HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must use the RUMOR prefix in thread title. Proposals must contain the PROPOSAL prefix in the thread title.

Gillis: Potential Return For Luongo May Not Improve Canucks **Mod Warning #86**

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-16-2012, 09:32 PM
  #701
tempest2i
You and Whose Army?
 
tempest2i's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cowtown
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
The Canucks did that last season and cruised to the playoffs.

St. Louis had 2 elite netminders last season and cruised to the playoffs.

The Bruins have been doing that for 3 seasons and have won a cup.

The Wild regularly ran with a 1A/1B setup.

Having 2 elite netminders is much better than having 0.

Of course I'd rather have a legitimate top 6er instead of Luongo (Canucks lack secondary scoring) but no one is offering that.

There are many upsides to keeping Luongo as part of a tandem, it's much more beneficial to a contender than acquiring MacArthur + draft pick.
While I understand your opinion regarding carrying two expensive goalies on the team, I doubt MG is excited about having a large cap hit sitting on the bench every night, regardless of who is actually in net.

In a capped league being able to squeeze every inch out of the cap is important. This is (imo) why we see so few trades in the first place, the salary almost always needs to match up in the short term because there's only so much cap to go around.

tempest2i is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 09:33 PM
  #702
Scottrockztheworld*
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
Keep spending it on a back-up goalie. More power to you.
Let me ask you this: Would you rather spend that money on Luongo, trade for overpaid players that won't make an impact or not spend it at all?

As long as we have the space with no other way to spend it to improve our team then keeping Luongo is better then trading for him, getting a cap dump & not having a great tandem.

Scottrockztheworld* is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 09:35 PM
  #703
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 17,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackdaddy View Post
We're not talking about a pronger/neidermayer or weber/suter tandem here. We're talking about a goaltending position which last time i checked is allowed only one goal tender in net at a time.

I don't think ive ever seen a team intentionally ice two starting goaltenders. I think many would see that as bad asset management. Especially at 10m.
What do you mean, the Oilers just signed Devan Dubnyk to pretty much the same contract Cory Schneider just got. With Khabibulin there as a starter making close to Luongo money...

The Canucks spend less than 3% of the cap more than the Oilers do between the pipes - and a dozen other teams as well. Are you also deeply concerned with the Oilers investing over $7mil of the cap in goaltending? Considering the monumental gap in performance between these 4 players it's easy to see why Canuck fans aren't worried in the least. Ensuring elite level netminding is well worth the price in dollars.

Drop the Sopel is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 09:37 PM
  #704
KeninsFan
"Unintentional" Tank
 
KeninsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3,459
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by tempest2i View Post
I doubt MG is excited about having a large cap hit sitting on the bench every night, regardless of who is actually in net.
What's the alternative?

3.2M for MacArthur?
3.5M for Upshall?

+ a much lesser back-up and a heavier workload for Schneider.

We have enough cap space to add a Doan (legit top 6) type player while keeping Luongo.

We can easily sign a tweener (like MacArthur) and keep Luongo.

KeninsFan is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 09:39 PM
  #705
smackdaddy
Hall-RNH-Eberle
 
smackdaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
The Canucks did that last season and cruised to the playoffs.

St. Louis had 2 elite netminders last season and cruised to the playoffs.

The Bruins have been doing that for 3 seasons and have won a cup.

The Wild regularly ran with a 1A/1B setup.

Having 2 elite netminders is much better than having 0.

Of course I'd rather have a legitimate top 6er instead of Luongo (Canucks lack secondary scoring) but no one is offering that.

There are many upsides to keeping Luongo as part of a tandem, it's much more beneficial to a contender than acquiring MacArthur + draft pick.
Those goaltenders have clear roles on the team. One is a backup, the other is a starter. The Canucks are icing two goaltenders who should be starters.

Having a 1A/1B is not an efficient use of resources and I'm pretty sure those teams didn't spend 10M between them. The Wild identified their starter and traded the other. Either way, it doesn't last long for the reasons I mentioned and I'm sure it's going to be the same way in Vancouver.

There might be a few "upsides" for keeping Luongo but they only become apparent when some real bad downsides come to light such as Schneider unable to carry the load or getting a season ending injury or whatever. If his upside is being able to take the load of Schneider what does that say about Schneider's ability and what does that do for his confidence going forward? I'm sure Schneider is chomping at the bit at becoming a #1.

Is Luongo at 5.5M/yr in cap space really worth the benefits that might show up 25% of the season? Logic says no.

