MG's hand?

Edited by oldnews, 06 March 2013 - 09:30 PM.

  • 0

#933 Legend Killer

Legend Killer

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,180 posts
  • Joined: 23-May 07

Posted 06 March 2013 - 09:34 PM

Honestly, part of me thinks that the plan has never been to trade Luongo, but to trade Schneider. Think about it. Surely Gillis knows what kind of value to expect with Lu, and i think he would've pulled the trigger by now.
  • 0
Posted Image
For the first time in a long time.. the future looks bright..

#934 RunningWild

RunningWild

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-December 10

Posted 06 March 2013 - 09:39 PM

Never has Lou's performance during the season been an issue.He gets it done. Where the issue is his inconsistance from game to game during the playoffs and under pressure. We could make the playoffs with 80 % of todays NHL goalies.


Never said I have an issue with Luongo, we're discussing an article I liked to earlier.

If the Canucks even strength sv% last year was .929, and Luongo's was .929, then wouldn't that suggest that Schneider's was .929?

And the year before? Schneider's sv % was .929, and Luongo's .928 - if Luongo's ev sv% was .934, and the team's was .932, then we are really talking about splitting hairs here - and Schneider's better short handed sv % has been consistently equal or better than Luongo's over the three seasons (doesn't seem to fluctuate as much as other samples) - equally hair-splitting. There simply aren't five years to compare the two, but there are two years (and a tiny sample from 2009/10 where Schneider was .915 and Luongo .913) - and it leaves very little to suggest that Luongo is a better goaltender or that the Canucks are making the wrong decision, assuming he knows what that decision will be.

In any event - do you honestly believe that the decision to start Schneider in game 3 has forced MG's hand?


No I personally don't believe it, but like I've said this whole time it's not about what either of us think. He wrote a legitimate article using stats to back up his belief. In hockey, you really only have stats to back up an argument as everyone 'sees' or 'believes' something different. Nothing wrong with that.
  • 0

#935 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,379 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 06 March 2013 - 09:48 PM

No I personally don't believe it, but like I've said this whole time it's not about what either of us think. He wrote a legitimate article using stats to back up his belief. In hockey, you really only have stats to back up an argument as everyone 'sees' or 'believes' something different. Nothing wrong with that.


It's about what the author thinks - and that's what I was taking issue with.
As for the Luongo vs Schneider aspect that isn't flushed out very well at all in his article, he didn't actually show Schneider's ev strength sv % - that much I had to deduce - so in that sense he didn't really compare the two - his point about choosing the wrong goaltender wasn't actually qualified, ironically, by his use of stats. What his stats showed was that Luongo has been better than the league average - not really revelation - and that Luongo has been valuable to the Canucks the past five years - not revelation - but not an argument relative to Schneider. What he did do was cherry pick this year's 12 game sample - which is hair-splitting to say the least.
I'll take the guy with the overall better sv% three years running, and who is Luongo's equal this season.
His title thesis - not really qualified - and his claim that AV forced MG's hand by starting Cory in game 3 - also not much of an argument there.

Edited by oldnews, 06 March 2013 - 09:50 PM.

  • 0

#936 RunningWild

RunningWild

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-December 10

Posted 06 March 2013 - 09:55 PM

It's about what the author thinks - and that's what I was taking issue with.
As for the Luongo vs Schneider aspect that isn't flushed out very well at all in his article, he didn't actually show Schneider's ev strength sv % - that much I had to deduce - so in that sense he didn't really compare the two - his point about choosing the wrong goaltender wasn't actually qualified, ironically, by his use of stats. What his stats showed was that Luongo has been better than the league average - not really revelation - and that Luongo has been valuable to the Canucks the past five years - not revelation - but not an argument relative to Schneider. What he did do was cherry pick this year's 12 game sample - which is hair-splitting to say the least.
His title thesis - not really qualified - and his claim that AV forced MG's hand by starting Cory in game 3 - also not much of an argument there.


You said the article was weak, I said it wasn't weak cause that's the best way to back up an argument in hockey by using stats. Which he's done. His title isn't his thesis. His thesis is Luongo has consistently been a reason why Vancouver has been successful over the last x amount of years. Again, we're clearly interpreting the article very differently.
  • 0

#937 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,672 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 06 March 2013 - 10:13 PM

I feel like crying after reading this.

Especially since i said this is what we should be shooting for, and proposed the exact deal several times.. :(

Well, the good news is you don't have to cry, since PITB kindly refreshed our memory on an Ian MacIntyre article from back in January:

No is not the only thing that means no. Waiving Tim Connolly means no. Trading Matthew Lombardi means no. Toronto Maple Leaf general manager Dave Nonis could scarcely be any clearer.

