Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

[Discussion] Roberto Luongo Trade Thread 7.0


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
3230 replies to this topic

#1381 Noheart

Noheart

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,810 posts
  • Joined: 01-June 12

Posted 03 May 2013 - 04:30 PM

Spam spam spam spam spam....wonderful spam...


This thread
  • 0
Posted Image

BEASTLY!!!

#1382 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,673 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 03 May 2013 - 04:33 PM

I watched a Gillius interview pre-deadline. He did his standard Lou has been a pro, there's been interest but if nothing happens we'll owe it to both guys to make a move in summer, we're happy to go all year if???

But he also responded to a question about interest in Schneider and whether we'd consider moving him. I can't quote, dangerous to even paraphrase but vthe answer baically said Lou would have to come back to us and let us know he wants to be here...

This remains an issue where Lou appears clearly to want out. He may have tried to drive the bus last year, but I agree he probably is willing to buy tickets to new detsinations this year.

Perhaps way back in one of the first few threads something similar was mentioned, but it certainly wouldn't be anything where he'd prevent a deal just until AV was fired. AV has nothing to do with Luongo's position now, it's all about how Schneider has come up and replaced him as the starter.

Even then, I don't think Luongo has any interest in vetoing any and all possible trades so he can stay in Vancouver. He's made it clear he'd like to be in Florida at least, and he doesn't want to share time with Schneider (or stay here as a backup) long term. Perhaps, if a deal is made for Schneider to be traded, he'd consider staying but without knowing what he's thinking that's not more than an outside possibility at this point.


My summary is there is no direct blame on Lou for any of the three goals. Correctly he is not to blame. In fact that last two goals started with missed opportunities to start a rush resulting in failed clearing attempts. Lou also held us in the game in the first. But in the end, like against LA last year, he also did not outplay the other goalie. A franschise goalie should be winning games for the team, not flying neutral or behind the guy at the other end of the ice.

Pretty similar results. Reimer was ok and Lu had a chance to steal the show until letting in 2 weak ones in the 3rd
. Oh I know the fanboys will say he had no chance, and it blah blah defence, but really, a rebound fron a backhand from the boards from the corner sliding along the ice at 50mph, and then going into his classic clam mode instead of butterfly on the 3rd goal, yes it was deflected but if he was in butterfly with his legs to the side instead of striaght forward he would have made that save. 2 bad goals at a very bad time, and yes our offence did suck, but sometimes ya have to get elite goaltending and win 2-1 when maybe you are not playing your best.


  • 0

#1383 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,673 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 03 May 2013 - 05:11 PM

Well, Columbus has a young goalie ahead of even Schneider, according to some, in the Vezina race. Your probably right about Columbus, but not for the reason you might be thinking?

Why woouldn't Lou go to Edmonton or Calgary? Edmonton has a great future & Calgary is a great place to live! I don't see them as a play-off team; but nixing Iginla, likely their goalie and big Bow thjey have money to spend when the opportunity presents itself.

Count NYR, the Habs, COLUMBUS, the Sharks, LA, Boston, Detroit & Ottawa as teams he wont go to. They already have goaltending. Top odd's he goes to an up and coming team without a star goalie. Next up; a re-building team. Last a play off team who has a fall out in goal. Or Philly, a team to their own. :rolleyes: Lots of places for Lou and no reason to discount Calgary or Edmonton!



I think ... well, pretty much the exact opposite. He might have been picky last summer,but by now I think he just wants out.

I'd say Calgary, Edmonton, mmmaybe Buffalo and Columbus would be the only teams he'd reject at this point.

I do not see how a player not being traded would lead to a coaching change in any way.


  • 0

#1384 Salmonberries

Salmonberries

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,560 posts
  • Joined: 22-November 11

Posted 04 May 2013 - 01:29 AM

Luongo...
Should we trade him?... :shock:


No. A compliance buyout is the way to go. It's the only option that makes the $5.3 million cap hit until 21-22 go away after Bobby retires and the contract reverts back to Gillis (if he's still around) and the Canucks for it's remaining term after he retires.

