Luongo

[Redleaf]

Not going to lie -- my stance hasn't wavered at all that if the Leafs can get Luongo at a reasonable price, I'd want them to be all over him, contract and all.

x2.

 

[Bullfrog]

Not going to lie -- my stance hasn't wavered at all that if the Leafs can get Luongo at a reasonable price, I'd want them to be all over him, contract and all.

I've wavered a bit, but I'm still in this camp.

There's no way Luongo plays out the whole contract. So they'll be stuck with a cap recapture penalty at the end. Not a big deal in my opinion. Not great either, but most likely manageable.

 

[ZBBM]

The day after the (inevitable) first meltdown by the Scrivens/Reimer duo is not the time to be changing one's mind about the wisdom of trading for Luongo, or the terms one would accept.

I haven't changed my position from the first, which is get him if it costs us essentially nothing, or else sends deadwood (not youth) the other way.  Debate all we want, but Luongo would be a vast upgrade on anybody we have now.  That's a fact.  But I would not take his contract unless it was pretty much given to us.  If Gillis won't agree to that, then screw him.

I have never been enamored of Scrivens.  He may be lights out in the AHL but so far he's been wildly inconsistent with the Leafs.  IMO he hasn't performed even to the standard of Gustavsson.  Rynnas interests me more as a prospect. 

Reimer may or may not be a big-league goalie.  Now's the time to hand him the keys and see if Gionta's hit was the cause of his poor play last year, or whether his good half-season 2 years ago was a fluke. 

 

[Bullfrog]

I have never been enamored of Scrivens.  He may be lights out in the AHL but so far he's been wildly inconsistent with the Leafs.  IMO he hasn't performed even to the standard of Gustavsson.  Rynnas interests me more as a prospect. 

Reimer may or may not be a big-league goalie.  Now's the time to hand him the keys and see if Gionta's hit was the cause of his poor play last year, or whether his good half-season 2 years ago was a fluke.

Agreed whole-heartedly with everything said here.

 

[cw]

People would really want to trade for Luongo under the assumption that he would be good for 4 more years, and then have to deal with 6 years of his cap hit?

I think the problem with that line of thinking though is that the deal is so long that when you try and assess how it'll look 7 or 8 years from now you're dealing with almost a complete unknown. What if the next CBA is 8 years from now and has more buyouts? What if the cap is edging towards 90-100 million dollars?

Obviously trading for Luongo has risks, and I'm not in that camp right now, but to try and say we really have a handle on what the consequences will be that far in advance seems like a wasted effort.

Well if you knock 2 years off his 4 yrs good, 6 not-so-good in his post, in the wake of the recent CBA being renewed when it came up and with the option within the new CBA to extend it to 10 years, you'd still have 4 years good and 4 years not-so-good. That to me is still ugly to try to carry that contract while they're hopefully contending.

Nobody knows that though.  What if Luongo is good for 8 years?  We don't know.

We could trade Gardiner for Lebda and there's a very, very slim chance Lebda will have the better career from this point forward. Gardiner could blow out his knees for example. So we don't know that with 100% absolute certainty on that deal either. We just know the heavy odds are that Gardiner is very likely to be the better player.

As I pointed out in a previous post, Luongo has played a lot of games with his butterfly style. And most goalies start to decline at age 34 (Luongo turns 34 April 2013 - this year). There's also the risk that Luongo could show up and show behind the skaters on this team why the Canucks are dumping him in year 1 because some of his results are masked by playing behind a good team - then where are you? The chances of Luongo still playing well in the latter half of his contract are definitely better than Lebda being better than Gardiner from this point forward but the historical trends are pretty darn poor that he'll be worth anything close to his cap hit during the latter half of his contract. To hope that he'll still be decent during the latter half of his contract is kind of like hoping you'll win a small lottery - the odds are not very good.

If there were no other options beyond this season, then you're stuck. But there is a credible UFA market for proven goalies over the next couple of years. And they can restock the farm with young UFAs and continue to draft/develop. And maybe a better trade opportunity comes along when teams do compliance buyouts or dump at deadlines because some other young stud pushes out a starter. A lot of good things can happen for Leafs goaltending over the next 10 years - in part because it doesn't get much worse than it is now.