When he took over for Brian Burke last week, Nonis found sitting on the corner of the general manager’s desk, gathering dust, a standing trade proposal from the Vancouver Canucks: Roberto Luongo to the Maple Leafs for Tyler Bozak, Nazem Kadri and a second-round draft pick.

It appears Nonis promptly swept it into the garbage bin.

It’s difficult to say whether it was unacceptable that he part with Bozak or Kadri, but it’s possible it was both.
...
“I’m not going to give up youth for older players,” Nonis told ESPN. “We would trade a young player for a young player. But we’re not going to trade a bunch of young players or first-round picks for short-term gain. You can’t build a club that way.”

I remember the talk about the Nonis quote, not wanting to give up youth, but I don't remember the article and the first part in particular.

Having said that, the first thing I thought after the Cox tweet was why would they give up two young centers and rely on one or both of Connelly and Lombardi, especially if they were getting a goalie of Luongo's calibre to try and compete for the playoffs. I could see one, but not both. I could see them trying to include one of Connelly or Lombardi along with one young center, then the pick as well.

With Nonis taking over, and what he had planned, it didn't make sense he would offer both to begin with, or accept a deal for both if it was offered to him.
  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

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

 


#938 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,379 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 06 March 2013 - 10:15 PM

You said the article was weak, I said it wasn't weak cause that's the best way to back up an argument in hockey by using stats. Which he's done. His title isn't his thesis. His thesis is Luongo has consistently been a reason why Vancouver has been successful over the last x amount of years. Again, we're clearly interpreting the article very differently.


I guess we are interpreting it differently.

When I read an article entitled:

Are we sure that the Canucks are looking to trade the right goaltender?


I would expect the advanced stats to actually be comparative of and address the difference between the Canucks' goaltenders, not a mundane sidetrack thesis that "Luongo has consistently been a reason why Vancouver has been successful over the last x amount of years".

We could write an article based on advanced stats to claim that Daniel has been a key to the Canucks success as well - but it wouldn't follow that he's therefore better than Henrik. The author tries to finesse the claim that the Canucks are now looking to trade the wrong goaltender - and ironically the 'advanced stats' he relies upon don't do a very good job of qualifying that argument - if anything, the more I think about it, the weaker the article gets.
  • 0

#939 BertuzziJr 2.0

BertuzziJr 2.0

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 278 posts
  • Joined: 02-February 13

Posted 06 March 2013 - 10:19 PM

I guess we are interpreting it differently.

When I read an article entitled:

Are we sure that the Canucks are looking to trade the right goaltender?


I would expect the advanced stats to actually be comparative of and address the difference between the Canucks' goaltenders, not a mundane sidetrack thesis that "Luongo has consistently been a reason why Vancouver has been successful over the last x amount of years".

We could write an article based on advanced stats to claim that Daniel has been a key to the Canucks success as well - but it wouldn't follow that he's therefore better than Henrik. The author tries to finesse the claim that the Canucks are now looking to trade the wrong goaltender - and ironically the 'advanced stats' he relies upon don't do a very good job of qualifying that argument - if anything, the more I think about it, the weaker the article gets.


I was about to say your first point. It's not really fair for him to suggest Schnieder isn't as important to the team because he hasn't had the same opportunity. Of course he won't have the same impact as Luongo playing half the games. Is it also just me or is Cory "poor play" be way over blown this season?
  • 0

#940 RunningWild

RunningWild

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-December 10

Posted 06 March 2013 - 10:24 PM

I guess we are interpreting it differently.

When I read an article entitled:

Are we sure that the Canucks are looking to trade the right goaltender?


I would expect the advanced stats to actually be comparative of and address the difference between the Canucks' goaltenders, not a mundane sidetrack thesis that "Luongo has consistently been a reason why Vancouver has been successful over the last x amount of years".

We could write an article based on advanced stats to claim that Daniel has been a key to the Canucks success as well - but it wouldn't follow that he's therefore better than Henrik. The author tries to finesse the claim that the Canucks are now looking to trade the wrong goaltender - and ironically the 'advanced stats' he relies upon don't do a very good job of qualifying that argument - if anything, the more I think about it, the weaker the article gets.


Yes, we clearly interpret it differently. I think he addressed the question he posed in his header.
  • 0

#941 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 06 March 2013 - 10:31 PM

Any word on the Nordiques coming back?
  • 0

#942 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,379 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 07 March 2013 - 12:10 AM

Any word on the Nordiques coming back?


Yeah, who do you propose they give us for Schneider 101?
  • 0

#943 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 07 March 2013 - 01:09 AM

Yeah, who do you propose they give us for Schneider 101?


They don't have the pieces Vancouver needs.

Edited by Canucks_Hockey_101, 07 March 2013 - 01:10 AM.

  • 0

#944 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,423 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 07 March 2013 - 01:17 AM

They don't have the pieces Vancouver needs.


