Thread: Speculation: More Luongo Talk
View Single Post
Old
01-04-2013, 11:29 AM
  #991
Spazmatic Dan
The Circle of Leaf
 
Spazmatic Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chatham, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,803
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Point out to me the "conditions" in his _initial_ post. He just refers to the new CBA. That's what makes it baseless. SC didn't protect
himself from making an outlandish claim in his initial post by listing caveats. Here it is again:






No Caveats.






It is not a counter to an equally opposed view point. It is a counter to what is likely to occur. He adopts the stance of the unlikely vs. the likely.



And no, the block is still the original, baseless claim. It brings about no meaningful discussion, as evidenced by the responses it garnered.
He adopts a stance based on the "new CBA" which doesn't exist yet. I didn't even consider he would've meant something other than the NHL's proposals with a lowered cap and an amnesty buyout clause so I apologize if that wasn't your interpretation. What did you think he was talking about?



Quote:
So trade the far better player vs evening out the roster? That's not a tough call at all to make.








The hypothetical you pose isn't put forth in SC's initial post. He's not arguing redundant asset vs. positional needs. He's just saying Luongo is likely to be bought out. That's it.



To contend what you are saying: Redundant asset or not, Luongo still carries far more value than Booth. So you should be able to recoup value better in the long-run. Regardless of current positional needs.
As you can see above, I thought that the phrase "new CBA" implied more than you apparently did. I thought his "caveat" as you put it was a natural expansion on what he said. This is sort of what I mean by "meaningful discussion": instead of jumping on him, why not expand on his opinion and provide counter points? You can only have a meaningful discussion if both parties participate.

Anyways, on to the hypothetical. The scenario is that due to a proposed $60M cap and the two amnesty buyout clause, Luongo's value plummets and makes trading any salary difficult because most teams without a budget. If this happens does it then make sense for Vancouver worsen the rest of the team via buyout vs buying out Luongo when you have Schneider?

Are you thinking you would make the forward group worse and try to trade Luongo a year or two down the road?

Spazmatic Dan is offline