Luongo/Hodgson/Raymond for Lecavlier/Hedman/Downie theory

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

Re: Luongo/Hodgson/Raymond for Lecavlier/Hedman/Downie theor

Postby Vpete » Thu Dec 29, 2011 1:06 pm

^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^

Royal Dude is bang on. Schneider has way more value to the Canucks in a Cup run (again) than he does being traded for a third liner or 'picks and prospects'. It is better to deal him in June for the latter if and when the pick is determined to be top five or not.

The reason Ballard is thrown in to almost every trade scenario is that he has the necessary salary to go the other way to bring in the so called missing piece. Just what is that missing piece? Lapierre and Higgins were both acquired for very little and were large parts of the Canucks success in the post season. Factor in having Booth this year along with a healthy Raymond and the team is deeper in the top 9 compared to last season.

So if trading Schneider is to get something for the third or fourth line it better come with something else such as a draft pick- which does bugger all to help in the playoffs. So realistically what/who do you trade him for come the deadline??

Is defensive depth a need? If so who goes out to make cap space? Ballard right? So what team trades a better defense man, in GIllis' eyes, for Ballard who is under contract for 3 more years?

The longer any fan looks at this team the solution comes from within and what the collective group learned last year through the whole playoff process. If they fail, make the changes with Schneider as the key asset to make a change and do it when there are no significant cap issues to work with.
Brick Top: Do you know what "nemesis" means? A righteous infliction of retribution manifested by an appropriate agent. Personified in this case by an 'orrible cunt... me.
Vpete
CC 2nd Team All-Star
 
Posts: 320
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Luongo/Hodgson/Raymond for Lecavlier/Hedman/Downie theor

Postby BladesofSteel » Thu Dec 29, 2011 1:08 pm

Fred wrote:The only player Schneider will be traded for is a young skilled player preferably big that is just starting his career and has a big upside down the road. MG I believe is concerned about the Canucks future....his team. Right now this team is a Sedins team (previous management ) we don't have any one to replace them when it becomes a MG exclusive team

:roll:
A MG exclusive team? Really Fred?

If Gillis was only concerned about what assets he can acquire to make this his own team, do you think he would have gone out of his way to re-sign the Sedins, Kesler, Luongo, Bieksa to long term deals? Or what about earlier on in his tenure, why extend Edler and Burrows to four year deals, or retain Salo, Hansen and Raymond if he could just deal them to put his own stamp on this club? What has Gillis ever done over the past four years to even suggest his concern is anything but winning now?
"A life, Jimmy, you know what that is? It's the shit that happens while you're waiting for moments that never come." -Det. Lester Freamon
BladesofSteel
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1330
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 6:29 pm
Location: Lower left-hand corner

Re: Luongo/Hodgson/Raymond for Lecavlier/Hedman/Downie theor

Postby Fred » Thu Dec 29, 2011 1:29 pm

I differ here I think MG has immediate concerns but can multi task he has his eye on a dynasty. Schneider would go for a Evander Kane type IMO. Any one less than that is simply not worth it. He'll hold on to Schneider until he has a line up :D
cheers
Fred
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 7:00 pm

Re: Luongo/Hodgson/Raymond for Lecavlier/Hedman/Downie theor

Postby dbr » Thu Dec 29, 2011 1:45 pm

There's a difference between wanting to trade Schneider for a player with a similarly bright future, and Mike Gillis wanting to do so because there is some ego attachment to the idea of replacing the team's core with players he's gone out and acquired.
dbr
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3043
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: Luongo/Hodgson/Raymond for Lecavlier/Hedman/Downie theor

Postby ESQ » Thu Dec 29, 2011 1:55 pm

RD - I agree with a lot of what you're saying. I don't say we need to trade Schneider for any return, and the more I think about it the more I see his high value as a dependable back-up, even if that's all he ever is.

I haven't heard Gillis say lots of teams are desperate to trade for him, and if that is the case then clearly I'm wrong. The sense I had gotten was many teams made low-ball offers because they thought the market value for him was low.