Then there's the very real possibility of both of them not being able to maintain any form of momentum whatsoever due to being constantly swapped out. Then you got yourselves the dreaded 2-headed goaltending monster.

I suppose the Canucks would do well for back-to-back games. But it's doubtful it would make up the ground lost with the 3 other teams in the Northwest banging on the door.

smackdaddy is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 09:42 PM
  #706
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyLager View Post
You make it sound like players are expected to enjoy this. Luongo hasn't "made it known" any more than the average player does, regardless of perception.
I guess I just listen to more talk radio.

charliolemieux is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 09:43 PM
  #707
smoke meat pete*
VoiceofReason
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandV View Post
A minor distinction should be made here. Burke started his tenure in Toronto with a great deal of impatience, when that blew up in his face he switched to more of a long term building mode and has done a decent job of it.

In my opinion the main pressure on Burke is if Luongo goes for relatively cheap to another team and is successful WHILE Toronto misses the playoffs yet again, especially if it's due to weak goaltending, then he's really going to have ownership and the entire fanbase breathing down his neck. If the offers Gillis receives for Luongo aren't that great he can get the most leverage on this against Burke since he's facing the most pressure. I'm talking about if it comes to the very end of the line and Vancouver has to pull the trigger now, Toronto's best offer is MacArthur and Lombardi and Florida's is Bergenheim and Goc, Gillis isn't going to do Burke any favours here and will take the Florida deal.
There is a price Burke will be willing to pay, and it won't be overpayment. I also believe we do not have to dump much salary to get him, and you may get a decent but unspectacular player for Luongo. We have plenty of those, some of whom are expendable.

A couple interesting things to consider. At the end of last season, Francois Allaire contemplated leaving the Leafs as he felt he was being blamed for not having quality veteran goalies to lead. He's also said to be a good friend and longtime coach of Luongo, and to date he has not quit the Leafs.

Add to that, in a Rick Dudley interview as he left the Leafs he was very sure the Leafs would be adding a good veteran goalie.

Quote:
The most important of those moves, one he believes GM Brian Burke is working on, is to get an established, elite goaltender. Dudley says that will make an enormous difference to a team with a lot of young players like the Leafs, since their confidence will no longer suffer when they see their mistakes wind up in the net.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle4209742/

Also of note, Ben Scrivens is not waiver exempt and he was not sent down by the Leafs this week. I have no idea what that means, but I've heard Ben has been told he'd get a chance to play in the NHL by the Leafs. I also don't think it's a coincidence that Cody Franson hasn't been signed yet. I don't know if he's trade bait, or someone else is, or someone else is coming over, but I think we are in for a couple of bigger moves.

smoke meat pete* is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 09:44 PM
  #708
AmazingNuck
Registered User
 
AmazingNuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,130
vCash: 500
I'm one of the Canucks fans that would like Roberto to stay. A lot have said that Schneider isn't proven over a full NHL season and that is true. If Schneider doesn't do well without Luongo there, then the Canucks are in a very bad position. If Schneider does not do well and the Canucks do have Luongo, then the Canucks might be in an even better position. Luongo might still be a better goaltender than Schneider.

AmazingNuck is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 09:45 PM
  #709
PanthersHockey1
South by Southeast
 
PanthersHockey1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Palm Trees
Country: United States
Posts: 6,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackdaddy View Post
Those goaltenders have clear roles on the team. One is a backup, the other is a starter. The Canucks are icing two goaltenders who should be starters.

Having a 1A/1B is not an efficient use of resources and I'm pretty sure those teams didn't spend 10M between them. The Wild identified their starter and traded the other. Either way, it doesn't last long for the reasons I mentioned and I'm sure it's going to be the same way in Vancouver.

There might be a few "upsides" for keeping Luongo but they only become apparent when some real bad downsides come to light such as Schneider unable to carry the load or getting a season ending injury or whatever. If his upside is being able to take the load of Schneider what does that say about Schneider's ability and what does that do for his confidence going forward? I'm sure Schneider is chomping at the bit at becoming a #1.

Is Luongo at 5.5M/yr in cap space really worth the benefits that might show up 25% of the season? Logic says no.

Then there's the very real possibility of both of them not being able to maintain any form of momentum whatsoever due to being constantly swapped out. Then you got yourselves the dreaded 2-headed goaltending monster.

I suppose the Canucks would do well for back-to-back games. But it's doubtful it would make up the ground lost with the 3 other teams in the Northwest banging on the door.
Good post very logical. When it comes to a stanley cup contender one player can make the difference. Honestly, i think the canucks would be wise to allocate funds used for luongo on players they need to win a cup. Its simple logic imo.

PanthersHockey1 is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 09:46 PM
  #710
PanthersHockey1
South by Southeast
 
PanthersHockey1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Palm Trees
Country: United States
Posts: 6,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmazingNuck View Post
I'm one of the Canucks fans that would like Roberto to stay. A lot have said that Schneider isn't proven over a full NHL season and that is true. If Schneider doesn't do well without Luongo there, then the Canucks are in a very bad position. If Schneider does not do well and the Canucks do have Luongo, then the Canucks might be in an even better position. Luongo might still be a better goaltender than Schneider.
Don't discount the fact that a serviceable goaltender in either clemmensen or theodore would be headed back to vancouver should a deal happen with luongo. Clemmensen was a rock last year and carried the panthers during a lean time when theodore was out with injury he did the same thing for New Jersey a couple of years ago. Theodore when healthy was excellent last year as well.

PanthersHockey1 is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 09:47 PM
  #711
KeninsFan
"Unintentional" Tank
 
KeninsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3,459
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackdaddy View Post
Is Luongo at 5.3M/yr in cap space really worth the benefits that might show up 25% of the season?
Ok fine, what would the Canucks receive that's worth 5.3M and improves their team?

A 3M+ tweener seems like a sharp downgrade...

Quote:
Originally Posted by smackdaddy View Post
I suppose the Canucks would do well for back-to-back games. But it's doubtful it would make up the ground lost with the 3 other teams in the Northwest banging on the door.
The closest team was over 20 points away.

I hope the other teams do well, having a competitive division would help reduce the Canucks absolutely mailing it in 20 games a season.

KeninsFan is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 09:47 PM
  #712
smackdaddy
Hall-RNH-Eberle
 
smackdaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
What do you mean, the Oilers just signed Devan Dubnyk to pretty much the same contract Cory Schneider just got. With Khabibulin there as a starter making close to Luongo money...

The Canucks spend less than 3% of the cap more than the Oilers do between the pipes - and a dozen other teams as well. Are you also deeply concerned with the Oilers investing over $7mil of the cap in goaltending? Considering the monumental gap in performance between these 4 players it's easy to see why Canuck fans aren't worried in the least. Ensuring elite level netminding is well worth the price in dollars.
I think the difference is Khabibulin's bad contract is over in 8 years sooner than Luongo's

smackdaddy is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 09:47 PM
  #713
Ched Brosky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
Enjoy Luongo then.

I wouldn't give more than a 2nd for him. Maybe Reimer and a 3rd.

Otherwise as a non-VAN fan enjoy your $10M back up. I, and the fans of 29 other teams, can't wait until Schneider wants $6M per year himself.
lol its not like Luongo could u know pull a Thomas and rebound. Its not like he had a bad year last season just an average one.

But thanks we'll enjoy 2 elite goalies while u can enjoy 2 back ups!

Ched Brosky is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 09:47 PM
  #714
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 17,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tempest2i View Post
While I understand your opinion regarding carrying two expensive goalies on the team, I doubt MG is excited about having a large cap hit sitting on the bench every night, regardless of who is actually in net.

In a capped league being able to squeeze every inch out of the cap is important. This is (imo) why we see so few trades in the first place, the salary almost always needs to match up in the short term because there's only so much cap to go around.
Luongo started 50 games last year - if he returned to form a tandem with Schneider he likely plays roughly 40 games over a full season. His share of work wouldn't be much different than last years...

Impact roster players value always goes up throughout the regular season and peaks at the trade deadline, where astronomical returns are often found. Until teams find themselves in the thick of a playoff race they won't need to get aggressive on the trade front. Gillis knows this and also see's the benefit of keeping around 2 elite level netminders in case of injury and to avoid fatigue. Canuck management has spoken countless times in the past about keeping the starting goalies workload down and have designs on a long playoff run. It's easy to see the value in holding onto Luongo until teams make serious offers.

Drop the Sopel is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 09:52 PM
  #715
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imagine17 View Post
Let me ask you this: Would you rather spend that money on Luongo, trade for overpaid players that won't make an impact or not spend it at all?

As long as we have the space with no other way to spend it to improve our team then keeping Luongo is better then trading for him, getting a cap dump & not having a great tandem.


As a top CUP contender the canucks have 5M+ tied up in a goalie who they don't believe gives them the best chance to win.

charliolemieux is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 09:58 PM
  #716
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 17,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
As a top CUP contender the canucks have 5M+ tied up in a goalie who they don't believe gives them the best chance to win.
If the Canucks have no faith in Luongo why did he get the net in game 1 and 2 against the Kings? Seems to me the coaching staff had Luongo pegged as their starter.

Look around at what teams are spending on goaltending. It's gone up significantly over the last couple years. The Canucks pay a lot for elite level netminding and that's what they get. In no way, shape or form is that a bad thing.

Drop the Sopel is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 10:01 PM
  #717
tempest2i
You and Whose Army?
 
tempest2i's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cowtown
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
What's the alternative?

3.2M for MacArthur?
3.5M for Upshall?

+ a much lesser back-up and a heavier workload for Schneider.

We have enough cap space to add a Doan (legit top 6) type player while keeping Luongo.

We can easily sign a tweener (like MacArthur) and keep Luongo.
I understand your viewpoint. I just don't think any GM is going to add a large cap hit without sending substantial cap back the other way.

Short term pain for long term gain. Overpaying a forward for a couple seasons might end up being the price it costs to get that contract off the books.

If you dislike the return that much just waive the player and send them to the minors. Just like the team Luongo gets traded to will eventually do once he's no longer worth his cap hit.

tempest2i is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 10:03 PM
  #718
Scottrockztheworld*
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
As a top CUP contender the canucks have 5M+ tied up in a goalie who they don't believe gives them the best chance to win.
When did they EVER say that?

Again if we don't have a better way to spend that $5.3 Million isn't it better to keep that tandem then trade him for scraps?


Quote:
Originally Posted by tempest2i View Post
I understand your viewpoint. I just don't think any GM is going to add a large cap hit without sending substantial cap back the other way.

Short term pain for long term gain. Overpaying a forward for a couple seasons might end up being the price it costs to get that contract off the books.

If you dislike the return that much just waive the player and send them to the minors. Just like the team Luongo gets traded to will eventually do once he's no longer worth his cap hit.
& if we don't need to get that contract off the books right now then why do it? Heck maybe he gains more value in the meanwhile & we eventually can trade him for something that doesn't include an absolute dump coming back.

Scottrockztheworld* is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 10:04 PM
  #719
leeroggy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,464
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
From Florida any 2 of Goc, Petrovic, and a 1st, with maybe Upshall/Clemmenson thrown in. That's what I'd expect, although worst case scenario we may have to take a bit less. Raymond may go the other way.

From Toronto I'd expect Kadri, 1st, and Lombardi.

These are simply my expectations, if Gillis gets less, I'll be disappointed, more and I would be happy.
For all of you Canucks fan hear this simple thought:

Luongo to Florida ISN'T happening and is only mentioned because of his links here. But in rebuttal:

Why put such a roadblock in front of Markstrom?

The Panther owners are NOT deep pockets (they are multiple local business owners and there's not a Terry Pegula-type in the group) and are not going to take on that salary. Since Vancouver is dealing Luongo to clear the salary out they don't want to take back salary.

The Panthers are committed to their youth and will not change that philosophy to go in another direction.

For all the Vancouver fans that keep talking about how its better to keep both why are there even trade talks AT ALL?

The Cap is going DOWN, are you really going to bury Luongo in the minors? NO! Your vaunted cap space will shrink and the whole idea is NOT to take up too much cap space with the goaltending position. Heck, the new CBA might even include some of a buried salary as part of the major league roster for cap purposes and then that strategy is less effective.

The only way you get what you want is to accept LESS. You keep forgetting that Luongo's salary can be applied to another position, even if you dump him for picks.

I don't understand how any Canuck fan can believe you have ANY leverage in dealing him. Do you think the other GM's are dummies? This is a new day for the league salary-wise and NO ONE else wants to extend a goalie like this (as a NY Islander fan I feel expert on that assumption). He is not a position player. Get used to the PROBABILITY he will be dumped WAY BELOW market value to be able to fit another need with the saved salary.

There is no such thing as FAIR VALUE when this salary albatross is taken into account. The salary coming off the books is the only return you will get. If he were a $9,000,000 per year goalie with two years left on his contract he would be more tradable today.

leeroggy is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 10:04 PM
  #720
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
Ok fine, what would the Canucks receive that's worth 5.3M and improves their team?

