Farhan's $0.05 - What about Luongo and Kesler to Carolina?

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: Farhan's $0.05 - What about Luongo and Kesler to Carolin

Postby Meds » Mon May 28, 2012 11:42 am

Farhan Lalji wrote:For example - if we're thinking Getzlaf from Anaheim, then maybe a guy like Jonas Hiller can be a part of that package (If Schneider and Kesler are going the other way).


Well I think that is one of the worst I've seen you suggest.

Getzlaf brings more on offense but quite a bit less on defense. Kesler is faster and has a better shot. Getzlaf is bigger and distributes more effectively. Kesler is also quite a bit better on faceoffs.

From what I've seen, Schneider is better than Hiller in every way. Hiller is also 4 years older.

The only way I make that trade is if it includes Booth and brings back Getzlaf AND Ryan.
User avatar
Meds
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2758
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Farhan's $0.05 - What about Luongo and Kesler to Carolin

Postby Farhan Lalji » Mon May 28, 2012 5:19 pm

Meds wrote:
Farhan Lalji wrote:For example - if we're thinking Getzlaf from Anaheim, then maybe a guy like Jonas Hiller can be a part of that package (If Schneider and Kesler are going the other way).


Well I think that is one of the worst I've seen you suggest.

Getzlaf brings more on offense but quite a bit less on defense. Kesler is faster and has a better shot. Getzlaf is bigger and distributes more effectively. Kesler is also quite a bit better on faceoffs.

From what I've seen, Schneider is better than Hiller in every way. Hiller is also 4 years older.

The only way I make that trade is if it includes Booth and brings back Getzlaf AND Ryan.


Like I said, I have no idea if my proposed deal is fair or not.............but if it isn't, then Anaheim could throw in a draft pick or another play to even out the odds.

I agree with you on your Getzlaf/Kesler comparison, but that is why I think a guy like Getzlaf would be a better fit for this team. Getzlaf's ability to distribute better would allow guys like Booth and Higgins to be a factor. Getzlaf might be quite a bit less on defense and faceoffs, but he's not a liability in either of those areas either. Furthermore - it becomes far less of an issue if guys like Pahlsson and Lapierre are the ones playing the shut down role anyways.

Schneider is infinitely better than Hiller......no question. Remember - I'm arguing from the perspective that if the Canucks want another legit #1 center that can get more out of linemates AND effectively replace the twins a few years down the road as the #1 pivot for the top line, then you have to "give" to "receive." Accept the downgrade in net if it means getting the upgrade at center.

One last thing about Hiller (or a goalie of that 'type'). Even if we're getting a veteran goalie, keep in mind that we still have Lack in the system..........and once Lack develops into the goalie that we think he'll become, then said veteran goalie becomes expendible.
Farhan Lalji
 

Re: Farhan's $0.05 - What about Luongo and Kesler to Carolin

Postby Farhan Lalji » Mon May 28, 2012 5:36 pm

Meds wrote:Farhan, how would you say the Canucks look on the ice when playing in front of Luongo as compared to when playing in front of Schneider?


Oh without question - the Canucks look more comfortable in front of Schneider. You and I have agreed on this in the past, and I'm still with you on this. Remember - I'm only arguing from the perspective that, "if the Canucks want to have organizational depth that is comparable to the LA Kings, etc., then perhaps we would have to consider trading BOTH Luongo and Schneider if it means accepting a slight downgrade in net........with the expectation that we acquire another blue chip defenseman and another #1 center that can successfully take over Henrik's spot in a few years."

I would say that they are far more comfortable with Schneider in net. Regardless of what they say in the press and media, the on-ice performance of the team indicates that they feel like Cory has their back rather than the team having to have Lou's back. I can't see why anyone in their right mind would want to remove a goaltender that has won the absolute confidence of the entire team and downgrade that position. Especially when Schneider can likely be re-signed at less than $4M for the immediate future. Look no further than Schneider's numbers in both regular season and playoffs this year. Sure he played a meager 3 games in the post-season, but he put up better numbers than Conn Smythe favorite Jonathan Quick.