I realize it's particularly tough after last night and after the recent seasons. But it's also been tough to watch quick fixes over the last 40 plus years in Toronto and they have never panned out to anything close to a parade. I don't want to merely win a round or two in the playoffs. I want them to win a Cup. Without a #1 center and without a stud dman, some of Luongo's best remaining years are not likely to bear fruit so even if you get him, the window of winning a Cup with him is not large because there's other things they have to do to this roster for it to become a true contender.

 

[maplesyrup]

Without a #1 center and without a stud dman, some of Luongo's best remaining years are not likely to bear fruit.

^ Oh my God, THIS! ^

 

[bustaheims]

Without a #1 center and without a stud dman, some of Luongo's best remaining years are not likely to bear fruit.

^ Oh my God, THIS! ^

This is why I often say that getting the goalie should be the last of the big pieces, as they have a tendency to cover up deficiencies in other areas. Make the team good enough to be reasonably successful without a top flight goalie, and then go out and get the top flight goalie to put them over the top. If you develop one in house over that span, that's great, but, don't use assets to acquire one.

 

[Champ Kind]

Without a #1 center and without a stud dman, some of Luongo's best remaining years are not likely to bear fruit.

^ Oh my God, THIS! ^

This is why I often say that getting the goalie should be the last of the big pieces, as they have a tendency to cover up deficiencies in other areas. Make the team good enough to be reasonably successful without a top flight goalie, and then go out and get the top flight goalie to put them over the top. If you develop one in house over that span, that's great, but, don't use assets to acquire one.

Some great goalies potentially free agents next summer.  Impossible to plan for, of course.  But nonetheless, next summer could  - COULD! - shape up as a transformative period for the Leafs, maybe like the way the Flyers reivented themselves a few years back with Hartnell, Timonen, and Brier (if I recall correctly).

 

[Redleaf]

Without a #1 center and without a stud dman, some of Luongo's best remaining years are not likely to bear fruit.

^ Oh my God, THIS! ^

I think people underestimate the fact that if we have a hall of famer goalie, it attracts some of the remaining pieces via free agency. If we have terrible goaltending, those players look for other places to go where their chances are better to win right away.

Yes, it is a fast track approach, and Nonis has indicated he will take the slow and steady route. I have no problems either way. My biggest worry is Nonis is canned and MLSE brings in someone else who blows it all up entirely after another bad season. Then we're basically back to square one. Hopefully MLSE can see the bigger picture here and allow Nonis a few years to do what he sees fit.

 

[lamajama]

Yep the radio in Vancouver has been all over this - exactly like anyone would
think.

Still not in favor at all and would rather miss the playoffs than grab his contract.

That contract is so long that Rick DiPietro is a UFA before Luongo.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Without a #1 center and without a stud dman, some of Luongo's best remaining years are not likely to bear fruit.

^ Oh my God, THIS! ^

This is why I often say that getting the goalie should be the last of the big pieces, as they have a tendency to cover up deficiencies in other areas. Make the team good enough to be reasonably successful without a top flight goalie, and then go out and get the top flight goalie to put them over the top. If you develop one in house over that span, that's great, but, don't use assets to acquire one.

Wait, why couldn't you get a goalie and say, make the team good enough to be reasonably successful without, for example, a top flight centre, and then go out and get the top flight centre to put them over the top?

 

[cw]

Without a #1 center and without a stud dman, some of Luongo's best remaining years are not likely to bear fruit.

^ Oh my God, THIS! ^

This is why I often say that getting the goalie should be the last of the big pieces, as they have a tendency to cover up deficiencies in other areas. Make the team good enough to be reasonably successful without a top flight goalie, and then go out and get the top flight goalie to put them over the top. If you develop one in house over that span, that's great, but, don't use assets to acquire one.

I'm more along the lines of "franchise building blocks don't come along every day, so you take what the market gives you". In other words, if a top flight 27 yr old UFA goalie, franchise center or stud dman went to free agency, I'd snag him with or without other key pieces in place and then work towards filling the franchise player type holes left in the roster as the market made them available.

