Luongo will Waive NTC If Asked To

[Farhan Lalji]

Lecavalier appears to be what they want to give up but we definitely shouldn't want that contract on our books for however many more years he has left. I like VL and feel he would definitely help but would he waive his NTC to leave the sunny beaches of Florida for 200+ days of rain per year? I highly doubt it. He's also exercised his NTC before this so I highly doubt he'll be moving.

Agreed that his contract is not what we should be looking for, but I'd take it if it helped us get rid of Luongo's and Raymond's.

Lecavlier's presence would allow the Canucks to have very formidable depth at center for a number of years, while also allowing our younger promising guys (i.e. Kassian and Schroeder) to play with an established playmaker as opposed to a shutdown grinder plummer like Lapierre of Pahlsson. A little thing like that could not only turn a 'non-factors' into a decent goal scorers (compare how Kassian and Schroeder would play with Lecavlier as opposed to Pahlsson or Lapierre), but would also drastically decrease the learning/developmental curve.

I know people lament the fact that Lecavlier is washed up and can only produce 45-50 points a year now, but that type of production in a 3rd line setting would be pretty damn good.......and he'd be exactly the type of guy that could dominate an opposing teams' 3rd or 4th line.

In this past LA series for instance - while guys like Kesler and the twins had their hands full with the likes of Richards, Doughty, Carter, Brown, and Kopitar,, who did LA have on their 3rd line?.......and what would a guy like Lecavlier do against an LA 3rd or 4th line when compared to Pahlsson, Malhottra, etc.?

Canucks lost a lot of close games to the Kings. Think Lecavlier's 2 or 3 extra goals in the series would have made a difference? Think a guy like Lecavlier would've been able to make better use of a winger like Higgins as opposed to a guy like Pahlsson or Malhottra would have?

Think Lecavlier's big body presence on the power play would've made a bit of a difference?

[FAN]

Agreed that his contract is not what we should be looking for, but I'd take it if it helped us get rid of Luongo's and Raymond's.

Raymond's contract expires this summer.

Think Lecavlier's big body presence on the power play would've made a bit of a difference?

I don't think it would have made a difference considering Kesler plays that role and has proven to be highly successful in the past.

I think that if Lecavalier was acquired he would be playing with either the Sedins or Kesler. There is simply no way a team can afford to have a $6.1M first line center, a $5M second line center, and a $7.7M third line center and have enough cap room for quality wingers, defense, and goaltending. Wingers are important. Look at the Penguins. They can't win with Crosby, Malkin, and Staal mostly because there weren't enough quality wingers to go around. Strength down the middle is important but if you don't have guys that can complement them they can be easily neutralized.

I think adding another gamebreaking forward up front is something Gillis should consider, but I think adding a #1 Dman (if possible) would be a greater benefit.

[Lancer]

Teddy Purcel

He's somebody I think Gillis would go for but it would take more than Purcell to move Luongo. Likely Purcell and a high pick or two depending on what biddnig war may transpire. I'm all for Gillis sweetening the pot to get Purcell and a prospect like Connolly or Hedman (less likely. if they have a surplus, it's scoring forwards), but putting Edler AND Luongo for Purcell and Connolly is just prison yard rape IMO.

BTW, Lecavalier is going nowhere, nor do the Canucks need him. We need wingers, not centres.

[Uncle dans leg]

Teddy Purcel

He's somebody I think Gillis would go for but it would take more than Purcell to move Luongo. Likely Purcell and a high pick or two depending on what biddnig war may transpire. I'm all for Gillis sweetening the pot to get Purcell and a prospect like Connolly or Hedman (less likely. if they have a surplus, it's scoring forwards), but putting Edler AND Luongo for Purcell and Connolly is just prison yard rape IMO.

BTW, Lecavalier is going nowhere, nor do the Canucks need him. We need wingers, not centres.

But do u feel it's still prison yard rape if it's Edler and Luongo for Hedman and someone like Purcell, my boil
slaying comrade?

[SKYO]

I hope Nate Thompson can be a part of the TB package.

This ugly dude,

44 - C/LW
Age: 27
Date of birth: October 05, 1984
Place of birth: Anchorage, AK
Ht: 6-0 Wt: 210
Shoots: L
Salary: $950,000
NHL Seasons: 4
Drafted by Boston in 2003 (6/183).

ASSETS: Provides a lot of energy, can kill penalties and isn't afraid to rumble. Can line up both at center or wing and provides plenty of versatility to a lineup. Works hard and has sound fundamentals. Is good on face-offs.

[Uncle dans leg]

I hope Nate Thompson can be a part of the TB package.