I completely and wholeheartedly agree. To be honest, I would even go as far as saying that Cory Schneider is a better goaltender than both Jonathan Quick and Henrik Lundquist. I'm not even joking. I think Schneider will be a top 3 goalie in the league for many years to come.

My purpose/motivation behind this thread (other than trolling :P ), is to find a viable solution to the depth issue. For the last few weeks, posters such as Island Knucklehead and Royaldude have argued that the Canucks simply do not have much depth when compared to some other elite teams.........and I think they are right. Over the past few years, parity has only increased.....and I suspect that this trend will continue (meaning, that players and teams will be far more comparable with one another, which will lead to a greater dependence on having 4 solid lines and 3 solid defensive pairings........and LESS emphasis on "front loading" a certain strength......like Chicago and Anaheim are currently doing for instance).

My viewpoint is that trading only ONE of Schneider or Luongo will NOT solve our depth issue. It will certainly help, but my argument/viewpoint is why not make depth a MASSIVE strength of ours?.......which ensures that our team is elite in both the short term and long term?

Instead of trading Luongo for a bunch of kids that "might" pan out and "might" give us that much coveted organizational depth, why not go for a sure thing?

That is why I'm openly pondering the idea of upgrading Kesler at center (for a true #1 center that can make more effective use of Booth/Higgins), while also getting a guy like Victor Hedman out of Tampa Bay. For the next 12-18 months, we use a steady veteran as our #1 goalie and then transition to Eddie Lack when he is ready (and from the sounds of it, this guy could be every bit as good as Corey Schneider).

And as for the Ward vs Roloson matchup in 2006, well Ward won something that year......oh yeah the Conn Smythe, and Roloson probably would have won it if Edmonton had won because quite frankly neither team gets there without Ward and Rollie.


That's the thing though........neither goalie are, or were, truly elite Top 3 or even Top 5 goalies in the league (maybe Top 5 but I can't remember now). In Ward's case, he just played like one when it mattered most.......as did Dwayne Roloson. And that's all that really matters.

Remember back in 2003 when JS Giguerre was fucking brilliant when Anaheim went all the way to the finals? Look at how Jose Theodore almost singlehandedly carried Montreal.

It doesn't take an elite goalie to do that. Often times, it just takes a goalie to get hot at the right time.........and the chances of that increase ten-fold when the team in front is ridiculously dominant (ask Anti Niemi in 2010).
Farhan Lalji
 

Re: Farhan's $0.05 - What about Luongo and Kesler to Carolin

Postby Island Nucklehead » Mon May 28, 2012 7:15 pm

Farhan Lalji wrote:My purpose/motivation behind this thread (other than trolling :P ), is to find a viable solution to the depth issue. For the last few weeks, posters such as Island Knucklehead and Royaldude have argued that the Canucks simply do not have much depth when compared to some other elite teams.........and I think they are right. Over the past few years, parity has only increased.....and I suspect that this trend will continue (meaning, that players and teams will be far more comparable with one another, which will lead to a greater dependence on having 4 solid lines and 3 solid defensive pairings........and LESS emphasis on "front loading" a certain strength......like Chicago and Anaheim are currently doing for instance).


I think what the Canucks have done is set themselves up so they have no glaring weaknesses. They should have star power (Sedins, Kesler) up front. They should have a great supporting cast (Burrows, Booth, Higgins). They should have guys that could step up (Hansen, Raymond). They should have quality shut down ability (Pahlsson, Lappy, Manny). They should have mobile, puck-moving D that can skate or pass the puck out of trouble. They should have star-calibre goaltending every night. A lot of these things didn't materialize this season at all, and especially down the stretch.

