Luongo will Waive NTC If Asked To

[RoyalDude]

RD

I think we got the third round pick for taking Reinprecht off Florida's hands, not Booth. Florida wanted to be out from under paying him in the minors and it cost them the 3rd.

So is the gong show over?

Um, disagree with ya there. Why even take Reinprecht in the first place. He was stuffed down in the minors all year in our organization as well. An expensive minor league player? For the all important 3rd round pick? It's a cumulative affect starting with Booth, during the process of the negotiation. Gillis fell in love with Booth and Tallon tacked on extra's for wanting him, even though Tallon wanted to wash his hands of Booth unbeknown to Gillis, basically saying "well if you want Booth, you will have to take Reinprecht" Gillis replies, "OK, but give us your 3rd round pick and deal is done". Tallon just completely bamboozled Gillis here. I think the 3rd round pick was a volley from Gillis to Tallon for Tallon saying if you want Booth, you must take Reinprecht. Makes sense, don't it?

[Orcasfan]

Farhan, Nash ain't bringing us to Lord Stanley. And I disagree about our D core, we have decent No. 2 defenseman but lack a serious top quality D-man. Not saying Erhoff was a serious Norris contender but his departure has a bit to do with our inability to score. When he was here, our D was a massive part of our Offense.

Also, think we need way more quality depth in our Top 3 forward lines than just adding a top scorer to our 2nd line. I like to use the model of what the Flyers did in the off-season. They have fantastic depth on their top 3 lines, Giroux, Hartnell, Simmonds, Couturier, Schenn, Briere, Voracek, Read, Van Reimsdyk. That's not counting Jagr. So that's 10 players. That's the kind of offensive depth I love, the sort of hockey I am used to around here. Do you put Pahlsson, Lappiere, Higgins, Booth, Raymond, Malhotra, Hansen on par with those 10 when it comes to offensive skill? I don't think so. That comparison is quite laughable and embarrassing when you compare our top 3 lines to theirs. The Sedins and Kesler and Burrows are the only presence in our forward group that you could lump in with those 10 forwards from Philly when it comes to creating offense in which you, I and everyone else knows we sorely lack. So, if you factor in the fact that Gillis LOVES Offense as he kept saying it and did not mince words on his thoughts regarding defensive hockey, you have to imagine that Gillis feels that our forward group could use some serious depth other than just adding one super expensive puck hogging forward that we can't afford, to play with two other puck hogging blind forwards in Booth and Kesler on the 2nd line. Please Farhan my friend, tell me, who does the passing out of those 3? Who has the Hank Sedin like vision of those 3 to make plays? None.

RD, you hit the proverbial nail! I can't believe how often I heard the hype this year about the Canucks' "depth"...compared to who? As you say, they certainly do not come close to a team like Phillie. But, the Flyers have been building this team for several years. And being patient with their young prospects (hello Giroux!). And, not to mention, brilliant trading! That's the kind of depth I want to see on this team. So, bye-bye to Raymond, Pahlsson and maybe Ballard. And,of course, Luo. Higgins should be on the 3rd line - he is not a real 2nd liner. I'll wait till pre-season to pass judgment on Booth!

And to put all your eggs into one basket (like Farhan suggests) by going for that one superstar is a huge mistake. I don't believe that this team is only in need of that big scorer to get them to a SCF again. What about the chance of injury? Or just an off year for the star? Of course the team needs to continue getting talented prospects. They want to stay competitive, after all. If the team starts heading into the tank (hello '95), no more sell-outs, and Aquaman sure would not like that!

[Farhan Lalji]

I don't believe that this team is only in need of that big scorer to get them to a SCF again. What about the chance of injury? Or just an off year for the star? Of course the team needs to continue getting talented prospects.

You don't believe that a team that has won two back-to-back Presidents' trophies and went to Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals in the year prior is quite possibly one piece away from making a SCF run?

The Canucks this year looked jaded in the playoffs and so they need their rest. This off-season will do them some good perhaps but lets make no mistake about it: This team is CLOSE, and this IS the time to bring in that one player that can make the difference. Yeah - LA beat us in 5 but a few more goals our way, combined with some well rested players with that extra gear in them, could spell an entirely different story.

Playing the "what if" game is for cowards. Anything can happen obviously. Sidney Crosby and Daniel Sedin can tell you that.

What if the Canucks trade for a bunch of prospects and these prospects get attacked by a half-tiger half lion (a Liger!) on the way here. THEN WHAT?!?!!?