Nobody's offering anything useful in return anyway, Bobby's pretty much immovable, given the monster contract.
  • 0

th_1435408476_c985b0ec75_zps489544ad.jpg


#1385 Plum

Plum

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,748 posts
  • Joined: 06-April 13

Posted 04 May 2013 - 01:32 AM

Just trade Luongo for a 3rd rounder or 2nd rounder. Atleast we get something decent, if we keep pushing we will push too much and fall off the cliff and value goes down.
  • 0

#1386 Salmonberries

Salmonberries

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,560 posts
  • Joined: 22-November 11

Posted 04 May 2013 - 01:33 AM

To TOR
Luongo (25% of salary)

To Van

Pack of Export A regular


Throw in the rights to Brit Selby and you have a deal.
  • 0

th_1435408476_c985b0ec75_zps489544ad.jpg


#1387 Salmonberries

Salmonberries

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,560 posts
  • Joined: 22-November 11

Posted 04 May 2013 - 01:38 AM

Just trade Luongo for a 3rd rounder or 2nd rounder. Atleast we get something decent, if we keep pushing we will push too much and fall off the cliff and value goes down.


If we don't buy him out we own that $5.3 million cap hit from the time he retires until 2022, whether we manage to trade him or not. That's the new collective bargaining agreement speaking, not me. I wish it wasn't so, but considering everything, I'm hoping Aqualini is willing to buy him out. Otherwise whoever the next GM is will be operating with a $5.3 payroll handicap for 3-5 years, guaranteed.
  • 0

th_1435408476_c985b0ec75_zps489544ad.jpg


#1388 bd71

bd71

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 708 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 11

Posted 04 May 2013 - 07:32 AM

I watched a Gillius interview pre-deadline. He did his standard Lou has been a pro, there's been interest but if nothing happens we'll owe it to both guys to make a move in summer, we're happy to go all year if???

But he also responded to a question about interest in Schneider and whether we'd consider moving him. I can't quote, dangerous to even paraphrase but vthe answer baically said Lou would have to come back to us and let us know he wants to be here...

This remains an issue where Lou appears clearly to want out. He may have tried to drive the bus last year, but I agree he probably is willing to buy tickets to new detsinations.


He is in even more charge now. If I'm Luongo and his agent I want the compliance buy out. Why go to Edmonton when you can force Gillis' hand and be a UFA with a giant 30 plus million dollar cheque in the back of said bus he is driving? Get all of your money from the Canucks and more form the Panthers. That's the end game if they are smart about it. And why Gillis has zero leverage.
  • 0

#1389 MoneypuckOverlord

MoneypuckOverlord

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,355 posts
  • Joined: 24-September 09

Posted 04 May 2013 - 12:05 PM

we have idiots still suggesting a buy out?
  • 2

Players Nikolaj Ehlers have been compared too by the fan base of the Vancouver Canucks.

 

1 Pavel Bure

2 Markus Naslund

3 Nathan Mackkinon

4 Jonathan Drouin.

5 Jonathan Tavares

 

http://bleacherrepor...d-top-prospects

combine results.  Ehlers 5'11 162 lbs of solid rock.  


#1390 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 04 May 2013 - 12:51 PM

Luongo, Ballard and our first to Philly

Laughton and their first back 11th overall - They get their goalie, a top 4 dman (both big needs) an still have a first rounder. They have youth and Philly fans wont take not making the playoffs again. They move a non roster player and get a solid dman (if played in the right spot) and a hell of a goalie. They become contenders in the East again.

Then move Beiksa and that first to Edm for their 1st (Edmonton keeps a high pick -11 and gets a good vet dman - again a BIG need. We lose a bit but need to give to get).

Then move Jensen and the Edm Pick to FLA for second overall (Fla has alot of young centers, they dont NEED Mckinnon. My guess is they'd prefer getting Jones but Colorado its a no brainer). Edm has the number 6? or 7 right so they still have a very high pick AND get Jensen. No brainer for them.

We end up with #2 and get McKinnon (the first line center we're dying for).

Future Core

Mckinnon, Schnieder, Edler, Tanev, Corrado, Kassian, Gaunce, Laughton.

Depth down the middle.

Give up Lou, Ballard, Bieksa and Jensen for Laughton and Mckinnon.