I guess where you and I disagree is the value of Downie, and that's totally fair, like I said I don't watch enough Tampa games to really know. I'm pretty sure he's a second line guy on that team, gets PP time...unfortunately for my argument he's not producing this year. His first year in Tampa I thought he was a breakout star in the making, and could even be a 30 goal producer. He had an off year last year, but stepped it up big in the playoffs. However, a lot of Tampa players had huge numbers, makes me wonder if they're artificially inflated due to their matchups.

If Downie is a third/fourth line goon, then I 100% agree with your assessment that we don't need him. If he is a second-line power forward who brings a huge physical element, speed, and scoring, I think he's worth kicking the tires on. And if he's the bat-shit crazy loose cannon we saw in Philly crosschecking Kesler to the face, then you don't touch him with a 10 foot pole.

So that's my mea culpa - but at least its fun to talk about :)

In terms of building a dynasty as Fred said, I think nobody has done a better job of that than Paul Holmgren. He tanked for one year, and now has a steady stream of elite-level prospects coming on line at every position except goalie. Detroit on the other hand is riding their old warhorses, getting big performances out of minor free agent pick-ups, and slowly developing their prospects, none of whom seem to have first-line upside.
ESQ
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1284
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:34 pm

Re: Luongo/Hodgson/Raymond for Lecavlier/Hedman/Downie theor

Postby Fred » Thu Dec 29, 2011 3:12 pm

first-line upside


That describes what MG is looking for a first line players in return for Schneider. He's not going to take a second or third liner a look. He has a good asset and he want a good return IMO.
cheers
Fred
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 7:00 pm

Re: Luongo/Hodgson/Raymond for Lecavlier/Hedman/Downie theor

Postby Farhan Lalji » Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:18 pm

PS:

Just so everyone knows,

My real answer/opinion to this thread is as follows:

The Canucks should keep Schneider until the end of the season. I agree with RoyalDude that having two top-tier goalies is a huge asset. While I feel that trading one of these assets for help elsewhere would be beneficial, I also feel that Schneider's presence is helping Luongo....since Luongo now knows that the #1 goalie position is up for grabs.

If Luongo falters in the playoffs, then we go to Schneider immediately. The competition for the #1 spot has brought out the best in Luongo....and I believe that this is the best he has looked since the beginning of the 08/09 season (before that 2 month injury of his).

Hodgson - I would also keep Hodgson at all costs. Hodgson's presence will ensure that the Canucks will have a top-tier center once the Sedin twins are passed their prime.

How's that for a complete 180? ;)
Farhan Lalji
 

Re: Luongo/Hodgson/Raymond for Lecavlier/Hedman/Downie theor

Postby Hockey Widow » Thu Dec 29, 2011 5:48 pm

MG has said it before, Cory only gets traded if MG gets an offer he cannot refuse. He is a valuable part of this team and I for one feel better having him on the team for a long playoff run, for all the reasons stated.

Yes, it would suck to lose him for next to nothing but if keeping him brings us the cup how can you argue? To help us this year he would have to get a big return of a player that could help us now and a draft/prospect for the future. MG has said he will not trade for a rental so that player to help us now would have to be someone who will be around for a couple of years at least.

There are teams that need goaltending and by the trade deadline one may bite. Most contenders will be set in goal so a deal would be with a pretender or wanna be. There are certainly a number of players that could make us that much better and MG may grab one but as we have seen deadline day deals are costly so any team jettisoning quality players will want a lot more that Cory. I still think MG's best bet is to re-sign him to a 2 year deal for 2-2.5 range and hang onto him. Our first window to trade Luongo will be coming soon enough. If we still want Luongo after that then deal Cory.
The only HW the Canucks need
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
 
Posts: 11632
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: Luongo/Hodgson/Raymond for Lecavlier/Hedman/Downie theor

Postby Island Nucklehead » Fri Dec 30, 2011 3:33 pm

Hockey Widow wrote:I still think MG's best bet is to re-sign him to a 2 year deal for 2-2.5 range and hang onto him. Our first window to trade Luongo will be coming soon enough. If we still want Luongo after that then deal Cory.


Excellent post, as usual HW.

I'd only add (and it's been said many times before) that given our cap situation it makes far more sense to deal Schneider (or Luongo) in the offseason when we can move more salary around or go over the cap.

