Vancouver Canucks Messageboard

MG may have inherited a good core but I don't recall Burke/Nonis signing most if not all of the core players to below market value deals, or fostering a winning atmosphere for that matter.

GMMG has built an atmosphere that the players don't want to leave save for Ehrhoff and some of the aging vets like Ohlund and Salo that wanted the last big payday. Even Ballard who has every fucking reason to have asked for a trade many times over has elected to stay.

Todd Bersnoozi wrote:I agree with Big Tuna on this one. @ the beginning of the season, I would of said Lou would have been a huge upgrade over Reimer, but this season Reimer took a big step forward. Stats don't lie, this is a results orientated business and what have u done for me lately? This season alone, Reimer is having a better year over Lou.

Reimer - 24gp, 0.919 sv%, 14-5
Lou - 16gp, 0.904 sv%, 7-4

Luongo has 16 GP, it's ridiculous to try to draw meaningful conclusions from his stats at this point. Nevermind that he got lit up for 8 goals in one game when the team quit in front of him (and the coach left him in, not something you see often in this league), even with that performance his even strength save percentage is just .004 behind Reimer (.919 and .923) and that statistic has far more value when evaluating a goaltender.

Of course, it's all moot because no statistic has much value when you're talking about 16 GP.

okcanuck wrote:

Topper wrote:Go Blue Jays

Toronto is such a fucked-up place, even a Cy Young winner cant win for them.

They would have if Luo was catching

Why argue with morons. Luo didn't get sentenced to hockey banishment in Toronto and we'll get better players back in the summer than the ridiculous crap that they say MG was willing to accept. When he went out of his way to accommodate a player, he forget his job is to manage a team. I think MG looked like a tool trying to help Luo. He embarrassed himself so perhaps he has learned he is supposed to work for the Canucks. If he made that trade he should have been fired.

Blob Mckenzie wrote:

If anyone thinks Lu would be a backup in TO that person is a fucking idiot.

Reimer is their #1 as of now.. Just as Schneider is our #1.. Lu is now a backup. So?
Reimer is younger and will only get better..

Tiger wrote:Blob Mckenzie wrote:

If anyone thinks Lu would be a backup in TO that person is a fucking idiot.

Reimer is their #1 as of now.. Just as Schneider is our #1.. Lu is now a backup. So?
Reimer is younger and will only get better..

So is Bryzgalov. So is Kiprusoff. So is Markstrom. So is Nabokov. So is Dubnyk. That's a silly point to make, Tiger. Just because a goalie is starting doesn't mean he's a number 1 goalie. Luongo would be a starter above any of these guys, and he'd certainly start in Toronto if he was there.

There is also no guarantee Reimer will get any better. Steve Mason sure didn't. Jimmy Howard is up and down and hasnt taken that big next step. How's Semyon Varlamov doing?? Judging the career arc of goalies based on one or 1/2 seasons is incredibly risky. This is what makes guys like Luongo, Lundvist, Brodeur, Miller etc. so valuable. They are consistently good. leaves fans might find that out over a full 82 games...

Granted, Lu's rant post-deadline was emotionally-driven but it's fruit for thought. What if there was a way to re-negotiate a contract in order to enhance player mobility or team-building in a salary cap era?

The NFL allows teams to re-negotiate contracts. Mind you there are a lot of things about the NFL's CBA that may not translate well, but it's worth examination. Imagine a system where certain players and teams - by mutual consent - agree to re-negotiate existing contracts.

The league already does this to an extent with extending existing contracts and no-move/no-trade clause negotiation and waiving. The player agents and Russian players may balk at such a measure perhaps cutting into their paydays, but you look at some of the veteran players on long-term contracts and ask them if they wouldn't want access to a measure which would help move them to a contender or at least a better team. What would a guy like Luongo, Iginla, Weber or even Crosby down the road if things fall to crap for the team or a teammate screws his girlfriend. What guy wouldn't want to increase his mobility even if it meant a bit of a haircut after the millions they made?

It may be too radical an idea for it to be considered an amendment to the current CBA, and Buttman isn't interested in anything but punishing those clubs who signed these long-term deals, but at least it would give both clubs and players more choices in how to build teams and careers in a salary cap world.

