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 contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

The new All Purpose Lu Thread (MOD Warning in OP)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-25-2012, 11:47 PM
  #976
Vankiller Whale
All hail WMD
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,961
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
Which he is clearly not. Why yourself and others expect him to have the same value as he would have at 20, when he is clearly not that age; makes no sense.
And as I said, no one expects that as a return. Absolutely no one.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
11-25-2012, 11:47 PM
  #977
DougGilmour93
Registered User
 
DougGilmour93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
No one(including himself) expects him to play out his contract until the end.

And even if he does, there's no reason why he wouldn't agree to be traded as a veteran backup to Florida to push them over the cap floor while making peanuts.
I doubt Florida will still be in the NHL 7 years from now.

But your arguement is weak. Your speculating. No offense. Either you accept less than you expect, or you're stuck with him. Yes stuck, no one wants to be paying a 40 + year old 5.3 mil. (Brodeur is the exception)


Last edited by DougGilmour93: 11-26-2012 at 12:15 AM.
DougGilmour93 is offline  
Old
11-25-2012, 11:53 PM
  #978
Vankiller Whale
All hail WMD
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,961
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
I doubt Florida will still be in the NHL 7 years from now.
And you say my argument's weak?

Quote:
But your arguement is weak. Your speculating. No offense. Either you accept less than you expect, or you're stuck wit. Yes stuck, no one wants to be paying a 40 + year old 5.3 mil. (Brodeur is the exception)
As has been mentioned numerous, numerous times, there are many different possible options:

1)(Most likely) Luongo retires when his play declines and he knows he is no longer wanted.
2)(next most likely) Luongo would still like to play, so is traded to a cap floor team as a veteran backup.
3)(less likely) Luongo refuses to retire and there are no interested cap floor teams. Luongo is buried in the minors until he retires or his term is up.

4) Option 3, with the added twist that the CBA doesn't allow burying in the minors, and Luongo prefers to play in the AHL to retiring. That it's even considered a possibility is absurd.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
11-25-2012, 11:54 PM
  #979
Co Ho*
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
I doubt Florida will still be in the NHL 7 years from now.

But your arguement is weak. Your speculating. No offense. Either you accept less than you expect, or you're stuck wit. Yes stuck, no one wants to be paying a 40 + year old 5.3 mil. (Brodeur is the exception)

Both sides of the argument are weak. There has been plenty of speculation over when/if Luongo declines and at what age. None of this can be predicted. Both sides are pushing weak arguments based on non-existent premises.

Co Ho* is offline  
Old
11-25-2012, 11:58 PM
  #980
New Liskeard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
And as I said, no one expects that as a return. Absolutely no one.
You should go through your fan base's recent proposals, including your own. At first I would have been happy to have him, but with the risk, contract and contract length, and helping the nucks get out of cap issues and give plenty of propsects and picks for taking on the risk and cap burden is a bad move. Rather Vancouver keep him and juggle the cap hit, and pay him until he is in his early 40's. Pass thanks.

New Liskeard is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:01 AM
  #981
New Liskeard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Co Ho View Post
Both sides of the argument are weak. There has been plenty of speculation over when/if Luongo declines and at what age. None of this can be predicted. Both sides are pushing weak arguments based on non-existent premises.
So his contract doesnt pay him till he is 42? I guess that is a lie, not to mention the cap going down is fake as well?

New Liskeard is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:01 AM
  #982
Vankiller Whale
All hail WMD
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,961
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
You should go through your fan base's recent proposals, including your own. At first I would have been happy to have him, but with the risk, contract and contract length, and helping the nucks get out of cap issues and give plenty of propsects and picks for taking on the risk and cap burden is a bad move. Rather Vancouver keep him and juggle the cap hit, and pay him until he is in his early 40's. Pass thanks.
Who's asked for Kessel+? Because for Luongo in his twenties that's where the conversation starts and ends. We don't expect that now. We're still expecting a return that can help us though. And if Toronto isn't willing to give us that, then there's no deal to be made.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:06 AM
  #983
New Liskeard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
And you say my argument's weak?



