Island Nucklehead wrote:Kind of like Anaheim, who had Pronger and Niedermayer, AND a hot rookie goalie (as well as a high-priced backup), and still lost in the same round as we did.
To a team that decided to spend its money on offense rather than goaltending.
This does make for an interesting debate. Think it is quite a bit more complex than just the allocation of funds though. A large part of the equation is opportunity. For the most part we haven't drafted the players which afford us the opportunity of choosing to spend money on forwards or defense rather than goaltending nor is there a whole lot of variety in the upcoming UFA's. If it were as simple as spending money on Luongo(elite) and average forward versus spending money on Crosby, Malkin, Ovechkin, Lecavlier, Datsyuk etc. (elite) and average goaltender, I might tend toward the latter. (just to be clear I consider a current "average goaltender" to be competent, in other words un-cloutier-like) But that said, we have access to Luongo (well so long as he wants to resign) but no access to players of the other calibre. Hossa may be the one exception (gaborik doesn't count given his injury propensity) but I don't think he is as an elite a player as is Luongo and given his position on the market, he will have an amazing amount of bargaining power to jack his price. So to make a long story short, we have the ability to spend money on an elite tender, not so much on an elite offense. Should we therefore not spend the money on Luongo, trade him for prospects and potential and hope that we will be able to use the money saved on worthwhile players? Big risk, in my opinion.
There is always a breaking point though, no matter how good Luongo is, we can't win without having a decent offense and a decent defense. So the question is what price is the breaking point for the Canucks, what is too much to pay Luongo? Whatever that number is, if he demands it, you have to trade him and cut your losses.
Invincibility lies in oneself.
Vincibility lies in the enemy.
- Sun Tzu