This ugly dude,

44 - C/LW
Age: 27
Date of birth: October 05, 1984
Place of birth: Anchorage, AK
Ht: 6-0 Wt: 210
Shoots: L
Salary: $950,000
NHL Seasons: 4
Drafted by Boston in 2003 (6/183).

ASSETS: Provides a lot of energy, can kill penalties and isn't afraid to rumble. Can line up both at center or wing and provides plenty of versatility to a lineup. Works hard and has sound fundamentals. Is good on face-offs.

He can have a picket fence corn eating contest with Kassian and stand a pretty good shot at winning...

[FAN]

But do u feel it's still prison yard rape if it's Edler and Luongo for Hedman and someone like Purcell

I like Hedman and believe he'll develop into a very good Dman but it probably is a prison yard rape if that's the deal. Truth is Hedman, based on ability, is not worth Edler straight up. Hedman, based on potential, is likely worth much more than Edler. Hedman was projected as one of those Dman that came alone probably once every decade and you really can see why at times. He is already good defensively and doesn't have too many weaknesses.

I think Edler is a better Dman right now and there is a strong possbility that Hedman, at best, won't be any better than Edler or at least much better. Hedman is actually a lot like Edler. Both players have very high ceilings but they aren't consistently there. Both have the size and ability to play a mean physical brand of hockey but likely never will. Based on potential I would trade Luongo and Edler for Hedman plus Purcell type player. But factoring in the players as they are now and the likelihood of Edler and Hedman reaching their full potentials, I would seriously think hard before making that deal. The deal would be predicated on Hedman developing into the type of dominating #1 Dman originally projected of him and I'm not sure Hedman will get there.

[Uncle dans leg]

But do u feel it's still prison yard rape if it's Edler and Luongo for Hedman and someone like Purcell

I like Hedman and believe he'll develop into a very good Dman but it probably is a prison yard rape if that's the deal. Truth is Hedman, based on ability, is not worth Edler straight up. Hedman, based on potential, is likely worth much more than Edler. Hedman was projected as one of those Dman that came alone probably once every decade and you really can see why at times. He is already good defensively and doesn't have too many weaknesses.

I think Edler is a better Dman right now and there is a strong possbility that Hedman, at best, won't be any better than Edler or at least much better. Hedman is actually a lot like Edler. Both players have very high ceilings but they aren't consistently there. Both have the size and ability to play a mean physical brand of hockey but likely never will. Based on potential I would trade Luongo and Edler for Hedman plus Purcell type player. But factoring in the players as they are now and the likelihood of Edler and Hedman reaching their full potentials, I would seriously think hard before making that deal. The deal would be predicated on Hedman developing into the type of dominating #1 Dman originally projected of him and I'm not sure Hedman will get there.

Hedman is also 21 years old still, not to mention 6'6" and already 230lbs.
Our defense got pushed around pretty bad against LA. I would like to see us get bigger on the back end and although giving up Edler does hurt, adding that beef helps alot. That extra 3" and 15 pounds comes in handy when you're getting targeted on the walls like we were. I noticed how small Bieksa and Hamhius looked in this series for the first time and was thinking a bigger body could've helped out there.
In my opinion, our defense was a weakness against LA. We were getting pounded and this was why we were juggling the damn puck so bad. Vancouvers offense typically comes from quick ups to the forwards with speed but with our D shivering like they were, it was game over.

[Lancer]

But do u feel it's still prison yard rape if it's Edler and Luongo for Hedman and someone like Purcell

I like Hedman and believe he'll develop into a very good Dman but it probably is a prison yard rape if that's the deal. Truth is Hedman, based on ability, is not worth Edler straight up. Hedman, based on potential, is likely worth much more than Edler. Hedman was projected as one of those Dman that came alone probably once every decade and you really can see why at times. He is already good defensively and doesn't have too many weaknesses.

I think Edler is a better Dman right now and there is a strong possbility that Hedman, at best, won't be any better than Edler or at least much better. Hedman is actually a lot like Edler. Both players have very high ceilings but they aren't consistently there. Both have the size and ability to play a mean physical brand of hockey but likely never will. Based on potential I would trade Luongo and Edler for Hedman plus Purcell type player. But factoring in the players as they are now and the likelihood of Edler and Hedman reaching their full potentials, I would seriously think hard before making that deal. The deal would be predicated on Hedman developing into the type of dominating #1 Dman originally projected of him and I'm not sure Hedman will get there.[/quote]
Hedman is also 21 years old still, not to mention 6'6" and already 230lbs.
Our defense got pushed around pretty bad against LA. I would like to see us get bigger on the back end and although giving up Edler does hurt, adding that beef helps alot. That extra 3" and 15 pounds comes in handy when you're getting targeted on the walls like we were. I noticed how small Bieksa and Hamhius looked in this series for the first time and was thinking a bigger body could've helped out there.
In my opinion, our defense was a weakness against LA. We were getting pounded and this was why we were juggling the damn puck so bad. Vancouvers offense typically comes from quick ups to the forwards with speed but with our D shivering like they were, it was game over.[/quote]

