Part 1 of 2: Trading your best player is not the answer

J.J. Guerrero

Founder and Executive Editor of Canucks Hockey Blog. Proud Canadian, hardcore Canucks fan. I would like nothing more than watching the Canucks win the Stanley Cup. Against the Leafs.

You may also like...

13 Responses

  1. Laker says:

    Luongo needs to be traded. With all due respect I think you are missing why. It has nothing to do with his on ice play.

    It has everything to do with his non-committal talk about staying in Vancity.

    If he won’t extend this summer, he needs to go. Purely a business decision.

    If he extends long, then Schneider is trade bait.

    Strictly a business decision. Comparing Luongo to Cloutier is silly. Pretty much an insult to Luongo.

    Luongo has publicy been non-commital, pretty much playing on the they need me more than I need them angle.

    We are likely to lose Ohlund for nothing. We lost Naslund for nothing. Have we not learned anything? Is it even reasonable to keep doing the same thing and expect a different result?

  2. Laker says:

    Luongo needs to be traded. With all due respect I think you are missing why. It has nothing to do with his on ice play.

    It has everything to do with his non-committal talk about staying in Vancity.

    If he won’t extend this summer, he needs to go. Purely a business decision.

    If he extends long, then Schneider is trade bait.

    Strictly a business decision. Comparing Luongo to Cloutier is silly. Pretty much an insult to Luongo.

    Luongo has publicy been non-commital, pretty much playing on the they need me more than I need them angle.

    We are likely to lose Ohlund for nothing. We lost Naslund for nothing. Have we not learned anything? Is it even reasonable to keep doing the same thing and expect a different result?

  3. pastr says:

    I tend to agree with Laker… if Gillis can sign Lui to an extension by September- than we can continue to build, hoping we get some added offense from Bernier and upcoming Hodgson. Maybe we’ll have some cap space for a Bouwmeester to replace Ohlund.

    If we can’t sign Lui this summer- than we need to leverage the asset knowing we have Schneider in the wings. If we can get some young up-and comers (re: every cup winning team since the workstoppage) for him- and they excel- we could have 3-5 years of serious, consistent contention instead of unfulfilled cinderella contention every few years…

  4. pastr says:

    I tend to agree with Laker… if Gillis can sign Lui to an extension by September- than we can continue to build, hoping we get some added offense from Bernier and upcoming Hodgson. Maybe we’ll have some cap space for a Bouwmeester to replace Ohlund.

    If we can’t sign Lui this summer- than we need to leverage the asset knowing we have Schneider in the wings. If we can get some young up-and comers (re: every cup winning team since the workstoppage) for him- and they excel- we could have 3-5 years of serious, consistent contention instead of unfulfilled cinderella contention every few years…

  5. Alix Wright says:

    This was a really interesting post. As well as part 2.

    If you’re going the trade route mentioned in the comments, Lui has a NTC. Gillis has stated before that he doesn’t want to ask guys to waive them. Even if he does ask Lui to waive his, he’s going to be very limited trade wise. Lui’s not going to go just anywhere.

  6. Alix Wright says:

    This was a really interesting post. As well as part 2.

    If you’re going the trade route mentioned in the comments, Lui has a NTC. Gillis has stated before that he doesn’t want to ask guys to waive them. Even if he does ask Lui to waive his, he’s going to be very limited trade wise. Lui’s not going to go just anywhere.

  7. I understand that you want to protect your assets, especially in this cap world and especially an asset like Luongo. But just as important, it’s also about maximizing what you have (part 2 of this post).

    So the question is, do we trade the guy that gives us the best chance to win now (Luongo) for an unknown chance to win now and later (Schneider plus whatever Luongo gets us)?

    I obviously favor the first approach, but that’s because I’ve seen – as most Canucks fans have – the difference between having an average to good goalie and having a great one.

  8. I understand that you want to protect your assets, especially in this cap world and especially an asset like Luongo. But just as important, it’s also about maximizing what you have (part 2 of this post).

    So the question is, do we trade the guy that gives us the best chance to win now (Luongo) for an unknown chance to win now and later (Schneider plus whatever Luongo gets us)?

    I obviously favor the first approach, but that’s because I’ve seen – as most Canucks fans have – the difference between having an average to good goalie and having a great one.

  9. I should add that the reason Luongo is non-committal isn’t because he wants to leave, but because he wants to win – I think that’s a big difference. In this case, it’s up to Mike Gillis to build a winning roster around him – their best player and biggest difference maker – and to be fair, it’s something Gillis admitted to at his end of season presser.

  10. I should add that the reason Luongo is non-committal isn’t because he wants to leave, but because he wants to win – I think that’s a big difference. In this case, it’s up to Mike Gillis to build a winning roster around him – their best player and biggest difference maker – and to be fair, it’s something Gillis admitted to at his end of season presser.

  1. May 15, 2009

    […] Willes’ and Cole’s premise that the Canucks need to trade Roberto Luongo – and free up salary cap space to upgrade other positions – doesn’t make complete sense. It’s true that Detroit and Anaheim won the Cup with Osgood ($800,000) and Giguere ($3.9 million). But this year, Chicago and Pittsburgh made the Final Four with Khabibulin and Huet (combined $12.375 million) and Fleury ($5 million). In fact, what these teams have in common isn’t that their goaltenders take up less cap space, it’s that they have players on their roster who outperform their contracts. […]

  2. May 16, 2009

    […] a dangerous precipice between the pipes… but from threat comes opportunity.  Do the Canucks trade their best player to address both? Share this […]

  3. May 16, 2009

    […] a dangerous precipice between the pipes… but from threat comes opportunity.  Do the Canucks trade their best player to address both? May 16, 2009 […]

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: