Any other anchor contracts the isles got to give? Dipietro seems like a backwards move for the nucks. They're not getting much value in return as getting rid of the contract IS the value.
But at least lu can play if they dont move him, whereas rick isnt even nhl caliber.

Any other anchor contracts the isles got to give? Dipietro seems like a backwards move for the nucks. They're not getting much value in return as getting rid of the contract IS the value.
But at least lu can play if they dont move him, whereas rick isnt even nhl caliber.
- hugefemale dog77

Nope, every other Islander is on an insanely manageable contract. Tavares' contract is 100% without a doubt the best contract in the league, in terms of what you pay and what you get.

O'Reilly can play both sides of the puck and put up a more-than-respectable number of points. He also led the league in takeaways two years ago. (Finishing with two more TkA's than Tavares). I said it when there was the whole drama surrounding him at the beginning of this season and I'll say it now, I would absolutely love him on this team. His advanced statistics are phenomenal.
- eichiefs9

He is one hell of a player, but if the Avs draft McKinnon, his days are numbers and so trade him while he has great value for a piece that you can building with. Core player for Core player.

Any other anchor contracts the isles got to give? Dipietro seems like a backwards move for the nucks. They're not getting much value in return as getting rid of the contract IS the value.
But at least lu can play if they dont move him, whereas rick isnt even nhl caliber.
- hugefemale dog77

I would LOVE to see Gillis keep Luongo, I'd pvr that press conference and watch it over and over again. I imagine his face would look worse than Burke's did when Snow wouldn't trade the pick and took Tavares.

Luongo to the Islanders for Dipietro and a gourmet steak dinner on Snow. That's probably more than I want to give up for that contract anyway. If I had it my way it would be dinner at the Olive Garden.

Seriously though, not giving up a single asset for Luongo and that contract.
- eichiefs9

that was my position last year also.

I didn't want anything to do with that contract, but I especially did not want to give up even the slightest value for him whatsoever.

that was my position last year also.

I didn't want anything to do with that contract, but I especially did not want to give up even the slightest value for him whatsoever.
- Aetherial

you guys are in an even better position to say no this year after the job Reimer did. Bad final game but great year overall and a good young goaltender

that was my position last year also.

I didn't want anything to do with that contract, but I especially did not want to give up even the slightest value for him whatsoever.
- Aetherial

It's a completely logic-based position for young teams with talent. Don't mortgage the future for current talent that's beginning the downslope of it's career.

In fact, that would be a great tagline for the book titled "NY Islanders: The Milbury Years"

What about that Tim Thomas guy?

Like the idea of Lou and love him as a player. His contract is just so albatross I wouldn't give up anything other than DP, a late round pick and maybe a low end prospect (ie: Halmo)

With so many other goalies in the FA pool (Backstorm, Nabby, Emery,etc) and even better ones on the trade market (Hiller, Halak, Miller, Bernier, etc) i doubt Lou winds up back on the island. Just more appealing options else where that are more suitable for islanders

And people who think the Islanders will give up Nino for Lou have to be so high. Guy is a former top 5 pick a couple years ago (20 years old!) and since he had 1 bad year on a terrible team, playing with two non-goal scores, on the forth line, after being rushed to the NHL too early; he is just supposed to have no value, be considered a bust, and be completely expendable? I don't think so
- engrassias2

that was my position last year also.

I didn't want anything to do with that contract, but I especially did not want to give up even the slightest value for him whatsoever.
- Aetherial

It will be Snows as well.

What about that Tim Thomas guy?
- Ledgermain

The guy we are not paying and never did yet his contract counts against the cap so we can reach the floor? That Tim Thomas? If I were to guess he's probably at home right now watching Fox news drinking a Budweiser.

Cut the BS...just trade for Bernier or get Smith as a UFA...

Can we trade you for a steamy bag of shat?
- Vukota

Who would make a trade like that? id much rather have a steamy bag of shat then her...That would be a Milburyesque trade

The Sabres fan who was in here the other week proposing Nino and a first for Miller...I wouldn't want to do that deal, personally, but I'd do that long before I'd give up the same for Luongo.

((UIF))

I saw the title of this blog and just said to myself, "Let the ridiculous demands from Canucks fans begin!". Some things are predictable on this site. Bad blogs from Dee and crazy demands for the return on Roberto Luongo from Canucks fans are definitely two of them.

The Sabres fan who was in here the other week proposing Nino and a first for Miller...I wouldn't want to do that deal, personally, but I'd do that long before I'd give up the same for Luongo.
- UIF

I think most of us on here want to see Nino play unless he's a piece of a trade for something really big and beneficial to this club. I hope Snow agrees.

The guy we are not paying and never did yet his contract counts against the cap so we can reach the floor? That Tim Thomas? If I were to guess he's probably at home right now watching Fox news drinking a Budweiser.
- Cptmjl

Ahhhhh that's what happened...

I saw the title of this blog and just said to myself, "Let the ridiculous demands from Canucks fans begin!". Some things are predictable on this site. Bad blogs from Dee and crazy demands for the return on Roberto Luongo from Canucks fans are definitely two of them.
- Cptmjl

And Nino thrown into every trade for any player rumored to be possibly on the market.

((UIF))

He is one hell of a player, but if the Avs draft McKinnon, his days are numbers and so trade him while he has great value for a piece that you can building with. Core player for Core player.
- DDM-Coga

why would O'Reilly days be numbered? Avs could try him on wing if possible, plus McKinnon might not be ready, you just don't know how kids will perform.
I believe Avs have a lot of cap space, just need a defense.
Plus if McKinnon is ready, you can make him 3rd line C and ease him in to the NHL.....You guys have a young team and should not trade any young assets

Ahhhhh that's what happened...
- Ledgermain

Correct

why would O'Reilly days be numbered? Avs could try him on wing if possible, plus McKinnon might not be ready, you just don't know how kids will perform.
I believe Avs have a lot of cap space, just need a defense.
Plus if McKinnon is ready, you can make him 3rd line C and ease him in to the NHL.....You guys have a young team and should not trade any young assets
- Ur Not Me

If they can afford it as far as cap or otherwise for that matter than why not keep Oreilly. He's a good player, they don't grow on trees. You find a slot for them and make it work.

can't tear up contracts or adjust them. That isn't an option, NHL contracts are guaranteed, no changes. Buyout or payout.
- Isles_since_6

you a lawyer?
If both sides agree any contract can be broken.

If they can afford it as far as cap or otherwise for that matter than why not keep Oreilly. He's a good player, they don't grow on trees. You find a slot for them and make it work.
- Cptmjl

Agreed, you don't trade young proven players unless you HAVE to, and I don't think Avs have to. The only player I could see the Avs move is Stasny bc he has 1 yr left, and they might not resign him.....but i'll take him.....in a nano second

you a lawyer?
If both sides agree any contract can be broken.
- jmo16

I think he meant bc the players association wont allow that.

I think he meant bc the players association wont allow that.
- Ur Not Me

exactly, there is no way the PA will allow players with (in their opinion) awesome contracts paying huge amounts of money to be voided. In addition if you allowed that, teams that signed responsible contracts would be screaming bloody murder that their overspending counterparts who don't plan ahead can just rinse their hands of their mistakes and walk away. You will not ever see this happen. The closest you'll get was this year where teams were allowed to buy someone out early, player still got his money, team still took the cap hit.

Maybe I just thought it through more than he did.