Luongo will be dealt to Toronto

[bsi]

Luongo is what Toronto needs, it's just a matter of if the fans will allow him to adjust there or if they'll use him as a scapegoat like many before him including Luke Schenn, who I think was overbilled from the get go by the Leafs and their fans. Schenn is gonna be a really good second line pair D man atleast but he wasn't given that opportunity as a Leaf to grow into the player he will be. D men take some time, the Leafs didn't seem to think they had that type of time. As a Canadian I hope the Leafs can turn it around but Burke has to make a plan and stick to it, he really has no idea which way he is going with this team, is he rebuilding, retooling, or does he think he has a good team now? Everything he does seems to be by the seat of his pants. I honestly think when a GM makes a hard stand against long term contracts when every superstar in the league is asking for them it's not good for an organization that needs top 6 forwards. Luongo is still a high quality goalie, if the Leafs think they are gonna be a good team in the next couple years they should add him, but if they add him and continue to ice a mediocre team in front of him it's a waste of time, money and talent between the pipes and it will do nothing for how the fans feel about Luongo. Toronto needs a high skilled puck moving D man, a #1 center and another top 6 forward and then they'll be a decent team, especially if they add Luongo. And since I'm pointing fingers at Burke, Kadri has to be used or traded before his value is 0. Also Kessel is not the problem in Toronto as much as Ron Wilson seemed to think he was, he's the only guy capable of putting up 40 goals on that team unless JVR turns into the player he was supposed to be. But that's just my opinion, I'm sure some will disagree with it.

[Pfeifer]

Thank you for putting it in a same way. Correct me if I'm wrong but if he retires the leafes are not stuck with the cap hit so how is it that bad to have a top end goalie at a cap hit of 5 mil when the bulk of the money is payed out in the first couple of years. I'm not saying the Canucks should get a ton but comments like " I would pay more for fleury" are asinine. Gardener straight up wont happen but it's not an unrealistic asking price.

[Bob Loblaw]

This is youe evaluation of Gardiner? and you say you've seen him play? something doesn't add up here. Gardiners gonna be a hell of a player. Certainly a top young dman in the NHL without question. Slightly above average would be the low end of his potential.

well i hope you're right about him if they arnt going to trade him. I remember when Schenn had a good rookie year and he was going to be a top line dman for years to come.

[Halladay]

well i hope you're right about him if they arnt going to trade him. I remember when Schenn had a good rookie year and he was going to be a top line dman for years to come.

I never thought Schenn should have been put right into the NHL but he didn't look bad his first season, he looked like a solid second pairing dman but over the years he somehow got worse. His foot speed, or lack there of, was horrendous. I've never seen a player lose speed at his age. And I'm not saying this in hindsight, if you look at the Leafs forum from years ago you'll find many of us saying this. Gardiner is on another level, unbelievable speed,vision,IQ and hands. His only negative right now is he's average defensively. He's not bad but he needs to continue learning if he's gonna play against the other teams top line every night. His speed and smarts should allow him to play that Lidstrom style. Not using the body but using his stick. He's never gonna be a punisher. Sky's the limit though.

[Bob Loblaw]

I never thought Schenn should have been put right into the NHL but he didn't look bad his first season, he looked like a solid second pairing dman but over the years he somehow got worse. His foot speed, or lack there of, was horrendous. I've never seen a player lose speed at his age. And I'm not saying this in hindsight, if you look at the Leafs forum from years ago you'll find many of us saying this. Gardiner is on another level, unbelievable speed,vision,IQ and hands. His only negative right now is he's average defensively. He's not bad but he needs to continue learning if he's gonna play against the other teams top line every night. His speed and smarts should allow him to play that Lidstrom style. Not using the body but using his stick. He's never gonna be a punisher. Sky's the limit though.

maybe its descriptions like that that have me skeptical, i mean like that how sens fans talk about Karlsson only add in a heavy shot. I certainly dont see Gardiner and Karlsson on the same level.

[Halladay]

maybe its descriptions like that that have me skeptical, i mean like that how sens fans talk about Karlsson only add in a heavy shot. I certainly dont see Gardiner and Karlsson on the same level.