Moving him at the deadline forces us to add salary going out, and probably lowers his value. We'd have to bring in a backup goalie, who would make as much as Schneider and most likely be a weaker goaltender. There's also the delicate issue of chemistry in the room. Does management want to tinker with a winning team by moving bodies out the door, just for the sake of making moves? We're currently tied for first in the league. There's no reason to panic or seek a deal at this time.
User avatar
Island Nucklehead
CC Legend
 
Posts: 7319
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: Luongo/Hodgson/Raymond for Lecavlier/Hedman/Downie theor

Postby Uncle dans leg » Wed Feb 10, 2016 8:31 pm

Farhan Lalji wrote:Luongo/Hodgson/Raymond for Lecavlier/Hedman/Downie theory

Sorry guys,

I don't mean to keep harping on my "Luongo for Lecavlier" ideas but the idea of this intrigues me greatly....probably not if it was one-for-one but as part of a package deal.

Tampa Bay needs goaltending and they could also use some prospects I believe.

The Canucks on the other hand could use some more depth on defense, an agitator that can play aggressively and stick up for teammates, and a guy that can either play with Kesler or ensure that we have 3 dangerous scoring lines at almost all-times. Hedman, Downie, and Lecavlier would most certainly give us that.

Now obviously - you have to 'give to receive'. I think we can all agree that a straight up "Luongo for Lecavlier" deal would not be to our advantage. However - what if this was a packaged deal? Hedman isn't having the best of seasons but he's still very young.....and BIG.

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Higgins-Kesler-Booth
Downie-Lecavlier-Hansen
Malhottra-Lapierre-Weiss

Bieksa-Hamhuis
Hedman-Edler
Salo-Ballard

Schneider
Lack

(I have excluded Raymond from the line-up assuming that he is the 3rd man in this fantasy deal).

Pre-emptive arguments:

1) I realize that there is a huge advantage in having two bonafide #1 goalies (as the Bruins do in Thomas/Raask), but there are two sides to the coin obviously. Who wouldn't want more depth up front and on D?

2) Yes - Lecavlier's salary and # of years stinks, but I don't think the players will care about it TOO much (atleast our core). Guys like the Sedin twins, Bieksa, Kesler, etc., are all character guys that just want to win. None of them are so petty as to feel, "Hey, I'm better than this guy and he's making more money than me on this team."

3) Yes - Lecavlier is no longer the player that he once was but he still flat out brings it come play off time. He did this last year as well. Lecavlier sticks up for his teammates, is big and physical, and will help us in one of two ways: He will either be a beast with Kesler on the 2nd line (even if he isn't the player that he once was, playing alongside Kesler will ensure that he would be dangerous), OR.....he'd be the best 3rd line center in the game. And before anyone says, "6+ million for a 3rd line center? ha!" I have this to say: When the playoffs hit, depth is king......and perhaps we know this better than anyone. Think scoring depth would have helped us a little against Boston much last year?

4) Yes - losing Luongo would suck balls (especially if we traded Luongo and Schneider got hurt at some point), but it's about risk/reward. As the Redwings and Blackhawks proved in 2008 and 2010 respectively, a team doesn't need to have superstarish goaltending provided that the team in front is a fucking beast. Osgood and Niemi both played very well, but they were hardly Tim Thomas level. Far from it. However - both teams had tremendous depth and talent up front and this overcompensated. Schneider should be able to play just as good as both Osgood and Niemi.

5) Yes - losing Hodgson would suck since he definitely looks like the real deal but Hedman should get to that level as well. His upside is HUGE. At this point, I'd rather see the Canucks having a burgeoning defensive star than an offensive one. Assuming that both Hodgson and Hedman get to the next level in 18 months or so, I think the Canucks would be better served by having a blue chip defenseman.

Lol
Searching for Evan Oberg and this gem pops up
nobody forks...with the jesus
User avatar
Uncle dans leg
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3864
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl

Re: Luongo/Hodgson/Raymond for Lecavlier/Hedman/Downie theor

Postby Rumsfeld » Wed Feb 10, 2016 9:07 pm

:lol:
Chairman of the Jim Benning Appreciation Society
User avatar
Rumsfeld
CC Legend
 
Posts: 4171
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 2:48 pm
Location: Raqqa

Previous

Return to Canucks Corner Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 10 guests