Confirmed with Link: [VAN/FLA] Luongo, Anthony for Matthias, Markstrom - Pt. 2

[Lundface*]

Hodgson was not a blue-chip prospect at that point. He was talked about as bordering on injury riddled disappointment, they boosted his value as best they could and got the best asset they could for him. Kings wouldn't even give up Clifford for him. Go back and look it rather than rewrite history.



35yo malcontent, architect of his own imprisonment by demanding a trade to a team that didn't want him. Should have just waived him and kept Schneider?

Solid, kudos for that.

 

[Chubros]

...

35yo malcontent, architect of his own imprisonment by demanding a trade to a team that didn't want him. Should have just waived him and kept Schneider?

Most certainly.

 

[CherryToke]

Have you seen his possession stats? Or does that only apply when we are trashing players who we trade away?

I don't know anything about him but I'm not impressed so far.

 

[Finkle is Einhorn]

Should have just waived him and kept Schneider?

He was put through a media-described "hell" by getting sat for the Heritage Classic. Waiving him...is there something worse than hell? I'm not religious.

 

[m9]

I thought Matthias did some good things again last night. He's doing the things I saw him do in Florida and I think he will be a very solid 3rd line guy for us.

 

[B-rock]

I thought Matthias did some good things again last night. He's doing the things I saw him do in Florida and I think he will be a very solid 3rd line guy for us.

He drove the net to set up the winning goal, that was a good play. He almost did it previous to that as well. He seems decent so far.

 

[Barney Gumble]

He was put through a media-described "hell" by getting sat for the Heritage Classic. Waiving him...is there something worse than hell? I'm not religious.

So he wouldn't get hurt (deal had to be "in the works" at that point). Teams do that all the time on pending trades.

 

[Scurr]

Have you seen his possession stats? Or does that only apply when we are trashing players who we trade away?

Possession stats apply to everyone but the twins… amirite!

 

[y2kcanucks]

So he wouldn't get hurt (deal had to be "in the works" at that point). Teams do that all the time on pending trades.

Except a trade wasn't in the works until Monday.

 

[Finkle is Einhorn]

So he wouldn't get hurt (deal had to be "in the works" at that point). Teams do that all the time on pending trades.

I'm only repeating the media's narrative in the wake of the trade. "Hell" being a direct quote from Aaron Ward.

 

[Addison Rae]

Have you seen his possession stats? Or does that only apply when we are trashing players who we trade away?

The aren't half bad for a guy who only stats 43% of his shifts in the offensive zone.

 

[Wolfhard]

Except a trade wasn't in the works until Monday.

So you figure it just dawned on them, "Hey, I think we should trade Luongo today!"

Lack has been better. Lack was on a roll. Not only did Lack give them a better chance to win, but the deadline was a few days away. They wanted to move him, so decided to keep him off the bad ice and not risk injury while they explored their options.

It's not rocket science....

 

[y2kcanucks]

So he wouldn't get hurt (deal had to be "in the works" at that point). Teams do that all the time on pending trades.

So you figure it just dawned on them, "Hey, I think we should trade Luongo today!"

Lack has been better. Lack was on a roll. Not only did Lack give them a better chance to win, but the deadline was a few days away. They wanted to move him, so decided to keep him off the bad ice and not risk injury while they explored their options.

It's not rocket science....

Lack is a rookie with 20ish games of NHL experience. Luongo is a seasoned veteran with tons of experience, is a proven elite goalie, and has the ability to mentor the young rookie. There also had been no trade discussions about Luongo until after Luongo was snubbed at the Heritage Classic.

 

[Willting*]

So you figure it just dawned on them, "Hey, I think we should trade Luongo today!"

Lack has been better. Lack was on a roll. Not only did Lack give them a better chance to win, but the deadline was a few days away. They wanted to move him, so decided to keep him off the bad ice and not risk injury while they explored their options.

It's not rocket science....

This.

You have to account for Florida too, not just Vancouver...

 

[Willting*]

Lack is a rookie with 20ish games of NHL experience. Luongo is a seasoned veteran with tons of experience, is a proven elite goalie, and has the ability to mentor the young rookie. There also had been no trade discussions about Luongo until after Luongo was snubbed at the Heritage Classic.

There has been trade discussion with Florida since last year... they merely revisited it a couple days before the Heritage classic.

What are you insinuating...

 

[y2kcanucks]

There has been trade discussion with Florida since last year... they merely revisited it a couple days before the Heritage classic.

What are you insinuating...

What I am insinuating is that they hadn't discussed a trade for a year. They revisited it after Gillis called Tallon on MONDAY about Luongo. Had Luongo not been snubbed and been unhappy about the decision he likely wouldn't have been dealt until the offseason at the earliest.