I guess it depends on whether Gillis wants to trade for the now or for the future. If for the now, it's prison yard rape because despite the glimpses Hedman has shown thus far, it's still optimistic but uncertain potential Gillis would be buying. Hedman now < Edler now. If the trade is for the future, it looks more reasonable though still in the Hodgson for Kassian class of trade where only time will tell. Problem is, the team's window is now. Gillis makes that trade, he's accepting significant risk in the now on the reasonable hope for the future. Not a bad idea if you're dealing with the likes of a Booth or Bieksa but trading your #1 goalie and #1 defenceman? That's quite the gamble. If we're going to trade Edler (an option if they don't think he's going to get better in the playoffs), go for someone with more bite.

I hope Nate Thompson can be a part of the TB package.

Please no. We have enough 3rd and 4th liners already. He's got the look though.

my boilslaying comrade?

I leave the boils to my significant other - Lancet.

[dbr]

Vincent Lecavalier will retire a "Lightning."

As for Ted Purcell, he's certainly a player I'd like to see coming back - a more legitimate scoring line player than Chris Higgins with a really productive playoffs last season and apparently (I haven't watched him enough to say) with the playmaking ability to perhaps turn a line with a tunnel-visioned center and a dumb blonde winger into vastly less predictable offensive unit.

Personally, like tantalum I could see the return for Luongo being something along the lines of Purcell (ie. quality second liner with a year before UFA) plus a couple of good-but-not-great prospects and picks. I personally think that Luongo is worth more but I don't necessarily think the market will bear it out if he is moved.

As for what the Canucks need (a forward with a big fat contract if Farhan is to be believed) I do think this team has shown an inability to bust through and get goals in tight games, but I don't think you necessarily need a $7m player to address this - I think three dangerous lines is just as good an option as loading up one or two.

Put it this way, you can get right up against the cap with a $7m player that you're hoping will be able to overpower the league's best defenses, or you can spread scoring across three lines and hope that one of those lines is on the ice when your opponent makes a mistake. I think Boston showed last year that the latter approach works. As for the former, I'm sure it works too.. you just have to hope that your $7m guy is that good. Are Rick Nash or Vincent Lecavalier at this point?

[RoyalDude]

Edler for Hedman in a package deal is a sideways deal, in fact I would bet that Edler at his best is better than Hedman at his best. Hedman is still struggling to meet those lofty potentials he had tagged on him from the day he was drafted. That being said, Tampa is not trading defenseman, it's goaltending and defense they are desperate for, ie Carter Ashton for Keith Aulie. I just love how we are all giving up on Edler for his recent stumblings like he will never regain that great form. Reminds of how we were all throwing Bieksa under the bus when we were all trying desperately to trade him before Salo snapped his acchilles.

People seriously, a $7 million dollar centre in 32 year old Vinny Lecavalier is not coming here. Remember Gillis, "we want to get bigger, faster, YOUNGER!"

[dbr]

I don't know that it's a sideways deal Dude, although in 2012 Edler at his best probably is better than Hedman at his best. Hedman will one day be the better player in all likelihood.

What I find funny is the notion that we need to get off the 26 year old sinking ship that is Alex Edler, as though watching Hedman take six years to get to the same point Edler is now (in development, not necessarily in ability) isn't going to have a bunch of Canuck fans saying the exact same things they are about Eddie.

(Not that it ultimately matters what the fans are saying...)

[RoyalDude]

Hedman will one day be the better player in all likelihood.

There's that crystal ball again, where do you guys get those?

[Uncle dans leg]

Trading a very good Edler for a very good now Hedman isn't exactly a lateral move. Hedman has Pronger-esque attributes and has a higher potential ceiling than Edler. Not to mention he's 5 years younger and much, much bigger.

Edler is a very good player with more offensive prowess than Hedman yes but we need a more physical prescence on our blueline and Edler doesn't appear to bring that with any more consistency than a 21 year old Hedman.

The 2 are quite comparable and I like the move in that it adds what we need. You gotta give to get

[dbr]

"In all likelihood" the guy with a 4-5" height advantage over Edler (who is a big boy himself) and no real lack of mobility to go with it, who played in a first tier men's league before even being drafted, who is being used like a #1 defenseman (admittedly without the offense - yet) already and who is five years younger than Edler.. will one day be better.

I don't see what's so controversial about that.