Well no lol. You just compared Jake Gardiner to a Norris winner which I would never do. I think he turns into a legit number 2. The way I described him is accurate though. His offensive potential is through the roof. He's easily the best defensive prospect we've had here in years(before Rielly arrived)

[homie564]

yeah Gardiner is not THAT good. He's a good defenseman definitely above average, but literally, that description sounds like you're talking about Brian Rafalski. If Gardiner is "average" defensively, how are guys like Karlsson and Wideman "horrendous". Gardiner really peaks right now as a solid #2 defenseman on a team like Toronto who utilizes one dimensional offensive defensemen well. On a team like Boston, Detroit, Pittsburgh or Philly he's probably a #4 or high minute playing #5, because they are teams who don't really know how/choose to utilize such defensemen. He's a good young kid, who has explosive skating ability, but he's by no means shown that he's going to be some freak of nature like a guy like Karlsson could be. Is it possible that if his defense is heavily worked upon he turns into a better defenseman than I expect? Absolutely. But as of right now, there is no reason it would be "ludicrous" to move him for a FRANCHISE goalie, who is easily a top 10, possibly top 5 goalie in the NHL.

[bsi]

well i hope you're right about him if they arnt going to trade him. I remember when Schenn had a good rookie year and he was going to be a top line dman for years to come.

I still think Schenn will be a really good D-man for years to come...he's young though, he's gonna have ups and downs. I see him like Del Zotto(though not the same type of player). If you went by how DelZotto played his first year you'd think his second year was gonna be amazing, but he had a drop off and he was sent to the minors for a lot of his second year and he was the first to say that he needed more time learning and took the demotion as part of the process and realized that it was in his best interest. When he came back last year he had learned how to play better defensively and how to be stronger on the puck. To many of our fans Del Zotto was a write off after he struggled the second year but it goes to show that if a player has the talent to be considered an NHL'er and is willing to do the extra work then he shouldn't be disgarded quickly. I think Schenn is the same thing, I think he was under enormous pressure to be a #1 D man in Toronto and I think it was a little ambitious to expect that off him so early. I think if he's given a couple years to mature in Philly he'll be an excellent pick up for them. On the flip side, I think the same can be said of JVR.

[Halladay]

yeah Gardiner is not THAT good. He's a good defenseman definitely above average, but literally, that description sounds like you're talking about Brian Rafalski. If Gardiner is "average" defensively, how are guys like Karlsson and Wideman "horrendous". Gardiner really peaks right now as a solid #2 defenseman on a team like Toronto who utilizes one dimensional offensive defensemen well. On a team like Boston, Detroit, Pittsburgh or Philly he's probably a #4 or high minute playing #5, because they are teams who don't really know how/choose to utilize such defensemen. He's a good young kid, who has explosive skating ability, but he's by no means shown that he's going to be some freak of nature like a guy like Karlsson could be. Is it possible that if his defense is heavily worked upon he turns into a better defenseman than I expect? Absolutely. But as of right now, there is no reason it would be "ludicrous" to move him for a FRANCHISE goalie, who is easily a top 10, possibly top 5 goalie in the NHL.

Everything I said is absolutely true. If he hypothetically went back into the draft today, he'd be a top 5 pick. All the tools are there. And I never said Karlsson or Widemen were horrendous, I never mentioned Widemen. I don't even know how Karlsson and Widemen are even in the same sentence together.

[Halladay]

I still think Schenn will be a really good D-man for years to come...he's young though, he's gonna have ups and downs. I see him like Del Zotto(though not the same type of player). If you went by how DelZotto played his first year you'd think his second year was gonna be amazing, but he had a drop off and he was sent to the minors for a lot of his second year and he was the first to say that he needed more time learning and took the demotion as part of the process and realized that it was in his best interest. When he came back last year he had learned how to play better defensively and how to be stronger on the puck. To many of our fans Del Zotto was a write off after he struggled the second year but it goes to show that if a player has the talent to be considered an NHL'er and is willing to do the extra work then he shouldn't be disgarded quickly. I think Schenn is the same thing, I think he was under enormous pressure to be a #1 D man in Toronto and I think it was a little ambitious to expect that off him so early. I think if he's given a couple years to mature in Philly he'll be an excellent pick up for them. On the flip side, I think the same can be said of JVR.

Nobody ever said this or thought this. From day one there were no expectations for him to be a number one. A number two was his max potential. He'd need to be paired with a number one who could make the outlet pass and skate it up because Schenn isn't capable of doing this and likely never will be. But, he does play pretty good defense,throws tons of hits,blocks shots etc. Much like the old version of Mike Komisarek.

[Bob Loblaw]

Well no lol. You just compared Jake Gardiner to a Norris winner which I would never do. I think he turns into a legit number 2. The way I described him is accurate though. His offensive potential is through the roof. He's easily the best defensive prospect we've had here in years(before Rielly arrived)

I didnt mean to compare them as players, it was meant as how they are talked about by their respected teams fan bases. Not that it means anything i just am not as high on Gardiner as Leafs fans seem to be.

