LOL Yes the Leafs were short a goalie. And defence. Our offence is ok. Also, they already make millions by selling out and not winning. I doubt they would spend more to make just a little bit more.
How about them Canucks!
- Thread starter #juan
- Start date
LOL Yes the Leafs were short a goalie. And defence. Our offence is ok. Also, they already make millions by selling out and not winning. I doubt they would spend more to make just a little bit more.
I'm trying to ascertain who Toronto have that we would want........who Toronto would let go of.:smile:
And we have two good goalies, they are assets you don't give away for chump change. People want to the Canucks to be a flunky, no no no no.
Bryant Reeves of the Vancouver Grizzlies a few years back was a force in college, when he hit the NBA he became Mr Hamburger-that was his training regiment one summer. He was good a few games though, but his salary was for a decade.
would you be willing to take back brian burke?
Some of us might be willing to give Toronto a player so they would keep Burke:lol:
Toronto has some players and prospects. "They" is Burke, and he has to do something to save his job next year by making the playoffs. No playoffs, no job. We have leverage here.
Quite frankly, as a Leaf fan, I would rather miss the playoffs next year and lose Burke than morgage our future to make it 1 year .. and keep Burke.
But the Leafs have a history of making stupid deals so you guys may be in luck.
Luongo's got a few more years left, and let's hope it becomes a bidding war. Brodeur on the Devils is still going strong, fairly strong anyway.
what if a team offers gillis an elite player plus a draft pick for 'schneider', do you think gillis
should go for it, and keep luongo?
just askin
should go for it, and keep luongo?
just askin
Here is where a good general manager earns his pay check. If a team is shopping an elite player and a draft pick for one of the Canuck goaltenders, one might wonder at the real value of the player. I would bet that Gillis knows the value of most of the players in the league.
thats right, I am not believing that luongo is automatically the one leaving, if gillis can get an
awsome player, (that they need), a top blueliner for instance, with the big shot, that can lead the
power play, or a big well known centerman, these players don't grow on trees, and I would have to
think twice before I sent luongo on his way, and ignored such a deal for schneider.
just taking a step back, as so much has been suggested in a very short period of time, and a rash
move too soon could be the wrong one.
Yes, a good GM should play his cards carefully and shrewdly in this situation. If the other side is playing down Luongo's value he can always say thanks but no thanks, we'll talk to others about Schneider and perhaps keep Luongo. I'm sure Gillis will want to hear who's available for Schneider. Vancouver isn't desparate to get rid of Luongo.
i'm still sitting here scratching my head concerning 'vineault'. I mentioned the other day that 'maybe'
montreal has permission from canucks to negotiate with him.
He did fly out of town about 4 days ago, so that does fit in with my thoughts.
Does anyone else have a thought about his absence from any post season press conference, its been quite
a while now, and he is noticeably absent.
montreal has permission from canucks to negotiate with him.
He did fly out of town about 4 days ago, so that does fit in with my thoughts.
Does anyone else have a thought about his absence from any post season press conference, its been quite
a while now, and he is noticeably absent.
According to Gillis, Vineault is expected back. I have mixed feelings about Vineault. Does Vancouver need a tougher
coach who will motivate the team?
Over the years my opinion of him has changed-he's done an excellent job and it's difficult to think of someone else who could do better.
It might be a huge mistake to assume that because this season ended badly, that the Canucks need major changes. A little tweaking here and there, but basically they have "the tools". :smile:
Oh, did they win the cup last year? And who are they playing in the second round this year?
I don't call finishing in first place unmotivated, and I don't consider vineault a failure, and after
they spend all of the time they do, preparing players to do the best they can, IT is up to the player
to BE motivated, they are not children, they are professionals, and understand about motivation, and
it is their responsibility to be ready, and whatever players don't seem to be motivated over a reasonable
length of time, then it is the player who should be moved.
We have to teach our minor hockey players about motivation, not nhl players.
Of course coaches must prepare their players to play their best, and if that didn't happen, they would
not have finished so high after the season, I mean, even finishing in the top 8 in the league, I
would consider successful, then ANYTHING can happen in playoffs, as one can see if they are following
the playoffs, it proves my point over and over.
Do you really think any of the canucks could use "oh I just wasn't motivated by my coach", as an excuse,
I don't think so, that would be lame.