Phoenix right? Sure they do.
  • 0

zackass.png


#945 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 07 March 2013 - 01:20 AM

whats the rumour on who's moving to quebec? and when? Luongo in Quebec city would make all the sense in the world marketing wise
  • 0

#946 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,875 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 07 March 2013 - 01:54 AM

whats the rumour on who's moving to quebec? and when? Luongo in Quebec city would make all the sense in the world marketing wise


Quebec city won't happening for a long long time, if at all.

Still gotta put a team in Seattle first, and after that who knows. Could be Kansas City or Vegas with Bettman running things. I even think another Ontario team is more likely than QC.

Edited by DeNiro, 07 March 2013 - 01:55 AM.

  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#947 sampy

sampy

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,071 posts
  • Joined: 05-May 07

Posted 07 March 2013 - 09:20 AM

“@HeadtotheNet: Lebrun on the Team radio saying he senses a strong offer for #Canucks' Schneider will come over next few weeks.”

Gotta be TB or CLB. Both Eastern teams to (CLB joining East).
I'd rather keep Corey but if the value is very high for him then I can understand why.

Schneid, Booth, Shroeder, 3rd
For
Johansen, Mason, Prospal, late 1st

Or

Schneid, Ballard, 2nd
For
Hedman, Garon

Edited by sampy, 07 March 2013 - 09:20 AM.

  • 0

#948 Gooseberries

Gooseberries

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,188 posts
  • Joined: 09-January 10

Posted 07 March 2013 - 09:29 AM

“@HeadtotheNet: Lebrun on the Team radio saying he senses a strong offer for #Canucks' Schneider will come over next few weeks.”

Gotta be TB or CLB. Both Eastern teams to (CLB joining East).
I'd rather keep Corey but if the value is very high for him then I can understand why.

Schneid, Booth, Shroeder, 3rd
For
Johansen, Mason, Prospal, late 1st

Or

Schneid, Ballard, 2nd
For
Hedman, Garon

I'd like that first deal a lot better if it was Columbus 2nd 1st rnd pick
  • 0

20u7nh3.jpg

Credit to Vintage Canuck

The Sig lord


#949 BertuzziJr 2.0

BertuzziJr 2.0

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 278 posts
  • Joined: 02-February 13

Posted 07 March 2013 - 10:00 AM

If we traded Cory it the return would have to be absolutely massive. I still doubt that he's the one that gets traded but who knows
  • 0

#950 apollo

apollo

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,512 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 10

Posted 07 March 2013 - 10:29 AM

“@HeadtotheNet: Lebrun on the Team radio saying he senses a strong offer for #Canucks' Schneider will come over next few weeks.”

Gotta be TB or CLB. Both Eastern teams to (CLB joining East).
I'd rather keep Corey but if the value is very high for him then I can understand why.

Schneid, Booth, Shroeder, 3rd
For
Johansen, Mason, Prospal, late 1st

Or

Schneid, Ballard, 2nd
For
Hedman, Garon


I'm leaning towards the Tampa deal. Ill take either though
  • 0

2cz94w5.jpg

The NHL is a fixed old boys club. I've come to acceptance with that and just watch for entertainment. The 2011 & 2012 Canucks are champs in my books. Go Canucks Go!
 


#951 theminister

theminister

    Head Troll

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,952 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 03

Posted 07 March 2013 - 10:31 AM

"@HeadtotheNet: Lebrun on the Team radio saying he senses a strong offer for #Canucks' Schneider will come over next few weeks."

Gotta be TB or CLB. Both Eastern teams to (CLB joining East).
I'd rather keep Corey but if the value is very high for him then I can understand why.

Schneid, Booth, Shroeder, 3rd
For
Johansen, Mason, Prospal, late 1st

Or

Schneid, Ballard, 2nd
For
Hedman, Garon


IMHO, that Clb deal is not good value.
  • 0

Posted ImageNEW YORK ISLANDERS ROSTER - CDC GM LEAGUEPosted Image


2013 CDCGML CUP CHAMPIONS


#952 Claiborne55

Claiborne55

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 332 posts
  • Joined: 25-February 13

Posted 07 March 2013 - 10:37 AM

I'm leaning towards the Tampa deal. Ill take either though


Losing Faith in MG... Yzerman is not giving up Hedman... we will be lucky to get Garon and a 1st for Luongo. No one is desperate enough for a Goalie to even give proper value for Luongo.
  • 0

#953 apollo

apollo

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,512 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 10

Posted 07 March 2013 - 10:41 AM

Losing Faith in MG... Yzerman is not giving up Hedman... we will be lucky to get Garon and a 1st for Luongo. No one is desperate enough for a Goalie to even give proper value for Luongo.


