It's how much money and cap hit remain in the last 4 years of Luo's contract.
$7.8M is a lot of money? Do you mean to you personally? Cause its peanuts in the NHL.
And you don't understand how the salary cap works if you think Luongo's cap hit is $21.3 million at ANY point in his contract. (Here's a hint ... it's the exact same amount throughout the entire length of his contract )
There's not a chance in the world that happens. The NHLPA would nix it and the big market teams would nix it, too.
Owners were discussing the possibility of the amnesty clause, whereby you could buyout ONE contract at 100% and the player immediately becomes a free agent (like in the NBA).
If the owners are looking at new ways to get out of contracts, do you really think there's a chance they're going to go in completely the opposite direction and restrict themselves?
So why would anyone trade for Luo when they are planning to use the possibility of an amnesty clause to buy out his contract? That doesn't make any sense.
I do think the league will try to make it harder to get out of these contracts. You can call me crazy but I think it's bound to happen. This is the same league that is considering ways to limit these long contracts in the future. I don't think it's too far fetched that they would try to make it hard to get out of them.
No kidding. However, when the target asset in a trade holds negative value (Roberto Luongo), the team holding said negative asset must accept low trade value. It's just reality for the Canucks right now.
Well I for one am no longer going to respond to your posts after this. You have shown yourself repeatedly to either just be a troll or to be completely out to lunch.
It is OK... there are a few Vancouver fans that are this ridiculous as well. We tend to keep them away from the internet or sharp objects... but what can you do.