Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Search
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
 All Forums
 Hockey Forums
Allow Anonymous Posting forum... General Hockey Chat
 Luongo Trade Allow Anonymous Users Reply to This Topic...
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
Previous Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 5

nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star



3598 Posts

Posted - 07/16/2012 :  12:21:17  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15


The above note is from Nuxfan. I have just one questios to ask.

If Schneider is the man and has been being groomed for 8 years by the genius Vancouver management to take the big chair, why on earth would they sign Luongo to a 12 yr deal just 2 years ago??? If Schneider was earmarked to be the next one, does a 12 yr deal for Luongo make sense???

You are right, what do they know??

Daniel Alfredsson is the MVP of the universe. All hail the Ottawa Senators!!!!!



Ah, hindsight, what a wonderful tool.

2 years ago, I don't think anyone expected this to happen - he was certainly not earmarked as the "next one" in Vancouver, although VAN management certainly knew they had a solid prospect with a bright future on their hands that could be traded for value. VAN seemingly made their bed with Luongo as a goalie, and Schneider was supposed to come up, be a backup while proving he could play at the NHL level, and get traded for value. Who knew he would exceed all expectations and effectively outplay Luongo for the starting job?

Regardless of the hockey decision, I do agree that a large part of the decision to move him is probably business related. I think VAN management has realized that 12 year deals for any player is a bad idea, and they're trying to remove this deal from the books. It looked great 2 years ago, but with Luongo coming off an inconsistent year and turning 33, it must be difficult to stare down the barrel of another decade and 42M. Even harder when your backup has outplayed him.

Edited by - nuxfan on 07/16/2012 12:23:48
Go to Top of Page

JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran



Canada
1910 Posts

Posted - 07/16/2012 :  13:39:15  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Best part of this debate is, no matter how good or bad Schneider plays this year, Vancouver is gonna lose big time by losing one of the most coveted goaltenders in the NHL today. Schneider good/great high %. Loungo track record of being great 10 years in the making. Of course he always pooped the sheets in the playoffs.

I honestly hope he goes to Toronto. Would be a good fit and 10 years remaining on the 12 year contract at good value versus skill, with the option to trade or buyout in the later years. Burke should be so lucky.
Go to Top of Page

Alex116
PickupHockey Legend



5808 Posts

Posted - 07/16/2012 :  16:44:27  Show Profile  Reply with Quote


quote:
Originally posted by slozo

quote:
Originally posted by Alex116

As for the Canucks goalie situation, i could really care less what ANY fan thinks a year or two or five from now, even if Schneider turns out to be the next Jim Carey or Andrew Raycroft. UNLESS, of course it's someone who right now says they should be keeping Luongo. There are very few people on this planet who if they were in charge of the Canucks, wouldn't be doing exactly what the Canucks are trying to do, and that is, move Luongo. It's not even the contract or the fact they've lost their faith in him, it's the fact they've got a guy who they feel will be as good or better and for less money. Let's face it, if it wasn't for Schneider's emergence, or had they traded him 3 years ago when the talk first started about doing so, they Canucks wouldn't be trying to deal Luongo at all right now!!!

As far as Schneider taking on the starters roll, absolutely there's a chance he could flop. But there's also a chance that Luongo totally loses his game and completely sucks next year. NOTHING is a given. But, with the way that the Canucks have brought Schneider along and groomed him for this roll, you have to think he's more prepared than some of the young guys who get the job handed to them at age 20. What i find funny is there are many guys out there claiming that Holtby this the next coming of Dominik Hasek or Patrick Roy after his short successful stint yet these same clowns are saying that there's no way Schneider will be any good [size=3](and i'm not referencing anyone on here so please don't jump to any conclussions, ahem, cough, cough, Slozo, cough, cough[/size=4] )
I do agree with nuxfan that the Canucks actually gave Schneider a handful of big games this past season, though admittedly in years past, it was the crap teams like CBJ, Tor and Edm (okay, i admit, although they have been weak, i intentionally threw in Tor and Edm for you Slozo, and you Beans)

Again, this is somewhat of a risk, but it's really Mike Gillis who's in the most difficult situation. If he were to deal Schneider and the Canucks don't win the cup with the players he got in return, he'd be criticized yet if he keeps him and they don't win, he'll be critcized for not trading him for what people will claim would be enough of a return to win the cup!