Maybe the cbj deal is more realistic? I really don't think Gms out there under value luongo as much as most people on CDC do
  • 0

2cz94w5.jpg

The NHL is a fixed old boys club. I've come to acceptance with that and just watch for entertainment. The 2011 & 2012 Canucks are champs in my books. Go Canucks Go!
 


#954 TmanVan

TmanVan

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 615 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 07 March 2013 - 10:44 AM

I'm leaning towards the Tampa deal. Ill take either though


And why would you rather have the Tampa deal exactly? Ryan Johansen is loaded with potential, Steve Mason is young enough to turn around his developement and could still be a number 1 in the future, plus a first round pick in a deep draft is always good and gives you more options to make a deal at the draft.

Hedman is good, on the verge of really good, but the other trade benefits the Canucks better for the future.

Jensen Johansen Kassian :)

Edit: I'm speaking of the return only in the proposal, not what pieces the Canucks are giving up.

Edited by TmanVan, 07 March 2013 - 10:45 AM.

  • 0

#955 Claiborne55

Claiborne55

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 332 posts
  • Joined: 25-February 13

Posted 07 March 2013 - 10:47 AM

Maybe the cbj deal is more realistic? I really don't think Gms out there under value luongo as much as most people on CDC do


That's true... I'm not saying that GMs don't see the value in Luongo... they just know they don't have to pay much in a trade for him.  There will be no bidding war for Luongo, Luongo can nix any trade, and I don't think Columbus is on his preferred list.

Edited by Claiborne55, 07 March 2013 - 10:58 AM.

  • 0

#956 sampy

sampy

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,071 posts
  • Joined: 05-May 07

Posted 07 March 2013 - 11:02 AM

Losing Faith in MG... Yzerman is not giving up Hedman... we will be lucky to get Garon and a 1st for Luongo. No one is desperate enough for a Goalie to even give proper value for Luongo.

.

My deal involved Schneider not Lu, as Schneider has far greater value.
If MG is considering giving up Schneider then he better be getting superstar talent back, otherwise trade Lu for the secondary pieces. Hedman, Johansen, etc, young blue chip studs. Otherwise keep Corey, as he is a young stud.
  • 0

#957 thad

thad

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,227 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 07 March 2013 - 11:02 AM

Maybe the cbj deal is more realistic? I really don't think Gms out there under value luongo as much as most people on CDC do


I agree people undervalue him on here but I think the discussion about it gets blown way out of proportion. I don't think Schneider will bring significantly more but I do think your package for him will be significantly younger. Something that might include a B grade prospect(Jenner/howden) and a high 1st. Lu might be more along the lines of one of those and a good but older roster player. someone closer to ufa or not as contract friendly and something else.

I don't think good prospect and a 1st is too much to ask for Lu but there would have to be teams like us when we got him. Loaded with good players but can't stop pucks.




  • 0

#958 sampy

sampy

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,071 posts
  • Joined: 05-May 07

Posted 07 March 2013 - 11:09 AM

And why would you rather have the Tampa deal exactly? Ryan Johansen is loaded with potential, Steve Mason is young enough to turn around his developement and could still be a number 1 in the future, plus a first round pick in a deep draft is always good and gives you more options to make a deal at the draft.

Hedman is good, on the verge of really good, but the other trade benefits the Canucks better for the future.

Jensen Johansen Kassian :)

Edit: I'm speaking of the return only in the proposal, not what pieces the Canucks are giving up.


I completely agree about Johansen and Mason. Local boy Johansen will be a superstar, even with CLB wrecking his development. Schneider straight up would be a great trade. Johansen with Jensen and Kassian would be a great 2nd line. Put Kesler into a more checking role and special teams. Depth. As the Sedins begin to slow down, the young guns will be ramping up.
I also think Canucks could turn Mason's development around. He is still a big very young agile goaltender with potential.
  • 0

#959 Claiborne55

Claiborne55

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 332 posts
  • Joined: 25-February 13

Posted 07 March 2013 - 11:18 AM

.

My deal involved Schneider not Lu, as Schneider has far greater value.
If MG is considering giving up Schneider then he better be getting superstar talent back, otherwise trade Lu for the secondary pieces. Hedman, Johansen, etc, young blue chip studs. Otherwise keep Corey, as he is a young stud.


Yeah I know you said Schneider... but it's just hard to imagine MG back tracking on all he's said. All his promises to Schneider. And then it is Schneider that gets traded. Imagine the media field day with that. Luongo to Florida has been on the radar, rumour mill, forever... And Tampa is in Florida. Yzerman is gonna steal Luongo from us... just my opinion.
  • 0

#960 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,379 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 07 March 2013 - 11:26 AM

IMHO, that Clb deal is not good value.


I agree. Booth, Schroeder and a 3rd is far too much to throw in for Mason, who will take 3.19 million to qualify (not interested, particularly with Lack in the system), Prospal, who's a UFA, and a late round pick.
  • 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.