Or using your game of "what if", "what if" the Canucks trade Kesler (a la Flyer style for what they did with Mike Richards) for depth players and these depth players don't pan out? If we're going to play the "what if" game, we can't just use it for one scenario and ignore it for another scenario.

[RoyalDude]

I don't believe that this team is only in need of that big scorer to get them to a SCF again. What about the chance of injury? Or just an off year for the star? Of course the team needs to continue getting talented prospects.

You don't believe that a team that has won two back-to-back Presidents' trophies and went to Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals in the year prior is quite possibly one piece away from making a SCF run?

The Canucks this year looked jaded in the playoffs and so they need their rest. This off-season will do them some good perhaps but lets make no mistake about it: This team is CLOSE, and this IS the time to bring in that one player that can make the difference. Yeah - LA beat us in 5 but a few more goals our way, combined with some well rested players with that extra gear in them, could spell an entirely different story.

Playing the "what if" game is for cowards. Anything can happen obviously. Sidney Crosby and Daniel Sedin can tell you that.

What if the Canucks trade for a bunch of prospects and these prospects get attacked by a half-tiger half lion (a Liger!) on the way here. THEN WHAT?!?!!?

Or using your game of "what if", "what if" the Canucks trade Kesler (a la Flyer style for what they did with Mike Richards) for depth players and these depth players don't pan out? If we're going to play the "what if" game, we can't just use it for one scenario and ignore it for another scenario.

Farhan, the team regressed from last season to this. How is getting knocked out of the first round in just 5 games not enough evidence that something is a foul. The Flyers experienced the exact same regression before us in which they went out and did an amazing job at righting the ship that following summer, by creating 'depth' at the forward position. They already possessed a quality D-group. How in that do you come to the conclusion that we are 1 player away? We are many players away my friend. On Defense we need another premier D-man, we need a quality 2nd line and a 3rd line. Kesler is our only worthy 2nd line player and puhlllllease do not mention Booth. We got loads of 4th line options, a plethora of stone hand 4th line players to choose from, but between the 1st line and 4th line we suck massive and simply do not compare in that department to the remaining teams in the playoffs, that is, unless you consider Higgins, Hansen, Pahlsson, Lappiere, Malhotra, quality 3rd line players, please excuse me while I 'BARF'. There is a serious drop off in effective high end talent after the Sedins, Kesler and Burrows to the remaining group of forwards. You do not see this with the remaining 8 teams in the playoffs. When you look at the Flyers 12 forwards, 11 of them of which are Giroux, Read, Van Reimsdyk, Jagr, Briere, Schenn, Couturier, Wellwood, Voraceck, Simmonds and Hartnell ask yourself, why in gods name do we have 3 shut down centres in Malhotra, Lapierre and Pahlsson when in fact Kesler himself is considered a shut down centre? Who of those 11 forwards for the Flyers is doing the shutting down? I tell you who, none, they play defense with offense my friend, something we used to do, a full on 4 line arsenal of offensive attacking.

Ask yourself this, do you think we could have used Grabners 20 goals this year and Hodgson's 19 goals this year in the playoffs to help propel our scoring on the 2nd and 3rd lines in which we were completely void of? Or are you still loving Ballard and Kassian?

[Meds]

I don't believe that this team is only in need of that big scorer to get them to a SCF again. What about the chance of injury? Or just an off year for the star? Of course the team needs to continue getting talented prospects.

You don't believe that a team that has won two back-to-back Presidents' trophies and went to Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals in the year prior is quite possibly one piece away from making a SCF run?

The Canucks this year looked jaded in the playoffs and so they need their rest. This off-season will do them some good perhaps but lets make no mistake about it: This team is CLOSE, and this IS the time to bring in that one player that can make the difference. Yeah - LA beat us in 5 but a few more goals our way, combined with some well rested players with that extra gear in them, could spell an entirely different story.

Playing the "what if" game is for cowards. Anything can happen obviously. Sidney Crosby and Daniel Sedin can tell you that.

What if the Canucks trade for a bunch of prospects and these prospects get attacked by a half-tiger half lion (a Liger!) on the way here. THEN WHAT?!?!!?

Or using your game of "what if", "what if" the Canucks trade Kesler (a la Flyer style for what they did with Mike Richards) for depth players and these depth players don't pan out? If we're going to play the "what if" game, we can't just use it for one scenario and ignore it for another scenario.