[Bob Loblaw]

yeah Gardiner is not THAT good. He's a good defenseman definitely above average, but literally, that description sounds like you're talking about Brian Rafalski. If Gardiner is "average" defensively, how are guys like Karlsson and Wideman "horrendous". Gardiner really peaks right now as a solid #2 defenseman on a team like Toronto who utilizes one dimensional offensive defensemen well. On a team like Boston, Detroit, Pittsburgh or Philly he's probably a #4 or high minute playing #5, because they are teams who don't really know how/choose to utilize such defensemen. He's a good young kid, who has explosive skating ability, but he's by no means shown that he's going to be some freak of nature like a guy like Karlsson could be. Is it possible that if his defense is heavily worked upon he turns into a better defenseman than I expect? Absolutely. But as of right now, there is no reason it would be "ludicrous" to move him for a FRANCHISE goalie, who is easily a top 10, possibly top 5 goalie in the NHL.

this sums it up nicely

[bsi]

Nobody ever said this or thought this. From day one there were no expectations for him to be a number one. A number two was his max potential. He'd need to be paired with a number one who could make the outlet pass and skate it up because Schenn isn't capable of doing this and likely never will be. But, he does play pretty good defense,throws tons of hits,blocks shots etc. Much like the old version of Mike Komisarek.

His first year you'd swear he was the second coming of Christ according to the media and fans around here. Fans were wanting a ridiculous amount of talent back when Schenn was mentioned in trade rumours. My point was that there were too high of expectations on him, he's not an offensive D man, not a powerplay guy so his potential should limit him to be a shut down guy and a good Pk player now. If he's playing with an offensive D man he'll be on the top pair but if not he'll likely be a second pair guy as he's not going to be the guy making the outlet passes on the top pair, and there's nothing wrong with that either but everyone was so down on him after his first year you'd swear he was going to be a terrible D-man from then on but I don't think that's the case, I think Flyers fans will be happy with their acquisition. But like I said before Toronto didn't lose that trade, yet anyway as JVR should be a top 6 forward for them going forward and potentially a top3. It was a gamble on both sides, each one banking on potential, I have a feeling both teams make out ok with what they got though, I thought it was a fair trade. It all depends on whether each guys WANTS to be the player they can be, and each team filled a need with the trade.

[Halladay]

His first year you'd swear he was the second coming of Christ according to the media and fans around here. Fans were wanting a ridiculous amount of talent back when Schenn was mentioned in trade rumours. My point was that there were too high of expectations on him, he's not an offensive D man, not a powerplay guy so his potential should limit him to be a shut down guy and a good Pk player now. If he's playing with an offensive D man he'll be on the top pair but if not he'll likely be a second pair guy as he's not going to be the guy making the outlet passes on the top pair, and there's nothing wrong with that either but everyone was so down on him after his first year you'd swear he was going to be a terrible D-man from then on but I don't think that's the case, I think Flyers fans will be happy with their acquisition. But like I said before Toronto didn't lose that trade, yet anyway as JVR should be a top 6 forward for them going forward and potentially a top3. It was a gamble on both sides, each one banking on potential, I have a feeling both teams make out ok with what they got though, I thought it was a fair trade. It all depends on whether each guys WANTS to be the player they can be, and each team filled a need with the trade.

I'd actually been suggesting the Schenn for JVR trade for years...never thought it would actually happen. I was never a huge Schenn fan tbh. He serves a purpose though, to play hard nosed defense. I actually wanted us to draft a guy named Filatov.

[homie564]

Everything I said is absolutely true. If he hypothetically went back into the draft today, he'd be a top 5 pick. All the tools are there. And I never said Karlsson or Widemen were horrendous, I never mentioned Widemen. I don't even know how Karlsson and Widemen are even in the same sentence together.

I'm talking from defensive standpoints. Karlsson is obviously a million times the player Wideman is. And I don't believe I'd take Gardiner in the top 5. Top 10? maybe. You're telling me if you were a team like the Islanders, or someone with a top 5 pick, you'd trade your first round pick for Jake Gardiner? I would have a tough time parting with a top 10 pick for him nevermind Top 5. The Top 5 is usually reserved for guys with franchise player upside (top 3 would be debatable, but at the very least Top 5 in a draft should be players with practically no ceiling. Gardiner I would say has a pretty firm ceiling at this point of a #2 defenseman, and like any player, it's possible he breaks through that.)