The idiotic....errrr fickle, Vancouver fans, will not be happy unless there's a cup win. They won't even understand the business side of this nor will they ever admit that Luongo was as good as he was. It's like trying to convince the Luongo haters that Canada won gold, with his help, and not in spite of him.



First off, I'd love for you to show me the quote where I say Hotlby is going to become a HOFer goalie. THAT is laughable. Strawman argument after strawman argument . . . I mean seriously, I expect better of that from you Alex.

You agree that the Canucks gave Schneider a handful of big games? Yep, that's about right . . . A HANDFUL. Maybe 5, 6. You do realise it will require SEVERAL DOZEN big games in a real season, right? And not behind any kind of cushion offered by a proven, legitimate starter who has taken 100% of the fan flak for team failure (totally unfairly, IMHO).

You guys are brutal. Seriously.

And no, as GM, I would be keeping Luongo, and I would have dealt Schneider by now, once I realise I could have gotten a huge return for him, so that I could have added that extra piece for the playoffs.

You see this Beans? You thought I was only calling out the "bandwagon" jumping fans, but . . . it's prevalent everywhere in Canuckland. They all seriously believe that a back-up goalie who started less than 30 games, 11 of which were against eventual playoff teams (that's 29 starts, 11 playoff teams - 37%, compared with 16 playoff teams out of 30, 53%), with no meaningful games after February . . . that this is the guy who is BETTER than Roberto Luongo, all-star goalie with all the cred in the world.

I totally get why Luongo wants to leave Vancouver now. I didn't get it before, but . . . I totally get it now.

"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug



Slozo, do you even read my posts? Cuz if you don't, or you just skim through them, perhaps you should not comment on them?

Feel free to scroll back up to where i've quoted my own post above. I've taken the time to "bold" and even enlarge a very important part of what i said that you seemed to take issue with. Please feel free to see below. If you still choose to skim through my post, just go to the part i just referenced, maybe then you can take your strawman crap and shove it where.......uhh, ummm, where, uhh....ah, wherever you want (this sticking to the rules around here really sucks sometimes.

Now, if you did in fact read it, can you show me where i claim YOU said Holtby would be a HOFer or any part that entices you to call your strawman crap on me or for what i said that makes you "expect better of me" ???

I've defended Luongo for a long time on this site and elsewhere and still consider him a top 10 goalie in the world, something i've been ridiculed for around here i might add. Now suddenly i'm grouped in with a bunch fickle "bandwagon" fans??? Seriously??? That's a clown comment bro! (no insult intended, and if you watch baseball, you'll get the comment.)

Seriously though Slozo, this "you expect better of me" crap is what's really laughable. First you jump the gun and attack me on the Rick Nash thread, now this? Who should be expecting more from who really?

One last thing, i find it ironic how there are a few of you piping in about how great Luongo is. I don't recall EVER hearing this sort of opinion from many of you before? I don't have the time now but i do recall mutiple threads in years past where he got little to no love from a lot of people around here. Not saying it's you guys and maybe you did give him love before, but you can be darn sure i'll go back and look just to be sure, when i have some time and am bored.
Go to Top of Page

slozo
Moderator



Canada
4607 Posts

Posted - 07/18/2012 :  10:50:34  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Slozo, do you
quote:
even read my posts? Cuz if you don't, or you just skim through them, perhaps you should not comment on them?