Farhan, the team regressed from last season to this. How is getting knocked out of the first round in just 5 games not enough evidence that something is a foul. The Flyers experienced the exact same regression before us in which they went out and did an amazing job at righting the ship that following summer, by creating 'depth' at the forward position. They already possessed a quality D-group. How in that do you come to the conclusion that we are 1 player away? We are many players away my friend. On Defense we need another premier D-man, we need a quality 2nd line and a 3rd line. Kesler is our only worthy 2nd line player and puhlllllease do not mention Booth. We got loads of 4th line options, a plethora of stone hand 4th line players to choose from, but between the 1st line and 4th line we suck massive and simply do not compare in that department to the remaining teams in the playoffs, that is, unless you consider Higgins, Hansen, Pahlsson, Lappiere, Malhotra, quality 3rd line players, please excuse me while I 'BARF'. There is a serious drop off in effective high end talent after the Sedins, Kesler and Burrows to the remaining group of forwards. You do not see this with the remaining 8 teams in the playoffs. When you look at the Flyers 12 forwards, 11 of them of which are Giroux, Read, Van Reimsdyk, Jagr, Briere, Schenn, Couturier, Wellwood, Voraceck, Simmonds and Hartnell ask yourself, why in gods name do we have 3 shut down centres in Malhotra, Lapierre and Pahlsson when in fact Kesler himself is considered a shut down centre? Who of those 11 forwards for the Flyers is doing the shutting down? I tell you who, none, they play defense with offense my friend, something we used to do, a full on 4 line arsenal of offensive attacking.

Ask yourself this, do you think we could have used Grabners 20 goals this year and Hodgson's 19 goals this year in the playoffs to help propel our scoring on the 2nd and 3rd lines in which we were completely void of? Or are you still loving Ballard and Kassian?

We are not MANY players away here RD. There are some players that need replacing, there are some players that need to be moved. Getting rid of 1 of our 4 (#2-3) dmen and replacing him with a solid #1 dman is the first step. Finding a winger who will distribute and make our second line a balanced threat is next. Getting some decent skill on our 3rd line that can actually finish a rush at times comes in 3rd. A coach that can effectively utilize every piece of the puzzle has to be in the top 5. Putting some playable nasty on the blueline ranks up there too.

[Farhan Lalji]

Farhan, the team regressed from last season to this. How is getting knocked out of the first round in just 5 games not enough evidence that something is a foul.

Boston, Pitsburgh, and a whole slew of good teams were bounced in the first round this year? Should they also go on some hardcore penis-on-penis rebuilding scheme? OR - should they acknowledge that fact that they're still pretty good....and might need to make a few minor changes? Or - just get some rest?

The Canucks are still a great team. They just seemed tired......perhaps due to the fact that they've been playing constant hockey for almost two years. Lets atleast give them a chance to see what type of effect having a 4+ month rest will do.

How in that do you come to the conclusion that we are 1 player away? We are many players away my friend.

The fact that we've won back-to-back Presidents trophies, had a run to Game 7 of the Stanley Cup, and had some solid success this year despite the fact that it was obvious that Kesler and Raymond weren't their true selves......due to a lack of training from this past summer. Am I right? Maybe. Am I wrong? Maybe. All I know is that this core is still pretty close to being good. Their goaltending, whether it's with Schneider or Lou, is top notch. Their team defense is pretty damn good, and their offense has potential to be as good as it once was if they just add that final missing piece.

On Defense we need another premier D-man, we need a quality 2nd line and a 3rd line. Kesler is our only worthy 2nd line player and puhlllllease do not mention Booth.

Ok - so we bring in Nash and our 2nd line is taken care. You'll either have Sedin-Sedin-Nash on the first line, followed by Higgins-Kesler-Booth on the 2nd line (remember, it's a healthy Kesler), and you'll have Burrows-Lapierre and either Raymond (a well rested Raymond) or Kassian as the winger.

I'll disagree with you that the Canucks need a premiere defenseman. We don't in my opinion. The Canucks have been a great team all these years without a premiere d-man. Our defense has been solid largely because

1) We've always had 5-6 solid defensemen that were worthy of playing top 4.
2) A commitment to team defense

In the defense's case (assuming we package Schneider, Edler, and a pick for Nash), we'd still have......

-Hamhuis
-Bieksa
-Ballard
-Tanev
-Salo (sign him for one more year - protected minutes)
-Gragnani (should be much better next year).

We can also trade one, or even two of the following forwards to get depth on defense if necessary: Hansen, Booth, Higgins, Burrows, or Lapierre. That way - even without an elite defenseman, the Canucks still ensure that they have 5-6 defensemen that are worthy of playing top 4 incase of injuries.