As has been mentioned numerous, numerous times, there are many different possible options:

1)(Most likely) Luongo retires when his play declines and he knows he is no longer wanted.
2)(next most likely) Luongo would still like to play, so is traded to a cap floor team as a veteran backup.
3)(less likely) Luongo refuses to retire and there are no interested cap floor teams. Luongo is buried in the minors until he retires or his term is up.

4) Option 3, with the added twist that the CBA doesn't allow burying in the minors, and Luongo prefers to play in the AHL to retiring. That it's even considered a possibility is absurd.
Why would a cap floor team still pay a player who is on the decline? There have been discusions that teams will no longer be able to hide players in the minors. This is something that has been discussed at length in the CBA, you seem to be skirting the conversation again and making excuses.

New Liskeard is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:09 AM
  #984
Vankiller Whale
All hail WMD
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,961
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
Why would a cap floor team still pay a player who is on the decline?
To pay only $1mil and pay $5mil less to stay over the cap floor? That's $4 mil in the owner's pocket.



Quote:
There have been discusions that teams will no longer be able to hide players in the minors. This is something that has been discussed at length in the CBA, you seem to be skirting the conversation again and making excuses.
And there have been discussions of the NHLPA decertifying, basically eliminating a salary cap. What of it? Speculating the new CBA will lower Luongo's value is as productive of me speculating it will raise his value.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:11 AM
  #985
mriswith
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 348
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
So I guess contract consideration is not important? I guess its an easy sell to any owner suggesting that by aquiring Lou, the team may be forced to continue to pay this player even if he isnt playing. Not to mention the cap as a whole is going down, and it is unsure how many years of top goaltending Lou will provide? Oh and the Nucks will also want to shed some cap to address other needs as well, and of course expect a big return on a player that comes with lots of risk and financial commitment long term. Makes plenty of sense
Given that we were talking about Rinne's relevance, and you somehow branched to this, I assume that in two/three years Rinne will also only be worth a bag of pucks?

Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
Why would a cap floor team still pay a player who is on the decline? There have been discusions that teams will no longer be able to hide players in the minors. This is something that has been discussed at length in the CBA, you seem to be skirting the conversation again and making excuses.
The inanity of this discussion is highlighted by focusing on his play and pay when he's over forty.

mriswith is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:15 AM
  #986
New Liskeard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Who's asked for Kessel+? Because for Luongo in his twenties that's where the conversation starts and ends. We don't expect that now. We're still expecting a return that can help us though. And if Toronto isn't willing to give us that, then there's no deal to be made.

With Lou's NTC, and every team looking at a reduced cap hit, I can see many teams lining up to take on a player who may be on the decline, has a contract that pays him until 42, and Nucks fans expect teams to help them out by taking on Lou;s contract, and giving up assets in the process? It gets more ridiculous by the minute. Keep Lou, enjoy the contract and the cap hit for both goalies, and good luck managing the new reduced cap.

New Liskeard is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:16 AM
  #987
DougGilmour93
Registered User
 
DougGilmour93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
And you say my argument's weak?



As has been mentioned numerous, numerous times, there are many different possible options:

1)(Most likely) Luongo retires when his play declines and he knows he is no longer wanted.
2)(next most likely) Luongo would still like to play, so is traded to a cap floor team as a veteran backup.
3)(less likely) Luongo refuses to retire and there are no interested cap floor teams. Luongo is buried in the minors until he retires or his term is up.

4) Option 3, with the added twist that the CBA doesn't allow burying in the minors, and Luongo prefers to play in the AHL to retiring. That it's even considered a possibility is absurd.
Why would a player walk away from money?

DougGilmour93 is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:17 AM
  #988
New Liskeard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by schism View Post
Given that we were talking about Rinne's relevance, and you somehow branched to this, I assume that in two/three years Rinne will also only be worth a bag of pucks?

The inanity of this discussion is highlighted by focusing on his play and pay when he's over forty.
No the insanity is expecting a team to take on a player who may be on the decline, while the overall cap will be reduced, and give up assets in the process. Its the reality that some dont want to face.