Feel free to scroll back up to where i've quoted my own post above. I've taken the time to "bold" and even enlarge a very important part of what i said that you seemed to take issue with. Please feel free to see below. If you still choose to skim through my post, just go to the part i just referenced, maybe then you can take your strawman crap and shove it where.......uhh, ummm, where, uhh....ah, wherever you want (this sticking to the rules around here really sucks sometimes.

Now, if you did in fact read it, can you show me where i claim YOU said Holtby would be a HOFer or any part that entices you to call your strawman crap on me or for what i said that makes you "expect better of me" ???

I've defended Luongo for a long time on this site and elsewhere and still consider him a top 10 goalie in the world, something i've been ridiculed for around here i might add. Now suddenly i'm grouped in with a bunch fickle "bandwagon" fans??? Seriously??? That's a clown comment bro! (no insult intended, and if you watch baseball, you'll get the comment.)

Seriously though Slozo, this "you expect better of me" crap is what's really laughable. First you jump the gun and attack me on the Rick Nash thread, now this? Who should be expecting more from who really?

One last thing, i find it ironic how there are a few of you piping in about how great Luongo is. I don't recall EVER hearing this sort of opinion from many of you before? I don't have the time now but i do recall mutiple threads in years past where he got little to no love from a lot of people around here. Not saying it's you guys and maybe you did give him love before, but you can be darn sure i'll go back and look just to be sure, when i have some time and am bored.


Yeah, I do read your posts, and when you stated that there were
a) many guys out there who were real high on Holtby (with references to Hasek and Roy), and
b) these same clowns are saying there's no way Schneider will be any good

and then state "and i'm not referencing anyone on here so please don't jump to any conclussions, ahem, cough, cough, Slozo, cough, cough" . . . I would have to assume that you are stating both
A and B

about me, slozo.

Is that not a fair assumption to make, Alex116? I don't believe my reading comprehension skills have failed me here.

So, I do believe you made a nearly 100% incorrect statement there, thereby eliciting my response about strawman arguments. As has been the case - feel free to look back in the threads, my young man - I have contended that:

1) Holtby was Washington's best goalie going into the playoffs.
(never made aspersions as to how great he would be)

2) Luongo was not to blame for the finals loss to Boston.

3) Luongo is a top 5 goalie in the league, and seems to be underappreciated in Vancouver

4) It is not just bandwagon jumping fans that are hyper-critical of their goalie, it is the serious/real fanbase as well (everyone).

Again, if you actually read what I wrote, I give an aside to Beans in a post talking to you, "You see this Beans? You thought I was only calling out the "bandwagon" jumping fans, but . . . it's prevalent everywhere in Canuckland."

I hope you realise that from that comment, one can discern that I was in fact NOT lumping you together with bandwagon jumpers, which you clearly are not.

I find it ironic that you got so offended by my post, asking me to reread what you have written . . . when it is so clear to me that it is in fact yourself that has trouble comprehending what you in fact said.

Bro.

"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug

Edited by - slozo on 07/18/2012 10:52:32
Go to Top of Page

Alex116
PickupHockey Legend



5808 Posts

Posted - 07/18/2012 :  14:40:00  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Well, all i can say is this. I can in fact see how you interpretted it incorrectly. Have a read of this sentence again: and i'm not referencing anyone on here so please don't jump to any conclussions, ahem, cough, cough, Slozo, cough, cough

Without sounding like an english professor, which i'm nothing even remotely close to i might add, the key word is "SO". I made it clear that i was not referencing anyone on this site. Then, rather than use a "." and start a new sentence, i chose the word "so", which means "therefore" or "hence". I follow this with please don't jump to any conclussions, ahem, cough, cough, Slozo, cough, cough a sarcastic reference to you, Slozo, so that you won't think i'm accusing you of being one of these people. Had i put the "ahem, cough, Slozo" stuff just before the word "so", it would have def been a reference to you. Either way, i can see how you could be confused but i don't think my statement was anything close to "100% incorrect".