We got loads of 4th line options, a plethora of stone hand 4th line players to choose from, but between the 1st line and 4th line we suck massive and simply do not compare in that department to the remaining teams in the playoffs, that is, unless you consider Higgins, Hansen, Pahlsson, Lappiere, Malhotra, quality 3rd line players, please excuse me while I 'BARF'. There is a serious drop off in effective high end talent after the Sedins, Kesler and Burrows to the remaining group of forwards. You do not see this with the remaining 8 teams in the playoffs. When you look at the Flyers 12 forwards, 11 of them of which are Giroux, Read, Van Reimsdyk, Jagr, Briere, Schenn, Couturier, Wellwood, Voraceck, Simmonds and Hartnell ask yourself, why in gods name do we have 3 shut down centres in Malhotra, Lapierre and Pahlsson when in fact Kesler himself is considered a shut down centre? Who of those 11 forwards for the Flyhers is doing the shutting down? I tell you who, none, they play defense with offense my friend, something we used to do, a full on 4 line arsenal of offensive attacking.

Ask yourself this, do you think we could have used Grabners 20 goals this year and Hodgson's 19 goals this year to help propel our scoring on the 2nd and 3rd lines? Or are you still loving Ballard and Kassian?

I'm with you on all of the above (i.e. I was against the Hodgson deal as much as you were and if we were going to trade Hodgson, I think it was STUPID AS FUCK to trade Hodgson for two very green prospects......at this juncture in the Canucks' timeline).

As far as the "drop off" goes, I think a healthy Kesler would be able to bring out the best in guys like Higgins and Booth. Last year and the year before - guys like Raymond, Samuelson, and even Grabner benefited from playing alongside Kesler and so I don't see why the same couldn't happen. Earlier this season, Higgins-Kesler-Booth also displayed some great chemistry.

If you bring in Nash, you can create a mega line with him and the twins, or you can use him with Kesler (and I know you have issues with Nash playing with Kesler, but fuck...........if Higgins-Kesler-Booth was pretty good earlier in the year, then I see no reason why Nash replacing Booth on that line wouldn't work out).

On the new 3rd line, you could have any combination of Pahlsson, Lapierre, Burrows, Kassian, Raymond, or Hansen. 1 or 2 of these players can be traded to make up for the loss of Edler on defense (we won't get a player of Edler's calibre and potential, but we could easily get a guy that would not look out of place playing on the 2nd pairing as our #3 or #4 defenseman. Long story short - the Canucks maintain their depth on defense.

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows (or Booth or Nash)
Higgins-Kesler-Nash (or Booth, or Burrows)
Raymond-Pahlsson-Lapierre (or Burrows or Hansen).
Weisse-Bitz-Kassian

(Hansen and/or Burrows can be used to trade for defensemen.....or again, any combination of Lapierre, Burrows, Hansen, Kassian, Higgins, Booth, etc.). Personally - I think the Canucks are ok if they keep Pahlsson and Lapierre down the middle. Hansen is also a great defensive player. Higgins, Booth, and/or Burrows could be used to trade for an extra #3/#4 defenseman.

I am also a fan of Philadelphia's abundance of talent up front, but lets not start sucking their dicks before they actually make a run to the cup.....or win the cup. The amount of goals they gave up against Pitsburgh was downright embarrassing. There are plenty of ways to skin a cat. The Canucks don't have to have the depth of a team like the Flyers up front, but they can have a far greater top end talent.

[Orcasfan]

Diito, RD...though I'm not sold on how much difference Cody would have made (I can't see him winning too many puck battles with those LA forwards!). And I think Grabner would have run to avoid Dustin Brown's hits! So, how do we go about acquiring one one two real 2nd liners and a 3rd line C? Not to mention a top 4 right side D?

Do you think Tampa would part with Purcell as part of a deal for Luo? Or how about Tyler Bozak from the Laffs (3rd C)? I think it's not a stretch for GM's wanting quality, dependable goal-keeping!

[TDA Rum]

Gillis M.O is to identify the players they want from other teams and that is what he will trade for, otherwise he won't make the trade.... he won't take on bad contracts or players he doesn't want to make a trade.... so whichever goalie he does trade, he will get exactly what he wants or he won't make the trade...

[CFP!]

Gillis M.O is to identify the players they want from other teams and that is what he will trade for, otherwise he won't make the trade.... he won't take on bad contracts or players he doesn't want to make a trade.... so whichever goalie he does trade, he will get exactly what he wants or he won't make the trade...

So you mean we wont trade for Nash and put him on the second line with Kesler?

