oldnews Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 A change of scenery for Mason might just rejuvenate his career. I think Philly trading for him is a sign that they're out of the Luongo drama. I think there still a good chance he can go to Tampa in the offseason, im not convince Bishop is a #1 goaltender. Yzerman is just being stubborn, he hasnt learned from the Lindback trade. Once he realise Bishop could be a dud, i think he'll give MG a call. Florida and Toronto are the only realistic destination for Luongo and both Nonis/Tallon knows this. It put Gillis in a disadvange, he cant demand players he want back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc44 Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Common sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 I disagree about the last hope, but agree that Philly is possible. Mason is a UFA. He's a rental, an average option to go to if they should manage to sneak into the playoffs and Bryz melts down (again). Florida is still a possibility. The Islanders. And everyone assumes the market shrinks when other guys go on the market - but for every one of them, there's a team that just lost a goaltender. There was no point in taking prospects and picks at this point. That would have been a bad decision - the time to do that, if that's the result, is in the offseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Plus if Kipper retires that's one less goalie on the market. If Brodeur leaves that's another spot opening up and I think they could be very interested. There may even be more retirements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks8888 Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 In the interview with TSN Roberto Luongo said "If I could change my contract I would". Ok, the next question is can he change his contract? If so, why isn't the legal team on this to grant his wish? He sounds like he is willing to make a trade work at any cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 I thought he was untouchable for Luongo. But not in general. Although that wasn't a great deal IMO. But Erat is underrated. I think it actually make TOR look bad. Unless those picks were 1sts. But I highly doubt they were since we did make 3 offers in desperation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wshdrvvn Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 In the interview with TSN Roberto Luongo said "If I could change my contract I would". Ok, the next question is can he change his contract? If so, why isn't the legal team on this to grant his wish? He sounds like he is willing to make a trade work at any cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 I think it is time to face reality unstead of face it with a cloud of optimisim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc44 Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 And the teams that won cups in the last 3 years were never part of those cup favorites in the years they won either. LA was never a concensus cup favorite. Sorry but that`s just a lie. There may have been some people that thought they were contenders, but no one ever called them favorites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Come on, SK. Can you even be honest with yourself? You were so vocal and adamant that Forsberg was 'untouchable.' Period. He just went for Martin freakin' Erat. Good player but get real.... to suggest there is a major difference in an actual possibility a player gets moved for X player is asinine. No player is untradeable and this deal proves it. I hope you can learn from this and stop using that term in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 I agree , he has some biased tendencies with Nonis but what he saying about the offers being declined for Scrivens and draft picks seems legit to Most people on CDC tend to just look at things from a canucks perspective but i like to look at things from both sides , I think the Leafs really believe they dont need a long term contract goaltender because Riemer and Scrivens have played well this season for them and feel no pressure to make a deal for Luongo and his contract ( The issue has been from day one and will always be the contract ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trebreh Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Acquiring Mason say nothing about Philly's disposition towards Luongo. It says more about their disposition towards Bryzgalov. Again, Mason is a UFA, so to say they're out of the "drama" makes no more sense than assuming this puts them right in the middle of it. They're a possibility, simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 If Luo had been traded it would have ended all our fun. We still have Luo, and we still have our threads. Win. Win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Come on, SK. Can you even be honest with yourself? You were so vocal and adamant that Forsberg was 'untouchable.' Period. He just went for Martin freakin' Erat. Good player but get real.... to suggest there is a major difference in an actual possibility a player gets moved for X player is asinine. No player is untradeable and this deal proves it. I hope you can learn from this and stop using that term in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 because a contract is a legally binding document. you can't just revise it as you please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 What you call reality is really only your perspective. Fact is you don't know what will happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 But, but, but SK always knows who is and is not available, who is and is not interested, who will and won't be moved and where... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Goose Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Its Florida or Toronto and the longer this drags on in the summer the goalie market could be gone. Were screwed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trebreh Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 If TOR tanks badly in the playoffs due to goaltending, it could change their interests in Lou. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Dreger was making it sound as if the Canucks kept calling back lowering their offer. I would be extremely surprised if this was true. I would not at all be surprised that MG called with an offer and kept calling back to see if Nonis was bluffing. This isn't a Canucks bias.... this is seeing through media spin. Dreger is being disingenuous in that he is being ambiguous about the situation making the Canucks doing their due diligence out to be desperate sellers. The fact that a deal didn't get done is more evidence that MG did not falter on the price, as T.O. was surely interested up to a level, than that MG couldn't give Lou away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.