Typically, you'd like a #1 franchise center, a stud dman and a top 10 goalie though a few teams, particularly lately, have found other ways to win a Cup without one of those.
(ie the Canes didn't have a stud dman in 2006 or the Hawks won with Niemi in 2010 for example)

 

[bustaheims]

Wait, why couldn't you get a goalie and say, make the team good enough to be reasonably successful without, for example, a top flight centre, and then go out and get the top flight centre to put them over the top?

The Leafs tried something along those lines with CuJo and Belfour. It didn't work. I'd like for them to try it the other way around.

What I'm really try to say here is that the focus should be on improving the team as a whole, not just on individual positions. Don't focus on a getting a top flight goalie or a number 1 centre or anything in particular, just make the team better. I don't care if there are three 2nd lines and middle of the pack goaltending - as long as it's successful.

 

[Frank E]

Without a #1 center and without a stud dman, some of Luongo's best remaining years are not likely to bear fruit.

^ Oh my God, THIS! ^

This is why I often say that getting the goalie should be the last of the big pieces, as they have a tendency to cover up deficiencies in other areas. Make the team good enough to be reasonably successful without a top flight goalie, and then go out and get the top flight goalie to put them over the top. If you develop one in house over that span, that's great, but, don't use assets to acquire one.

I'm not advocating getting Luongo, not at all.

But I think it's also hard for a team to develop properly without reasonably solid goaltending. 

It's early in the season, and I don't think they're really going anywhere this year, but I think they need to upgrade the goaltending.  Though as mentioned, I don't think Luongo is the answer here.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

I'm not advocating getting Luongo, not at all.

But I think it's also hard for a team to develop properly without reasonably solid goaltending. 

It's early in the season, and I don't think they're really going anywhere this year, but I think they need to upgrade the goaltending.  Though as mentioned, I don't think Luongo is the answer here.

This prick agrees with Frank.

 

[ZBBM]

Without a #1 center and without a stud dman, some of Luongo's best remaining years are not likely to bear fruit.

^ Oh my God, THIS! ^

This is why I often say that getting the goalie should be the last of the big pieces, as they have a tendency to cover up deficiencies in other areas. Make the team good enough to be reasonably successful without a top flight goalie, and then go out and get the top flight goalie to put them over the top. If you develop one in house over that span, that's great, but, don't use assets to acquire one.

That's great in theory, but top-flight goalies are available almost never.  Equally as rare (by definition) is developing one.

I would modify your point to say that getting a competent goalie is one of the first pieces to acquire.  A Cam Ward type, say.  Those CAN get you to a Cup if they get hot.  But you will never develop a contender by putting all the other pieces together and trying to win with crap goaltending of the kind that we've been dealing with.  That's why the Rask deal is still like a shiv in the ribs.  He may or may not be top-flight, but he is definitely competent.

EDIT: So I agree 100% with Frank's point about reasonably solid goaltending.  I do, however, advocate getting Luongo under a very narrow set of circumstances.

 

[Zee]

Without a #1 center and without a stud dman, some of Luongo's best remaining years are not likely to bear fruit.

^ Oh my God, THIS! ^

This is why I often say that getting the goalie should be the last of the big pieces, as they have a tendency to cover up deficiencies in other areas. Make the team good enough to be reasonably successful without a top flight goalie, and then go out and get the top flight goalie to put them over the top. If you develop one in house over that span, that's great, but, don't use assets to acquire one.

That's why the Rask deal is still like a shiv in the ribs.

I've never seen the Rask deal summed up so succinctly.

 

[caver]

I would think that Carlyle will give Reimer a run of games to see how he does. If he fails the Luongo talk will peak.

 

[Redleaf]

I would think that Carlyle will give Reimer a run of games to see how he does. If he fails the Luongo talk will peak.

...along with the asking price. Smartest way to play it, if Nonis is planning on acquiring him, is to do it when Reimer is on a winning streak, when the media/general perception is we don't need him.

 

[Zee]

I would think that Carlyle will give Reimer a run of games to see how he does. If he fails the Luongo talk will peak.

...along with the asking price. Smartest way to play it, if Nonis is planning on acquiring him, is to do it when Reimer is on a winning streak, when the media is convinced we don't need him.

I agree.  If Reimer gets hot it'll more than likely be Gillis calling Nonis to inquire if he's "still interested".  Nonis in the driver seat, "I don't really need Luongo, so I can't give up much.."