 

[Wolfhard]

Lack is a rookie with 20ish games of NHL experience. Luongo is a seasoned veteran with tons of experience, is a proven elite goalie, and has the ability to mentor the young rookie. There also had been no trade discussions about Luongo until after Luongo was snubbed at the Heritage Classic.

So you're under the opinion that Gillis was going long term with a goalie who was STILL making comments about being moved, until he randomly decided to pull the trigger on a trade?

Come on. He obviously wanted to move him, or he wouldn't have contacted his agent and worked out a deal in the next day or two. Gillis is very methodical, and you know as well as I do, that trading Luongo wasn't some knee-jerk reaction to Luongo's whining about the Heritage Classic.

And who cares if Lack was a rookie. Fact is the team is floundering, and we have two strengths. Defense, and goal. Most of our defense is locked up with NTC's and don't want to move, while we have a goalie who badly wants out. No brainer! Play the better goalie, and ship out the whiner. Win-win situation!

 

[Willting*]

What I am insinuating is that they hadn't discussed a trade for a year. They revisited it after Gillis called Tallon on MONDAY about Luongo. Had Luongo not been snubbed and been unhappy about the decision he likely wouldn't have been dealt until the offseason at the earliest.

When Gillis revisits a Kesler trade with Shero in June, don't you think they are building on what prior trade discussions they made during the week of the trade deadline? Or do all of those phone conversations suddenly mean nothing...

No GM talks over a trade for the entirety of a year but both sides have the basic framework laid out regarding select players. Both sides had already established values for each team's players prior to Monday, the only thing impeding the trade was an 'okay' by both sides. That is what posters in this thread have argued.

 

[y2kcanucks]

So you're under the opinion that Gillis was going long term with a goalie who was STILL making comments about being moved, until he randomly decided to pull the trigger on a trade?

Come on. He obviously wanted to move him, or he wouldn't have contacted his agent and worked out a deal in the next day or two. Gillis is very methodical, and you know as well as I do, that trading Luongo wasn't some knee-jerk reaction to Luongo's whining about the Heritage Classic.

And who cares if Lack was a rookie. Fact is the team is floundering, and we have two strengths. Defense, and goal. Most of our defense is locked up with NTC's and don't want to move, while we have a goalie who badly wants out. No brainer! Play the better goalie, and ship out the whiner. Win-win situation!

Source? Or are you making that up?

We aren't playing the better goalie though...its absolutely absurd that people think this. Is LA screwing up by not playing "the better goalie" Martin Jones every game?

 

[y2kcanucks]

When Gillis revisits a Kesler trade with Shero in June, don't you think they are building on what prior trade discussions they made during the week of the trade deadline? Or do all of those phone conversations suddenly mean nothing...

No GM talks over a trade for the entirety of a year but both sides have the basic framework laid out regarding select players. Both sides had already established values for each team's players prior to Monday, the only thing impeding the trade was an 'okay' by both sides. That is what posters in this thread have argued.

I must have missed the whole trade freeze that only expired after the Heritage Classic.

 

[Willting*]

I must have missed the whole trade freeze that only expired after the Heritage Classic.

Trade freeze expiring means teams can trade... Talking is not restricted.

 

[opendoor]

Is LA screwing up by not playing "the better goalie" Martin Jones every game?

No, because Quick has been far better recently. Since Quick returned from injury he has a .926 sv% compared to Jones' .872 in the same period.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Trade freeze expiring means teams can trade... Talking is not restricted.

So then why did you assume Shero and MG wouldn't talk until June?

 

[y2kcanucks]

No, because Quick has been far better recently. Since Quick returned from injury he has a .926 sv% compared to Jones' .872 in the same period.

Yet Lack's .908SVP in January is somehow better than Luongo's 0.921? Do you really think teams make these big decisions based on how a goalie plays "recently?"

 

[Wolfhard]

Source? Or are you making that up?

We aren't playing the better goalie though...its absolutely absurd that people think this. Is LA screwing up by not playing "the better goalie" Martin Jones every game?

His own twitter comments about Kesler. "We know how this ends"
He's making light of the fact that he still hasn't been moved, regardless of him wanting it.

And you have to work very hard to find a snapshot where Luongo has outplayed his backup in the past 3 years. Lack was coming off 2 games where he allowed 1 goal between them. We went through this, but you somehow can't accept it.

Lack = playing VERY well since the break.
Luongo = 1 (non competetive) game in a month.
Ice was bad --> injury risk
Luongo has a history of injury in early games
Luongo was making comments again
Trade deadline was a few days away, and it's very clear there were intentions of moving him.

Take your blinders off. The above are all FACTS.

Your argument = *sniff sniff* Luongo's the #1, and he deseeeeerved it!