Sounds like alot but think here

Lou and Ballard are gone, need to be, so we get alot of cap room back too...kind of 'throw ins' but are better so it sounds like alot but from OUR perpective they are.

Therefore we're giving up Bieksa and Jensen for Mckinnon and Laughton

I make that trade

Edited by BuretoMogilny, 04 May 2013 - 12:55 PM.

  • 0

#1391 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,101 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 04 May 2013 - 01:00 PM

He is in even more charge now. If I'm Luongo and his agent I want the compliance buy out. Why go to Edmonton when you can force Gillis' hand and be a UFA with a giant 30 plus million dollar cheque in the back of said bus he is driving? Get all of your money from the Canucks and more form the Panthers. That's the end game if they are smart about it. And why Gillis has zero leverage.

That is an option I didn't think of. I guess Gillis's response would be that they would keep him. A game of chicken. I cannot see ownership taking that big a hit. Lu is playing great right now which simply solidifies his value. There will be teams who want him come June. Likely Van doesn't get out of the first round which suggests a major shakeup, including coaching.
  • 0

#1392 Noheart

Noheart

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,810 posts
  • Joined: 01-June 12

Posted 04 May 2013 - 01:56 PM

we have idiots still suggesting a buy out?


I've just saved your quote

Ttyl
  • 0
Posted Image

BEASTLY!!!

#1393 Drouin

Drouin

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,963 posts
  • Joined: 25-March 13

Posted 04 May 2013 - 02:36 PM

If we're gonna trade him, safe to say his trade value increased.
  • 0

33y40fk.jpg

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#1394 Apples

Apples

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,905 posts
  • Joined: 21-May 09

Posted 04 May 2013 - 02:37 PM

If we're gonna trade him, safe to say his trade value increased.


He did lose both games. Couldn't make the final saves that counted.
  • 0

apple_e0.gif

apple_e0.gifapple_e0.gif

apple_e0.gifapple_e0.gifapple_e0.gif


#1395 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,023 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 04 May 2013 - 02:38 PM

If we're gonna trade him, safe to say his trade value increased.

Yup. Big time. I can't remember the last time I've seen Lu play this determined before.
  • 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


#1396 Drouin

Drouin

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,963 posts
  • Joined: 25-March 13

Posted 04 May 2013 - 02:46 PM

He did lose both games. Couldn't make the final saves that counted.

Still, he made those timely saves. He's confident and he has something to prove. That last goal wouldn't have happened if Hank didn't throw the puck straight in the middle and give it away. Or if Jannik scored the empty netter. Bottom line, Luongo hasn't been the problem. 2 goals in 2 games. We're averaging a goal a game scored. (Game 1 goal was Torres' own goal). Both which came from Kesler. Personally, I don't expect Luo to register a shutout every game. I honestly hope Schneider plays in net, and if/when he plays horrible, I wanna see CDC's reaction.

Edited by CanucksD, 04 May 2013 - 02:49 PM.

  • 0

33y40fk.jpg

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#1397 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 04 May 2013 - 05:09 PM

Pretty Simple folks

1. For all those saying lou cost us the game. Again, I am a go with Schnieder guy but Lou has played lights out. 3 goals in 2 games for, 1 of which we didnt even score. Well you cant blame him for losses

2. The game would have been 4-0 with in the first period had he not stood on his head

3. Yes the last one was a leaker but it happens it found a hole. If Hansen could hit a friggen empty net or AV is smart enough to put his best checkers on the ice vs trying to get the sedin's an empty netter to get them going we win.

4. His value has increased, anyone critisizing goaltending right now is out to lunch

5. Cherry just helped his value tonight on coaches corner. He called out our scorers and said the problem in Vancouver is not our goalies, to which I concur.

6. Never has been our goalies just that we have two great ones, and the younger one is slightly better and cheaper.

7. That doesn't mean Lou sucks...
  • 1

#1398 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,748 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 05 May 2013 - 12:56 AM

Well, Columbus has a young goalie ahead of even Schneider, according to some, in the Vezina race. Your probably right about Columbus, but not for the reason you might be thinking?

