View Single Post
01-08-2013, 02:56 PM
Registered User
racerjoe's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by marty111 View Post
Bleach for goodness sakes, I'm talking about goaltending. Maybe you don't fully understand the new CBA. Whatever is being paid to Luongo [6.7M] and his cap hit [5.3M] will factor into the penalty given out depending on when he retires.

So yes, a team will get him on the cap now at 5.3M [below value] but will be later penalized for it so in effect the savings are gone in the long term.

THAT'S THE ENTIRE POINT OF CAP CIRCUMVENTING CONTRACTS. To get a lower cap hit on a longer deal, NOT being penalized for it when it's all done.

So I ask you, is a goalie at 33 worth close to 7M for the next 6 years? Hell no he's not. That's above market value now and thus Luongo when it's all said and done is a goalie getting paid above market value. Even then there are still 11 years on the contract which is a further detriment to whole concept itself.

I think there's been way too much Luongo and Gillis love going on in Vancouver to realize this. It is official, the contract is not a good one and Gillis made a boo boo here.

I'm not saying he is untradeable but to anyone suggesting that the cap penality makes NO DIFFERENCE is sniffing glue or something.

The other point to be made here is as the cap is low, so is his cap hit, as it goes up you get hurt.

What I mean is the 1.5 mil savings now is better value than the 2 mil cap hit in later years.

Lets take the NHL's own numbers of 5% growth, and the NHL's lowest cap ceiling this season of 60 mil. In 6 years, the cap would be about 75 mil.(I rounded numbers to make it easier math). Keep in mind it is the worst case too.

So 1.5mil saving in 64.3mil cap > than 2 mil cap hit in 75 mil Cap.

racerjoe is offline