New Liskeard is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:18 AM
  #989
Vankiller Whale
All hail WMD
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,961
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
With Lou's NTC, and every team looking at a reduced cap hit, I can see many teams lining up to take on a player who may be on the decline, has a contract that pays him until 42, and Nucks fans expect teams to help them out by taking on Lou;s contract, and giving up assets in the process? It gets more ridiculous by the minute. Keep Lou, enjoy the contract and the cap hit for both goalies, and good luck managing the new reduced cap.
You didn't answer the question. Luongo at 25 would be worth Kessel+. Luongo now obviously has less value, and everyone accepts that. But you can keep telling us to keep our goalies like it's a bad thing. It's a lot better than having no starting calibre goalies.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:18 AM
  #990
DougGilmour93
Registered User
 
DougGilmour93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Co Ho View Post
Both sides of the argument are weak. There has been plenty of speculation over when/if Luongo declines and at what age. None of this can be predicted. Both sides are pushing weak arguments based on non-existent premises.
I concur.

DougGilmour93 is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:19 AM
  #991
New Liskeard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by schism View Post
Given that we were talking about Rinne's relevance, and you somehow branched to this, I assume that in two/three years Rinne will also only be worth a bag of pucks? The inanity of this discussion is highlighted by focusing on his play and pay when he's over forty.
Who knows that his value will be, but I would rather have a player under contract until 37 than 42 but that should be common sense. Rinne is not being moved, Lou is open for a trade and has a contract till 42, Rinne 37. Why you are comparing two totally different players to one another is ridiculous.

New Liskeard is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:22 AM
  #992
Vankiller Whale
All hail WMD
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,961
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
Why would a player walk away from money?
Because the last 3 years of his contract are 1.6 mil, 1 mil, 1 mil. It virtually screams cap circumvention. Plus Luongo said in an interview during a poker tournament that "It's a long contract, likely way longer than I'd be want to play" or something to that effect. There's a reason the league stopped any new circumvention contracts, and it's not because their protecting the GMs that made the deal.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:23 AM
  #993
Beezeral
Registered User
 
Beezeral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 2,214
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=DougGilmour93;56036165]I doubt Florida will still be in the NHL 7 years from now.

/QUOTE]

This should be a very interesting explanation.

Beezeral is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:30 AM
  #994
New Liskeard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
You didn't answer the question. Luongo at 25 would be worth Kessel+. Luongo now obviously has less value, and everyone accepts that. But you can keep telling us to keep our goalies like it's a bad thing. It's a lot better than having no starting calibre goalies.
Why talk about what value Lou has at 25, when he is 33? Its not reality, and has no bearing on what the situation is today. Sound like a game that kids play, about finding out players values previously. Thanks but i;m not interested in this game. Maybe you can start a fun thread elsewhere asking posters what players value;s are? In the meantime, I could care less about Vancouver, I certainlly hope the Leafs dont take on Lous contract and risk, and help the nucks out with their cap hit and give them assets in the meantime. Rather you guys sort that our, rather than the Leafs help you out.

New Liskeard is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:31 AM
  #995
LAX attack*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Danger Zone
Country: United States
Posts: 14,543
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to LAX attack*
What if Luo became an Islander again? What about Moulson straight up for Roberto.

LAX attack* is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:34 AM
  #996
marty111
Registered User
 
marty111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by schism View Post
The relevance is that the contract is the only thing people ever talk about. What % of these threads have been about his contract? Compare that to what % has been discussion about over a decade of elite play with no sign of decline (yet, of course).

Look at the Nash+Staal trades recently for how public knowledge of wanting out doesn't have to impact trade value.
The relevance I was talking about was BOTH goalies for Nashville and NYR. Combined cap hits and all, Vancouver has the height-est paid tandem in the NHL for the longest duration.

If they intend to keep Schneider regardless [which can be a separate conversation] we are talking 3-5 years+++ for a 9m+ tandem.

It is simply unparallelled by any team in the league so using Nashville and NYR as examples isn't a good comparison. Even at less of a combined cap hit, they are less and over within one year or two.

It's completely fruitless to have this conversation to have a rebuttal that end up in the "Lu for scraps? Have fun with X goalie, etc" because I'm not even talking about value at this point.

