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.
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.....