However, I think we saw what they Canucks are capable of doing last season. This team certainly has the horses to go all the way... when all systems go. Take out a Sedin, make Hamhuis think like Bieksa, have Edler go full-retard, or remove our goalie (or have Luongo have an off-night) and we come to a halt very quick. We don't have the horses to out-score teams every game. But we're not the Flyers where they HAVE to outscore teams every game because they have weak goalies. Balance.

The Canucks ran into an 8th seed that's not a true 8th seed. They also failed themselves. They also missed their top scorer to start, and obviously wasn't totally right when he came back. Their second line centre was obviously crippled. Their "D" wasn't making the smart, safe play, or would hang onto the puck too long and negate their speed advantage vs. LA's slower forwards. The forwards couldn't be bothered to go to war with bigger wingers in support. Our secondary scoring was non-existant, due to decreased ability (Raymond), injury (Kesler), and unsure role and predictable play (Booth).

I think it's just a case of bad timing and opponent. We saw what happened when the team limped into Boston in the finals. We also saw what happened when they played the game they wanted to vs. San Jose. The Canucks have won a lot of games over the past two seasons, because they can win almost any style of game. Unfortunately, all the factors going against them down the stretch and into the playoffs, they couldn't get it done.

Ultimately, the Luongo trade SHOULD bring us back either a quality prospect/pick to help in the long-run, or an established impact player that will help immediately. That might be the only thing required to get this team that extra gear back, especially with the parity league-wide.
User avatar
Island Nucklehead
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 3506
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm

Re: Farhan's $0.05 - What about Luongo and Kesler to Carolin

Postby Meds » Tue May 29, 2012 11:41 am

Farhan Lalji wrote:Oh without question - the Canucks look more comfortable in front of Schneider. You and I have agreed on this in the past, and I'm still with you on this. Remember - I'm only arguing from the perspective that, "if the Canucks want to have organizational depth that is comparable to the LA Kings, etc., then perhaps we would have to consider trading BOTH Luongo and Schneider if it means accepting a slight downgrade in net........with the expectation that we acquire another blue chip defenseman and another #1 center that can successfully take over Henrik's spot in a few years."


Well first of all, I don't think that the Kings have more organizational depth than the Canucks do. I think they were simply coached to play a system that is designed to shutdown systems like ours. I also think that Schnedier would have won at least one of the games in Vancouver, and going into LA tied 1-1 would have made for a completely different series. I also think that some of our go-to players played at a lower level than they are capable of, whereas the Kings players all played to, or above, expectations. There were also brain farts by several players that cost us the series, some of this is due to the players themselves, and some of it is due to the system. LA plays a VERY simply game. Defense first, forecheck HARD, make short easy passes, and worry about the offense when it presents itself. The Canucks play a puck-control game that worries more about getting and keeping the puck to control the game. This means more to think about on the ice for the players which, in turn, will invariably lead to a few more mistakes under pressure. Edler and Hamhuis single handedly cost the Canucks that series. Edler was directly responsible for 3 of LA's game winners, and Hamhuis coughed up the puck that resulted in the series ending goal. So two of our key defenseman screwed up, none of LA's players screwed up.

Farhan wrote:I completely and wholeheartedly agree. To be honest, I would even go as far as saying that Cory Schneider is a better goaltender than both Jonathan Quick and Henrik Lundquist. I'm not even joking. I think Schneider will be a top 3 goalie in the league for many years to come.


So why would ANYONE even consider trading away a guy like that? Lack has upside, but to bank on any player rounding into form and developing into a top 3 goaltender is ridiculously foolish. I don't think any of us actually expected Schneider to develop to the point he is at now. I fully hoped that he would become a reliable top 15 guy in his prime, but never did I see him out-dueling the best in the league at only 26 years of age, and to have put up consistent numbers like that in 2 seasons.....that's amazing. It's just asinine to consider parting ways with a guy who looks to have a future like his.