Surely Vancouver fans should be able to concede the point that part of the reason for trading Lu [or one of their goalies] is for the cap management and distribution of their assets.

Surely they should be able to at least concede that point, but round and round we go and it's often ignored or taken out of context.

marty111 is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:35 AM
  #997
mriswith
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 348
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
Why would a player walk away from money?
Lu has said on air he didn't plan on playing it out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
No the insanity is expecting a team to take on a player who may be on the decline, while the overall cap will be reduced, and give up assets in the process. Its the reality that some dont want to face.
This ignores the fact that he is an elite player and has not begun to decline yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
Who knows that his value will be, but I would rather have a player under contract until 37 than 42 but that should be common sense. Rinne is not being moved, Lou is open for a trade and has a contract till 42, Rinne 37. Why you are comparing two totally different players to one another is ridiculous.
Again, since you are having trouble following the chain of events...

>term brought up "
->Rinne is signed until 37, is it that different
-->your blurb on cap and contracts making Lu not worth giving up any assets for
--->Rinne in a few years (Lu's age) will be worth nothing?

mriswith is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:36 AM
  #998
Vankiller Whale
All hail WMD
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,961
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
Why talk about what value Lou has at 25, when he is 33? Its not reality, and has no bearing on what the situation is today. Sound like a game that kids play, about finding out players values previously. Thanks but i;m not interested in this game. Maybe you can start a fun thread elsewhere asking posters what players value;s are? In the meantime, I could care less about Vancouver, I certainlly hope the Leafs dont take on Lous contract and risk, and help the nucks out with their cap hit and give them assets in the meantime. Rather you guys sort that our, rather than the Leafs help you out.
You seem to keep going in circles. You said we expect a return for Luongo right now that he would get if he were in his mid twenties. We don't. No one does.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:41 AM
  #999
DanCloutiers5hole
Registered User
 
DanCloutiers5hole's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Van City
Country: Canada
Posts: 83
vCash: 500
When did this thread become a disscussion on salary and supposed cap implications? I am of the opinion that i would rather keep Lou than receive a below average return. I don't think Vancouver management would resign Schneider without knowing there may be a possibility that both goalies might return. We are talking about a multi-million dollar organization that employs capologists for scenarios like this. These people are not dumb! Im not worried about it so maybe you shouldnt be either. Any arguments based on what may or may not happen (e.g. where the cap will be) should not have any basis on supposed value. It kills me how people from other fan bases continually bring up money and distractions just to validate their argument that Luongo has poor value. Everyone's entitled to there opinions, i understand this, but that last several pages have been spent on baseless hypothetical circumstance

DanCloutiers5hole is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:45 AM
  #1000
mriswith
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 348
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by marty111 View Post
The relevance I was talking about was BOTH goalies for Nashville and NYR. Combined cap hits and all, Vancouver has the height-est paid tandem in the NHL for the longest duration.

If they intend to keep Schneider regardless [which can be a separate conversation] we are talking 3-5 years+++ for a 9m+ tandem.

It is simply unparallelled by any team in the league so using Nashville and NYR as examples isn't a good comparison. Even at less of a combined cap hit, they are less and over within one year or two.
Rinne and Lundqvists contracts basically ensure that the tandem's combined cap hit will be 8m+ for the duration of the contract. I still agree that we will need to move one of our goalies, but that is just as much a function of having two elite goaltenders for one position as it is the combined cap hit.

Quote:
It's completely fruitless to have this conversation to have a rebuttal that end up in the "Lu for scraps? Have fun with X goalie, etc" because I'm not even talking about value at this point.

Surely Vancouver fans should be able to concede the point that part of the reason for trading Lu [or one of their goalies] is for the cap management and distribution of their assets.

Surely they should be able to at least concede that point, but round and round we go and it's often ignored or taken out of context.
I absolutely agree with this. If we aren't talking about value right now, then I agree with all of this.

I brought back the comparison because the conversation shifted back to Lu being a cap dump. Despite that one of the reasons for moving him is the cap, we don't have an urgent need to move him. He is an elite player with a below market cap hit and at least, at least, a few years of elite play left before the beginning of a decline.

mriswith 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 03:55 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.