Quit being so intentionally obtuse RD mathonwy.mathonwy wrote: Gillis traded Schneid because he couldn't trade Luo.
It's not logical to make Luo the back up for the entire year and then trade your starter.
The fact that Schneid was dealt for Horvat is irrelevant. It's about Gillis being unable to move Luo.
Nobody could have moved Luongo between the end of the 2011-12 season and the end of 2013's shortened season. There was a trade freeze because of the lockout. The only offer for Luongo at the 2012 deadline that came close to happening was, allegedly, a low-ball bullshit offer from Nonis and ownership had, apparently, said no way to any salary retention on the part of the Canucks. After the trade freeze cap space was at a premium and the new CBA included recapture penalties that weren't in place when Lou signed his contract. The very fact that they went back to include cap circumventing contracts from the old CBA in the new one instead of just grandfathering them through and no more going forward was absolute bullshit on the part of Bettman and the NHL.
So a couple of questions for you.....
1. Do you disagree that Luongo's contract and cap hit was actually a very good deal for the Canucks under the old CBA when he signed it?
2. Do you disagree that Luongo's cap hit is actually still a steal under the new CBA when compared to other top 10 goaltenders (FYI he made 52 saves last night in a Florida win over San Jose).
3. Do you agree or disagree that most teams that needed Lou's services could not have taken on Luongo's salary simply did not have the cap space because of salary cap rollback this year?