Why woouldn't Lou go to Edmonton or Calgary? Edmonton has a great future & Calgary is a great place to live! I don't see them as a play-off team; but nixing Iginla, likely their goalie and big Bow thjey have money to spend when the opportunity presents itself.

Count NYR, the Habs, COLUMBUS, the Sharks, LA, Boston, Detroit & Ottawa as teams he wont go to. They already have goaltending. Top odd's he goes to an up and coming team without a star goalie. Next up; a re-building team. Last a play off team who has a fall out in goal. Or Philly, a team to their own. :rolleyes: Lots of places for Lou and no reason to discount Calgary or Edmonton!


reasons I think Lu would not go to Cal/Edm:

-Canadian fishbowl market
-border between him and the fam. (flight connections, delays, etc)
-time zone difference " "
-not serious contenders in the near future
-fans already waiting for him to fail
-Alberta

just my .02, and you seem to have misunderstood my comments on teams he wouldn't go to as teams that wouldn't want him, which is totally different.

ps. is it possible you could start writing your replies after the quoted text?
  • 0

#1399 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,515 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 05 May 2013 - 01:00 AM

If we're gonna trade him, safe to say his trade value increased.

It's safe to say if a GM is swayed by the way he's played in 2 games, that GM isn't worth his salt in evalutating players to begin with. How he plays in a few games will have very little impact on his trade value.

...
ps. is it possible you could start writing your replies after the quoted text?

Computering is not as easy to some as it is to us.

No way he goes to a division rival - particularly when it doesn't get him close to where his family would like to be,

Edited by elvis15, 05 May 2013 - 01:02 AM.

  • 2

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

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

 


#1400 bd71

bd71

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 708 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 11

Posted 05 May 2013 - 05:36 AM

we have idiots still suggesting a buy out?


I will ignore the condescending tone and respond.

It is pure common sense to see this going to a buyout. If Luongo is as upset as some people report, he can very easily force a buyout. He has a no-trade clause and you can no longer bury contracts in the minors. If he denies trades then Gillis has no choice. With the cap going down he can't keep him. And the buyout makes the most sense for the player here. Luongo gets paid out and then has the opportunity to go wherever he would like on a new contract that will likely be pretty good. I think his image is OK because the perception outside of Vancouver is that he has been treated horribly by Gillis. People noticed that last Edmonton game.

And is a buyout that bad on the hockey side? The key is getting rid of the cap. A buyout is terrible on the management and ownership side and is likely the beginning of the end of Gillis in Vancouver.
  • 1

#1401 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,101 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 05 May 2013 - 07:47 AM

Pretty Simple folks

1. For all those saying lou cost us the game. Again, I am a go with Schnieder guy but Lou has played lights out. 3 goals in 2 games for, 1 of which we didnt even score. Well you cant blame him for losses

2. The game would have been 4-0 with in the first period had he not stood on his head

3. Yes the last one was a leaker but it happens it found a hole. If Hansen could hit a friggen empty net or AV is smart enough to put his best checkers on the ice vs trying to get the sedin's an empty netter to get them going we win.

4. His value has increased, anyone critisizing goaltending right now is out to lunch

5. Cherry just helped his value tonight on coaches corner. He called out our scorers and said the problem in Vancouver is not our goalies, to which I concur.

6. Never has been our goalies just that we have two great ones, and the younger one is slightly better and cheaper.

7. That doesn't mean Lou sucks...

You pretty much nailed it. Kesler returns and look how much easier the Canucks are moving out of their d-zone due to his FO %. Cherry has more hockey smarts than most fans and hockey people for that matter. Top players have to produce in CUP play or the team isn't really in it. Lu is getting almost no support on the score board. Anyone who doesn't think his play doesn't increase his trade value will never get it. Not enough pieces were added to this roster to make it anything but a long shot in CUP play. Roy in typical Van fashion has had his abilities overstated. Has anyone noticed his tendency to turn away from physical board work. His FO % is less than 50% on an ongoing basis. How do you play a puck possession game on that basis. I am not zeroing in on hios play as a reason for Van's lack of success. Simply saying to little to late.
  • 0

#1402 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 05 May 2013 - 08:42 AM

It's safe to say if a GM is swayed by the way he's played in 2 games, that GM isn't worth his salt in evalutating players to begin with. How he plays in a few games will have very little impact on his trade value.