A 3M+ tweener seems like a sharp downgrade...


The closest team was over 20 points away.

I hope the other teams do well, having a competitive division would help reduce the Canucks absolutely mailing it in 20 games a season.
This is what GIllis is trying to tell you.

Forget about getting anything for Luongo that is an upgrade to anything you already have.

Think futures and even then don't think about too much.

The key here is moving what you get, combined with what you have, to improve the team.

Booth? Higgins?

umm, sorry.

Ya keeping Luongo might be the best bet.

charliolemieux is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 10:05 PM
  #721
Vankiller Whale
#GetJimBinned
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,910
vCash: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by tempest2i View Post
I understand your viewpoint. I just don't think any GM is going to add a large cap hit without sending substantial cap back the other way.

Short term pain for long term gain. Overpaying a forward for a couple seasons might end up being the price it costs to get that contract off the books.

If you dislike the return that much just waive the player and send them to the minors. Just like the team Luongo gets traded to will eventually do once he's no longer worth his cap hit.

If and when we need the cap space we may do that. Until then we wil not be forced to move our elite goaltender unless someone gives us a reasonable incentive to do it.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 10:05 PM
  #722
arsmaster
semantic romantic
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 24,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanthersHockey1 View Post
Good post very logical. When it comes to a stanley cup contender one player can make the difference. Honestly, i think the canucks would be wise to allocate funds used for luongo on players they need to win a cup. Its simple logic imo.
How's it logical when the bruins were addressed?

They were in a similar situation 2 years ago...Rask took the starters role and the vetera Tim Thomas was the backup.

The next season Tim Thomas won his job back, won the vezina, conn Smythe and the Stanley cup.

It's only logical when it fits your argument.

arsmaster is online now  
Old
09-16-2012, 10:08 PM
  #723
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imagine17 View Post
When did they EVER say that?
How about RND 1 Game 3 2012 Stanley Cup playoffs!!!

charliolemieux is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 10:10 PM
  #724
Vankiller Whale
#GetJimBinned
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,910
vCash: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeroggy View Post
For all of you Canucks fan hear this simple thought:

Luongo to Florida ISN'T happening and is only mentioned because of his links here. But in rebuttal:

Why put such a roadblock in front of Markstrom?

The Panther owners are NOT deep pockets (they are multiple local business owners and there's not a Terry Pegula-type in the group) and are not going to take on that salary. Since Vancouver is dealing Luongo to clear the salary out they don't want to take back salary.

The Panthers are committed to their youth and will not change that philosophy to go in another direction.

For all the Vancouver fans that keep talking about how its better to keep both why are there even trade talks AT ALL?

The Cap is going DOWN, are you really going to bury Luongo in the minors? NO! Your vaunted cap space will shrink and the whole idea is NOT to take up too much cap space with the goaltending position. Heck, the new CBA might even include some of a buried salary as part of the major league roster for cap purposes and then that strategy is less effective.

The only way you get what you want is to accept LESS. You keep forgetting that Luongo's salary can be applied to another position, even if you dump him for picks.

I don't understand how any Canuck fan can believe you have ANY leverage in dealing him. Do you think the other GM's are dummies? This is a new day for the league salary-wise and NO ONE else wants to extend a goalie like this (as a NY Islander fan I feel expert on that assumption). He is not a position player. Get used to the PROBABILITY he will be dumped WAY BELOW market value to be able to fit another need with the saved salary.

There is no such thing as FAIR VALUE when this salary albatross is taken into account. The salary coming off the books is the only return you will get. If he were a $9,000,000 per year goalie with two years left on his contract he would be more tradable today.
It doesn't matter to me which team takes him, as long as we get good value. If Florida wants him now, they'd have to pay a decent amount. If for some reason we are forced to dump him later on because of the cap, then we may settle for less(like Petrovic + 2nd). As of now we have no reason to shed cap space, hence no reason to trade Luongo.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
09-16-2012, 10:10 PM
  #725
leeroggy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,464
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imagine17 View Post
Again if we don't have a better way to spend that $5.3 Million isn't it better to keep that tandem then trade him for scraps?
Not if you can use $4,000,000 of that to fit other needs. Asset allocation! If Lack is ready and you can add a solid player or two, or one Top 6 type for that $4 million its a better way to go. Add a prospect or a pick as a bonus. But the saved salary is the TOP asset in the deal, not what you get back.

leeroggy is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:24 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.