Ossi Vaananen Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Bozak for Luongo? Wow... 1. Agree Bozak is a good 3rd liner. Fills the void for when Manny leaves, and Lappy can take 4th. 2. Giving up an All Star Goalie, with actually a reasonable cap hit contract relative to other top ten goalies although a long contract for a 3rd liner is ridiculous. 3. Bozak stock is rising because he played on a line with Lupul who was having a career year before he got hurt and Kessel. He was the beneficiary of some very talented wingers. That being said, can he play the role of a Morrison between a Bert and Naslund, sure...but still not enough. 4. Kadri is junk, he's a bust and going no where in the NHL - as I have said prior. 3 yr pro, offensive center, drafted 6th overall, and can't crack a lineup of one of the worst teams in the league in need of an offensive center? Says enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Luongo to Luong Island - where it all began... for Okposo and Pokka (we need a young Finnish blueliner in the system to fill the Sami void). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 The Staal deal happened at the draft, which coincidentally is one of the two times I suggested Luongo could be dealt if not before the season. That was a completely different situation, and really bears no resemblance other than the fact they are both stars. RFA vs. long contract, Staal knew where he wanted to sign, and so on... It's funny, that's what he said he would do from the beginning, because he's not worried about having two awesome goaltenders, especially possibly heading in to a compressed season. It's a good problem to have when you're playing 4 games a week. He has time on his side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Even though it does appear, that Luongo made his own bed and management finds itself at a crossroads between making a choice between two goaltenders; one on a hefty, anchoring contract and getting up there in age, and the other, young, poised and on a seemingly perfect contract, no one from Canucks management has stated anything regarding a choice between Luongo and Schneider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 That's fair point but it doesn't mean you give him up for scraps then. We can win with both goalies splitting the season. Our team is strong, it can make a run as is if we're healthy, you don't trade away assets for nothing and expect to win long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briana Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Has Schneider left for Switzerland yet... What would happen if he injures himself..type groin injury..then what ....do we still trade Lou or what.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiDeN Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Not really completely different. Was Shero under any obligation to trade him to the Hurricanes? Nope. He was not obligated to trade him at all. What he did, though, was work in the background so that he could accommodate his player, and also not make it an ordeal. Luongo has already turned into an ordeal. This "nice problem to have" crap is so wrong. You say that he has time on his side - I'll ask again in what direction you think Luongo's value will go if he plays this entire season as our backup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 That's most likely, but I'd be surprised to hear any rational person say it's 100% that Luongo goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Well, he couldn't sign him, so he would have had to take a star player to arbitration, or face an offer sheet from Carolina, so yeah, his hand was forced. In a condensed season, he wouldn't be our backup at all. He would likely be splitting games pretty even. I have no more evidence that he won't go down in value than you do that he will. But, I guarantee he will be playing more than a typical backup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf47 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Then find me a 1st source quote (management) reported by a second source (media) that states management has decided to go with Schneder over Luongo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Has Schneider left for Switzerland yet... What would happen if he injures himself..type groin injury..then what ....do we still trade Lou or what.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_Hockey_101 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Luongo is on the trade block, so, through reasonable deduction, the job belongs to the other goalie, thus, Schneider. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it might be safe to say its a freaking duck. I'll rephrase my statement to satisfy your annal view. Its APPEARANT, that management has chosen Schneider over Lou, because, they are obviously trying to trade Lou, with nary a rumour about a Schneider trade. Now, stick your pen where the sun don;t shine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Waste of time. You don't get it. It is not about whether Luongo or Schneider being traded. It's about you spreading falsified facts; no one in management has stated specifically (go on record) that the Canucks have decided to go with Schneider over Luongo. You're not going to prove anything in this world by using the duck analogy. Science would be dead by now. FACTS smurf47. FACTS. Not common deduction, no analogy, no side steps. FACTS. You cannot prove it, you cannot discuss it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_Hockey_101 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 But they have. Mike Gillis has spoken pretty openly about it on the radio. And a quick Google search found the below article, which offers a bit of confirmation. Gillis did acknowledge that before the lockout he talked with several teams about trading the 33-year-old goaltender. Luongo lost his first-string status during the playoffs to Cory Schneider, who has since signed a three-year contract with the Canucks. http://www.torontosun.com/2012/10/19/roberto-luongo-to-leafs-deal-not-done-mike-gillis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riffraff Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 What's the alternative? Hold out for a superstar that will never be offered? In what direction do you think Luongo's value would go as a trade piece if he's atrophying away on our bench? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_Hockey_101 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Guess you ignored King's post on the last page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_Hockey_101 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 If there's a season, Hold out till trade deadline.....I suspect more than the above mentioned could be aquired in a trade for Lu when they are on hhe outside looking in again for a playoff spot......assuming the leafs are the only suitors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Waste of time. You don't get it. It is not about whether Luongo or Schneider being traded. It's about you spreading falsified facts; no one in management has stated specifically (go on record) that the Canucks have decided to go with Schneider over Luongo. You're not going to prove anything in this world by using the duck analogy. Science would be dead by now. FACTS smurf47. FACTS. Not common deduction, no analogy, no side steps. FACTS. You cannot prove it, you cannot discuss it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Lu used to be the man. We used to hitch our Stanley Cup hopes on him. But sometimes you have to let go, and embrace a new hope... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tangerines Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 ^^^^^^ LMAO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.