Computering is not as easy to some as it is to us.

No way he goes to a division rival - particularly when it doesn't get him close to where his family would like to be,


Computering?

:picard:
  • 0

#1403 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 05 May 2013 - 08:47 AM

You pretty much nailed it. Kesler returns and look how much easier the Canucks are moving out of their d-zone due to his FO %. Cherry has more hockey smarts than most fans and hockey people for that matter. Top players have to produce in CUP play or the team isn't really in it. Lu is getting almost no support on the score board. Anyone who doesn't think his play doesn't increase his trade value will never get it. Not enough pieces were added to this roster to make it anything but a long shot in CUP play. Roy in typical Van fashion has had his abilities overstated. Has anyone noticed his tendency to turn away from physical board work. His FO % is less than 50% on an ongoing basis. How do you play a puck possession game on that basis. I am not zeroing in on hios play as a reason for Van's lack of success. Simply saying to little to late.


I am a full go with Schnieds guy but never because Lou 'sucks'. He's been inconsistent at times but I am really starting to see the argument about it being our forwards.

Heard today on tsn last 12 games in the playoffs the canucks have 15 goals. How are you going to win?

And an important point related to that is, if you're scoring barely over 1 goal per game, what does that mean about your offensive pressure and resultantly the offensive pressure on you.

Clearly, only scoring 15 goals in 12 playoff games means your goalies are facing alot of heat, more so than normal because intensity in the playoffs is amped up...

Never been a fan of the "lou lovers" because again I do think Schnieds is better at this stage regardless but I certainly am seeing their argument more.

The Sedin's clearly haven't faced the type of criticism Lou has, perhaps its just a part of that position (which being a goalie always is, you face more criticism on a mistake bc it ends up in a goal)...but they certainly haven't been consistent in their playoff careers and I'd argue less consistent than Lou...

I hope he goes somewhere where he wins a cup...really...the man deserves one for all the crap he's taken
  • 0

#1404 Green Building

Green Building

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,383 posts
  • Joined: 16-October 09

Posted 05 May 2013 - 10:15 AM

Luongo, Ballard and our first to Philly

Laughton and their first back 11th overall


There is no way in hell Philly makes that trade. It won't ever happen. Even if they buy out Bryz, which they won't, they won't right away phone up Gillis and ask for 10 million bucks worth of salary cap dump in Ballard and Lu for a first round pick and Laughton.

I believe we can get something good for Lu still as he is playing great hockey. It won't be from the Flyers. Nice try though.

I do agree with your 7 points though. I am a Lu and Schneid fan, reality is that neither of them are the problem. Pucks in the net is the problem. Team toughness is marginal at best. I don't mean fighting here, I mean FIRE. Maybe it is an artifact of the lockout, but that excuse only applies to this season, not the last. There is lackadaisy hockey being played a lot of the time; in this league you are going to get eaten if you don't drive hard at all times. Especially in the post season.
  • 0

#1405 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 05 May 2013 - 10:18 AM

I am a full go with Schnieds guy but never because Lou 'sucks'. He's been inconsistent at times but I am really starting to see the argument about it being our forwards.

Heard today on tsn last 12 games in the playoffs the canucks have 15 goals. How are you going to win?

And an important point related to that is, if you're scoring barely over 1 goal per game, what does that mean about your offensive pressure and resultantly the offensive pressure on you.

Clearly, only scoring 15 goals in 12 playoff games means your goalies are facing alot of heat, more so than normal because intensity in the playoffs is amped up...

Never been a fan of the "lou lovers" because again I do think Schnieds is better at this stage regardless but I certainly am seeing their argument more.

The Sedin's clearly haven't faced the type of criticism Lou has, perhaps its just a part of that position (which being a goalie always is, you face more criticism on a mistake bc it ends up in a goal)...but they certainly haven't been consistent in their playoff careers and I'd argue less consistent than Lou...