Now it's your turn..... In regards to "lumping me together with the bandwagon fans", you did in fact do this. READ HERE:
quote:
Originally posted by slozo

You see this Beans? You thought I was only calling out the "bandwagon" jumping fans, but . . . it's prevalent everywhere in Canuckland. They all seriously believe that a back-up goalie who started less than 30 games, 11 of which were against eventual playoff teams (that's 29 starts, 11 playoff teams - 37%, compared with 16 playoff teams out of 30, 53%), with no meaningful games after February . . . that this is the guy who is BETTER than Roberto Luongo, all-star goalie with all the cred in the world.

I totally get why Luongo wants to leave Vancouver now. I didn't get it before, but . . . I totally get it now.





First off, i think that pretty much proves you did exactly what i accused you of, that being lumping me in with the bandwagonners. No biggie, just pointing it out. Secondly, please feel free to show me where i said Schneider is "better" than Luongo. IF i did in fact say that, i'm sure it was in regards to his play lately, something that is pretty hard to deny, but go ahead and try. There's not many people with knowledge of the game of hockey who don't think that Schneider outplayed Luongo in the second half of the season AND the brief playoff showing. Does this mean he's the "better goalie"? NO, of course not. But at that time, he was playing better. Has he acheived what Luongo has? Of course not. Could he fail as a starter? Of course he could. Could he succeed? Yes. But most importantly, is trading Luongo and keeping Schneider, regardless of the risk, the smartest move "BUSINESS-WISE", that Gillis could make at this time? Ask around, and i'm sure you will find that majority will agree that the time has come for Luongo to move on.

Still don't know if you got the "bro" bit, but it's not important.....


Edited by - Alex116 on 07/18/2012 14:41:14
Go to Top of Page

nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star



3598 Posts

Posted - 07/18/2012 :  15:25:04  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by slozo

2) Luongo was not to blame for the finals loss to Boston.

3) Luongo is a top 5 goalie in the league, and seems to be underappreciated in Vancouver



2) You are correct, he was not (solely) to blame. No one blamed Luongo any more than other players were blamed. It was a team loss.

3) Luongo is NOT unappreciated - rather, Schneider is appreciated more. Why do people not realize that?

When fans/team choose 1 player over another, it does not mean that the unchosen one is not appreciated, it just means that they are the second option. When you have room for only 1, you make a choice.

VAN fans and management are well aware that they have a great goalie in Luongo, and that they're trading away (arguably) one of the top-5 goalies over the last 5 years. However, past performance does not guarantee future performance, and the team (and much of the fan base) feel that Schneider presents a better option moving forward.
Go to Top of Page

slozo
Moderator



Canada
4607 Posts

Posted - 07/19/2012 :  05:51:47  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
2) Luongo was not to blame for the finals loss to Boston.

3) Luongo is a top 5 goalie in the league, and seems to be underappreciated in Vancouver

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2) You are correct, he was not (solely) to blame. No one blamed Luongo any more than other players were blamed. It was a team loss.

3) Luongo is NOT unappreciated - rather, Schneider is appreciated more. Why do people not realize that?

When fans/team choose 1 player over another, it does not mean that the unchosen one is not appreciated, it just means that they are the second option. When you have room for only 1, you make a choice.

VAN fans and management are well aware that they have a great goalie in Luongo, and that they're trading away (arguably) one of the top-5 goalies over the last 5 years. However, past performance does not guarantee future performance, and the team (and much of the fan base) feel that Schneider presents a better option moving forward.



I appreciate your answers nuxfan as coming from you, but . . . in terms of Vancouver Canucks fans as a whole, my points are based on reality and observation, while yours seem to be based on wishful thinking.

It was observable by ALL that many blamed the cup "loss" on Luongo. Most Vancouver fans are not really happy with Luongo.

And if your argument is "Schneider is appreciated MORE" . . . that most certainly IS snubbing Luongo in a HUGE way.