[Farhan Lalji]

Gillis M.O is to identify the players they want from other teams and that is what he will trade for, otherwise he won't make the trade.... he won't take on bad contracts or players he doesn't want to make a trade.... so whichever goalie he does trade, he will get exactly what he wants or he won't make the trade...

So you mean we wont trade for Nash and put him on the second line with Kesler?

Nah - we'll just trade for a guy like David Booth instead........and possibly put him on an Indian reserve.

[Farhan Lalji]

Gillis M.O is to identify the players they want from other teams and that is what he will trade for, otherwise he won't make the trade.... he won't take on bad contracts or players he doesn't want to make a trade.

Doesn't that describe pretty much describe every single General Manager in the league? Obviously - bad contracts do exist out there but it's not like a GM actively trades for a bad contract. A contract is only bad in retrospect after a player has proven himself to not be worthy of that contract.

If the Canucks truly are going to deal with Luongo, then I'd rather them trade for a contract that can be deemed equally bad.......provided that it fills a positional need for us, while also allowing us to get rid of other bad contracts. I know I am definitely in the minority when I say this, but I honestly don't think a Luongo/Raymond for Lecavlier trade is a bad idea. Miraculously, that would actually free up cap space for us if I'm not mistaken.

Furthermore - it would give the Canucks great depth down the middle. Even if Lecavlier is a shell of his former self, he would still provide us with the following:

1)Leadership
2)Stanley Cup experience
3)Size, grit, and toughness
4) A player that consistently elevates his game in the playoffs.....even as a guy that is washed up.
4)Dominance on the 3rd line in terms of 3rd line production. For Lecavlier's salary, it's obviously not acceptable to only produce around 45-50 points per season, but those 45-50 points being produced in a 3rd line role would be absolute killer.....and that dominance on the 3rd line against mediocre competition would be exactly what the Canucks need in terms of getting much needed balanced scoring. Lecavlier would be an upgraded version of Cody Hodgson in this respect.
5) Good for the young kids. Imagine bringing up a guy like Schroeder. How great would it be to put Schroeder with a guy like Lecavlier as opposed to a plummer like Pahlsson or Lapierre? Think Schroeder's learning curve would be a infinitely quicker alongside Lecavlier? Yeah - me too.
6) Maximization of offense from a 3rd line:

Lets say we have the following forwards: H.Sedin, D.Sedin, Burrows, Kesler, Higgins, Booth, Kassian, Schroeder

So out of those 8 players, only 6 obviously get to play on the top 6. So - with those other two forwards that have potential to score with the right type of center. Who would you rather put them with? Shut down centers such as Pahlsson or Lapierre? OR - a guy, that may be way overpriced and past his prime, but a guy that can still produce around 50 points per season in a 3rd line role?

What can a guy like Vincent Lecavlier do for developing players such as Jordan Schroeder and Zack Kassian in a 3rd line capacity?

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Higgins-Kesler-Booth
Schroeder-Lecavlier-Kassian
Hansen-Pahlsson-Lapierre

Hamhuis-Bieksa
Edler-Salo
Ballard-Tanev

Schneider
Lack

[TDA Rum]

It was meant in reference to posters saying Gillis would have to take on bad contracts like Komisarek. Lecalvalier or Malone, i don't believe Mike Gillis wants any of these players and therefore will not consummate a trade for any of them...Like HW says, Gillis wants to get younger, bigger and faster...

[Uncle dans leg]

I must have over slept in the dumpster...is the Cambie still open?

So after an uncountable number of draft sleeves, where do we all sit?

Luongo goes but the return ranges from absurd to absurd on both extremes of opinion. Is he worth anything? Yes but I wouldn't hold my breath for a game breaker coming our way. On the other hand I wouldn't give him away for a salary dump, especially since this summer appears to be one in which there's at least 5 or 6 teams that may be interested.

Many here have posted where they think he might go and what not but I think it's a better than not chance that Tampa is where he ends up. So what do they have?

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.

Hedman is exactly what I imagine Gillis would covet and if we could add in Edler to the trade, it may work. In my opinion, this is the most likely trade scenario involving TB.

Brett Conolly would also fit the bill although I don't think he's ready to do what we need right now. He's 2-3 years out from making a real difference IMHO.

I can't see any other players in that line up other than Stamkos but he isn't moving. So it likely RL and Edler for Hedman or else Gillis is looking elsewhere.

[Fred]

Teddy Purcel

[SKYO]

Why even take Reinprecht in the first place.

I have no ideal how Reinprecht was playing, but was he playing that bad that AV couldn't call him up?