Canucks Have Potential Deal in Place to Trade Roberto Luongo
Roberto Luongo remains a member of the Vancouver Canucks despite plenty of speculation that he would get moved once the NHL lockout ended. General manager Mike Gillis admits the framework for a trade is in place if they decide to make a deal.
Cam Cole of the Vancouver Sun reports there's no timetable for a decision about the star netminder's future. While Gillis told Cole the potential trade isn't involving the names that have been bantered about, he wouldn't provide any further details.
"We have a potential deal in place with one team that has to do something with another player that they have — and it’s not who anybody thinks it is — and so we have to wait. (But) we’ve been offered packages that don’t fit what our plan is, what we need," said Gillis.
The emergence of Cory Schneider has given the Canucks some flexibility between the pipes. His struggles in the opener (five goals allowed on 14 shots) will make it difficult for Gillis to pull the trigger on any possible trade until he re-establishes himself, though.
Luongo stepped in to start the team's second game and stopped 30 of the 32 shots sent his way. It still wasn't enough as the Canucks dropped their second straight game to start the shortened campaign. They did earn a point.
The condensed 48-game season is also a factor in trade talks. Schneider and Luongo are going to get plenty of work for as long as they both remain on the roster, which means it may actually help the Canucks to have two players they trust.
Should the Canucks trade Luongo?
Gillis said as much in the Vancouver Sun report. He stated the team received plenty of offers, but most of them included at least one piece that wouldn't make it worth trading a player of Luongo's caliber. So the entire situation remains in a holding pattern.
His comments about having a deal in place for an unexpected player will surely set off a new batch of rumors. But Gills holds all the cards and he's not ready to show them quite yet.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?