Farhan wrote:My viewpoint is that trading only ONE of Schneider or Luongo will NOT solve our depth issue. It will certainly help, but my argument/viewpoint is why not make depth a MASSIVE strength of ours?.......which ensures that our team is elite in both the short term and long term?

Instead of trading Luongo for a bunch of kids that "might" pan out and "might" give us that much coveted organizational depth, why not go for a sure thing?


Well I don't think that LA was as deep as us in the talent pool. Kopitar, Brown, Richards, Carter, Doughty, and Quick. Good core, but compared to Sedin, Sedin, Kesler, Burrows, Hamhuis, Bieksa, Edler, Luongo, and Schneider, I think the edge is Vancouver's. The difference was the intensity with which LA played versus what Vancouver brought to the ice. The regular season spoke for itself IMO. The depth simply didn't pay off because it was utilized and it didn't show up.

As for the "bunch of kids".....well I think the plan has to be to go that way and then use some of those kids, an established player or two, and go hard after a couple of FA's. I'm really high on Parise and Weber.

I just can't see Weber wanting to stay in Nashville, especially if Suter leaves, so in that case Nashville has to be open to offers for his rights rather than sink another $7+M into him for just a single year I think that Edler, some young talent and a 1st round pick might just secure those rights.

Parise sounds like he's looking at testing the market, if the Devils win then his value sky rockets and there is also a chance he'll stick around and sign with Jersey again. I think he'll be looking to something close to the same money that Kovalchuk got, and since it would be tough for the Devils to offer that to him considering how many players they have entering unrestriced free agency this year, and then next year again. As of now the Devils only have 4 players signed beyond next season, and out of all their players heading for free agency only 3 are restricted.

With Lou's contract gone and dealing away a few mil in salary, the Canucks could go after some serious talent this year and still leave room to re-sign Burrows, Lap, and HIggins, next year if they so desired. I can see this being done without losing Schneider.

Farhan wrote:That is why I'm openly pondering the idea of upgrading Kesler at center (for a true #1 center that can make more effective use of Booth/Higgins), while also getting a guy like Victor Hedman out of Tampa Bay. For the next 12-18 months, we use a steady veteran as our #1 goalie and then transition to Eddie Lack when he is ready (and from the sounds of it, this guy could be every bit as good as Corey Schneider).


I'm open to dealing Kesler as well if it sets us up for the future after Sedin declines/retires. The time to move him is now too, because next year he has a NTC that goes into effect.

I'm also open to looking at Schroeder this year and maybe taking the team to a 1-2A-2B-3 line setup where Kesler matches against top talent in a shutdown capactiy and also gets his regular shift on the top PP unit. It means that Kesler suits up with Higgins and Hansen, while Schroeder gets Booth and [insert new player]. Kesler's line will get top minutes just by matching up against the opponent's top line, and between that afore mentioned trio they will get their points and really make the other team's top scoring line work to get anywhere.

IF Gillis could land Parise though, then Booth becomes expendable and Kesler ends up with a winger who could distribute the puck and we'd see a balanced 2nd line with Kesler at center.
[/quote]


Farhan wrote:That's the thing though........neither goalie are, or were, truly elite Top 3 or even Top 5 goalies in the league (maybe Top 5 but I can't remember now). In Ward's case, he just played like one when it mattered most.......as did Dwayne Roloson. And that's all that really matters.

Remember back in 2003 when JS Giguerre was fucking brilliant when Anaheim went all the way to the finals? Look at how Jose Theodore almost singlehandedly carried Montreal.

It doesn't take an elite goalie to do that. Often times, it just takes a goalie to get hot at the right time.........and the chances of that increase ten-fold when the team in front is ridiculously dominant (ask Anti Niemi in 2010).


And then remember what happened to those teams the following seasons when said goalies returned to earth.....
User avatar
Meds
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2758
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Previous

Return to Canucks Corner Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], qubikal and 5 guests

cron