Lancer wrote: It may be too radical an idea for it to be considered an amendment to the current CBA, and Buttman isn't interested in anything but punishing those clubs who signed these long-term deals, but at least it would give both clubs and players more choices in how to build teams and careers in a salary cap world.

This would actually be interesting and something they probably should have worked out with the new CBA.

Instead of penalizing teams that signed players to long term deals, that fell within the rules of the previous CBA I might add, they should allow these deals to be renegotiated upon mutual agreement. This way teams won't be penalized with a possible cap recapture at the tail end of the contracts.

I get that the NHL didn't want these Cap circumventing contracts any longer but I still don't understand how you can punish teams for contracts that were perfectly acceptable, signed and approved by the NHL under the previous CBA.

Aaronp18 wrote:

Lancer wrote: It may be too radical an idea for it to be considered an amendment to the current CBA, and Buttman isn't interested in anything but punishing those clubs who signed these long-term deals, but at least it would give both clubs and players more choices in how to build teams and careers in a salary cap world.

This would actually be interesting and something they probably should have worked out with the new CBA.

Instead of penalizing teams that signed players to long term deals, that fell within the rules of the previous CBA I might add, they should allow these deals to be renegotiated upon mutual agreement. This way teams won't be penalized with a possible cap recapture at the tail end of the contracts.

I get that the NHL didn't want these Cap circumventing contracts any longer but I still don't understand how you can punish teams for contracts that were perfectly acceptable, signed and approved by the NHL under the previous CBA.

Yeah, they did that amendment so vets like Gomez could go play again this year. Should allow one per team.

Why didn't Gillis get on this? Oh yeah, he probably brought it up and BB & Nonutz shot it down...

It is hard to allow a team to re-negotiate if they have already had the luxury of the contract lowering the cap for previous years. If they did that they would still need some type of cap recapture to penalize the Canucks who paid Luongo 10 million but only had a cap of 5.3. Or numbers there abouts.

The easy answer was to not give into the pressure of a few disingenuous boobs and leave it alone. All of these contracts should have been grandfathered in.

If the NHLPA is like anything like most other unions it would never agree to allowing renegotiating contracts. Contracts set in stone are the foundation of any CBA. opening one up would be like opening a can of worms...

Hockey Widow wrote: The easy answer was to not give into the pressure of a few disingenuous boobs and leave it alone. All of these contracts should have been grandfathered in.

Yeah, this is what I figured they would do.

But no, like always the biggest boobs attract all the attention and rules are changed.

Blob Mckenzie wrote:Roy has averaged 60 + points a season while Bozak has averaged 40 + points a season. Roy is a much better player.


If anyone thinks Lu would be a backup in TO that person is a fucking idiot.

Roy's 60 point average is from the early part of his career.

Island Nucklehead wrote:

Tiger wrote:Blob Mckenzie wrote:

If anyone thinks Lu would be a backup in TO that person is a fucking idiot.

Reimer is their #1 as of now.. Just as Schneider is our #1.. Lu is now a backup. So?
Reimer is younger and will only get better..

So is Bryzgalov. So is Kiprusoff. So is Markstrom. So is Nabokov. So is Dubnyk. That's a silly point to make, Tiger. Just because a goalie is starting doesn't mean he's a number 1 goalie. Luongo would be a starter above any of these guys, and he'd certainly start in Toronto if he was there.

There is also no guarantee Reimer will get any better. Steve Mason sure didn't. Jimmy Howard is up and down and hasnt taken that big next step. How's Semyon Varlamov doing?? Judging the career arc of goalies based on one or 1/2 seasons is incredibly risky. This is what makes guys like Luongo, Lundvist, Brodeur, Miller etc. so valuable. They are consistently good. leaves fans might find that out over a full 82 games...

So by your thoughts Schneider should not be #1 on the Canucks?? he has never played a full season as a starter yet ..

BigTuna wrote:Mindless blathering--- look at me...I'm a Leaf Blower

Isn't there enough Leaf fans anymore to complete the Nasim Kadri Circle Jerk over at Leafsnation? Still bitter that Bobandy couldn't close the deal on an NHL goalie at the deadline? Still deluded into thinking the reason he was knocking on other teams doors all deadline looking for real goaltending is because he was trying to get revenge? Still buying his cheeseburger induced rhetoric that he's confident in whatcha got?
And here you are..."Roys numbers are from early in his career"!

Wicked dig Tuna