IF you appreciate a young goalie who has never been a starter in the NHL more than a multiple all-star goalie with the cache of Luongo who is STILL at the top of his game in his prime . . . then how else can you say it? By what twisted logic can you argue that you are not saying that you think Schneider is better than Luongo, based on
- an unfair sample size (played fewer games)
- unfair sample value (played against weaker opponents at less-critical times in the season and post-season)
- unknown variable of how he handles pressure of #1 starter
???

That is the issue I have with you guys.

I see that you THINK you are somehow giving Luongo his due, but I am not SEEING IT.

"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
Go to Top of Page

nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star



3598 Posts

Posted - 07/19/2012 :  09:32:22  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
I appreciate your answers nuxfan as coming from you, but . . . in terms of Vancouver Canucks fans as a whole, my points are based on reality and observation, while yours seem to be based on wishful thinking.

It was observable by ALL that many blamed the cup "loss" on Luongo. Most Vancouver fans are not really happy with Luongo.

And if your argument is "Schneider is appreciated MORE" . . . that most certainly IS snubbing Luongo in a HUGE way.

IF you appreciate a young goalie who has never been a starter in the NHL more than a multiple all-star goalie with the cache of Luongo who is STILL at the top of his game in his prime . . . then how else can you say it? By what twisted logic can you argue that you are not saying that you think Schneider is better than Luongo, based on
- an unfair sample size (played fewer games)
- unfair sample value (played against weaker opponents at less-critical times in the season and post-season)
- unknown variable of how he handles pressure of #1 starter
???

That is the issue I have with you guys.

I see that you THINK you are somehow giving Luongo his due, but I am not SEEING IT.

"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug



To be fair, you probably don't get much in the way of Vancouver news in your neck of the woods - but I get my fill here, so trust me when I say there was plenty of blame to go around for the cup loss here, the post-mortem went on for weeks. Sure, Luongo let in 20 goals in 3 games in BOS, but he was also stellar in the 3 games he played here before game 7, and that was widely recognized. Some other things that were widely recognized:

- VAN's offense combined for 8 goals in 7 games
- there was very little backbone to the team when challenged physically
- after losing Hamhuis, the defense looked very pedestrian
- the Sedin's and the PP disappeared
- Burrows should not bite the hand of a Bruin
- Luongo should not criticize opposing goalie play

The only player that pretty much escaped any criticism was Kesler, mainly because it was obvious he was playing through an injury. Everyone else shouldered some of that loss - so no slozo, it was not put squarely on Luongo, nor should it have been.

But back to Schneider. To answer your points:

- Schneider has played in high pressure situations (I believe I pointed that out before).
- Luongo has also played against weaker opponents. While Schneider started 19 (out of 32) games against non-playoff teams last year, Luongo started 24 (out of 50). He gets his fair share of "easy games" as well.
- The only risk IMO is how Schneider will handle the pressure of the regular starting job in a city like Vancouver. So far he has shown himself to be very calm under pressure, and very level headed when dealing with post-game stuff. He's ready for the challenge.

VAN fans and management obviously appreciate his potential, and want to move forward with him as a goalie. Is he a better goalie? In the last 2 regular seasons, yes he has been the better goalie for this team, but as you point out, that is a small sample size. So, VAN management is betting on potential over proven past performance.

Regardless, this move is not only about hockey ability, and I think you know that. In regards to contract flexibility, Schneider wins hands-down - were Luongo only signed for a couple more years, this trade might not happen, or at least it would be easier.

Finally, while I may be giving undue appreciation for an unproven goaltender, you are clearly selling Schneider short - and thats fair, you just don't see enough of him in Toronto. Do you think that this conversation would be happening at all if Schneider wasn't THAT good, in the time we've seen him? In order to consider Luongo expendable, the replacement had to be stellar, and so far he has been.
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 5 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
Jump To:
Snitz Forums 2000 Go To Top Of Page