I hope he goes somewhere where he wins a cup...really...the man deserves one for all the crap he's taken


Again: the Sedins are not playoff performers. I would even go on to say in the off season, trade the Sedins, Schneider and Ballard for great offensive returns. This "quiet captain" stuff doesn't work at all. The Canucks need a Linden type captain who will lead with a no quit attitude with heart and determination; not cycling until the clock runs out.

The Sedins are great regular season players but disappear in the playoffs. I hope most see it now. Schneider won't fair better than Luongo. The Canucks don't score. Expecting to have shutouts every game is unfair to say the least.

There is a plethora of young talent in the league that could do wonders for the Canucks.



  • 0

#1406 Drouin

Drouin

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,963 posts
  • Joined: 25-March 13

Posted 05 May 2013 - 10:50 AM

It's safe to say if a GM is swayed by the way he's played in 2 games, that GM isn't worth his salt in evalutating players to begin with. How he plays in a few games will have very little impact on his trade value.

It's not '2 games' Luo has been a great goalie throughout his career, those last 2 games just proved that he can still play on the elite level.
  • 0

33y40fk.jpg

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#1407 ForsbergTheGreat

ForsbergTheGreat

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,708 posts
  • Joined: 05-March 12

Posted 05 May 2013 - 11:29 AM

Luongos trade value isn't determined by how he is playing in this series. His valued is determined by the rest of the market. To suggest his play in the last two games will increase his value is ridiculous.
  • 0

#1408 Drouin

Drouin

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,963 posts
  • Joined: 25-March 13

Posted 05 May 2013 - 11:41 AM

Luongos trade value isn't determined by how he is playing in this series. His valued is determined by the rest of the market. To suggest his play in the last two games will increase his value is ridiculous.

No, but a team would want a goalie who can perform well in the playoffs, let alone the regular season. And i'm not saying "oh he played well his trade value is up by 29019181%!"

Look at the previous games, the point-blank stops he had to make cause of our horrendous defense.
I can guarantee on most teams that they wouldn't give that many opportunites. Or take stupid, pointless penalties
  • 0

33y40fk.jpg

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#1409 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,515 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 05 May 2013 - 12:02 PM

I will ignore the condescending tone and respond.

It is pure common sense to see this going to a buyout. If Luongo is as upset as some people report, he can very easily force a buyout. He has a no-trade clause and you can no longer bury contracts in the minors. If he denies trades then Gillis has no choice. With the cap going down he can't keep him. And the buyout makes the most sense for the player here. Luongo gets paid out and then has the opportunity to go wherever he would like on a new contract that will likely be pretty good. I think his image is OK because the perception outside of Vancouver is that he has been treated horribly by Gillis. People noticed that last Edmonton game.

And is a buyout that bad on the hockey side? The key is getting rid of the cap. A buyout is terrible on the management and ownership side and is likely the beginning of the end of Gillis in Vancouver.

And again, his contract isn't so bad that there wouldn't be a team to claim him for free off waivers. That's why a buyout is so far fetched, since it'd never get that far. To even say he'd get to waivers (as in we couldn't get a 7th for him from Florida, for instance) is a near impossibility.

It's not '2 games' Luo has been a great goalie throughout his career, those last 2 games just proved that he can still play on the elite level.

And a good GM would know that already. If they need those 2 games to prove it, then they aren't a good GM. It's not like Luongo just had a major injury or something where you'd wonder if it would affect his performance, so the evaluations other teams have on him are still the same.

Edited by elvis15, 05 May 2013 - 12:06 PM.

  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

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

 


#1410 Drouin

Drouin

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,963 posts
  • Joined: 25-March 13

Posted 05 May 2013 - 01:17 PM

And again, his contract isn't so bad that there wouldn't be a team to claim him for free off waivers. That's why a buyout is so far fetched, since it'd never get that far. To even say he'd get to waivers (as in we couldn't get a 7th for him from Florida, for instance) is a near impossibility.


And a good GM would know that already. If they need those 2 games to prove it, then they aren't a good GM. It's not like Luongo just had a major injury or something where you'd wonder if it would affect his performance, so the evaluations other teams have on him are still the same.

Well said, can't say I fully agree, but I get your point and I respect it.
  • 0

33y40fk.jpg

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-





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.