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.

Luongo thread continued...

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-29-2012, 03:47 PM
  #426
Jax Teller
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Watch it....you haven't heard the "plus" yet.
True. I'd probably like to get a look at that first.

Jax Teller is online now  
Old
11-29-2012, 03:48 PM
  #427
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,508
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper81 View Post
hahah if its lupul and first you would be all for it
If i thought a UFA winger and a 1st gets me Schnieder...the Hell ya...i'm all for it.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 03:53 PM
  #428
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,776
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
If i thought a UFA winger and a 1st gets me Schnieder...the Hell ya...i'm all for it.
It would have to be Rielly + 1st for me to want to trade Schneider.

Not saying the Leafs should do it but that's what I'd want for Schneider.

DJOpus is online now  
Old
11-29-2012, 03:53 PM
  #429
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,882
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
If Luongo was younger than the landscape of the deal would change.

If Luongo was only signed for 3-4yrs than I'd give up more value in a trade.

Truth is this...

1.He lost his job to a younger cheaper alternative due to his play.

2.He has a NTC which limits where he can be dealt.

3.He has an albatross of a contract.

All those lower his value to a potential suitor. GM's will take advantage of all those factors.

Sure, Luongo is a former allstar, I'm not debating that. There is just too many negative factors there for me to want to pay top dollar for him. No GM would.
If Lu were signed for 3 or 4 years his cap hit would be 6.7m and Leaf fans would be *****ing about that.

His NTC only matters if he limits the field, something he hasn't done as of yet. The only way that really effects Toronto is if he decides not to waive to go there or he veto's a trade that offers the best value to Vancouver.

His contract is not an albatross and in fact is a big reason Toronto is and should be in the Lu sweepstakes. Burke has not managed the cap well, Lu allows him to get our from under some mistakes while being a big upgrade to the current team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spasmatic Dan View Post
If his price is high, it destroys the allure to get him in my mind. I would look to other options personally.
I'm sure Burke will, as he should. If solving your goaltending issue was that easy, I think he would have got around to it before now.

Scurr is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 03:56 PM
  #430
DougGilmour93
Registered User
 
DougGilmour93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,150
vCash: 500
I'd have no problem paying a number one goalie 6.7m, especially on a shorter term contract.

DougGilmour93 is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 03:56 PM
  #431
Liferleafer
RIP Mrs Doubtfire
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,508
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
It would have to be Rielly + 1st for me to want to trade Schneider.

Not saying the Leafs should do it but that's what I'd want for Schneider.
I would pass on that one.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:00 PM
  #432
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,858
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnybaby View Post
I'd be more than happy with a Gardiner+ deal if Schneider was on the table. With Rielly on the way and Liles signed up for a few more years, Gardiner would be more than expendable for that type of asset.
Gardiner and your first or Lupul. Some Nuck fans would prefer the pick, others an impact forward. That is pretty much around what you could expect the demand for Schneider to be. Obviously, I'd prefer Lupul.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:01 PM
  #433
Spazmatic Dan
The Circle of Leaf
 
Spazmatic Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chatham, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
My question, which has a more positive impact for the next 5 years?

A: Luongo in net...JVR replacing Kuli.
B: Reimer or ?? in net...Kuli scoring 10-20 goals and Kadri playing 2nd-3rd line and the mystery pick.
Depends on what the ?? is. What other options are available for a similar or even slightly higher price? Or, with a shortened season, do we wait for the offseason to see who is available before pulling the trigger on a deal?

JVR doesn't replace Kulemin. He is already on the roster.

I'd love to see Luongo play for the Leafs as it would give us a very solid option in net for the next 5 years. However, I don't think its a good idea at that price because of what we lose and because of the riskiness of his contract.

I'm borderline okay with giving up Kulemin (I'm admittedly a big fan and I think he can get close to the form he had year before last so I'd prefer not to). I'm okay with giving up Kadri. I'm okay with giving up a conditional 1st.

What I'm squeamish about is giving up Kulemin, Kadri AND a conditional 1st. Like I was talking about earlier, I'm more comfortable giving up Gardiner etc. for a young up and coming goalie like Schneider than I am with giving up that much for Lu.

Spazmatic Dan is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:05 PM
  #434
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,882
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
I'd have no problem paying a number one goalie 6.7m, especially on a shorter term contract.
You may not, but Burke doesn't have 6.7m kicking around to give Lu.

Scurr is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:06 PM
  #435
Spazmatic Dan
The Circle of Leaf
 
Spazmatic Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chatham, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
If Lu were signed for 3 or 4 years his cap hit would be 6.7m and Leaf fans would be *****ing about that.

His NTC only matters if he limits the field, something he hasn't done as of yet. The only way that really effects Toronto is if he decides not to waive to go there or he veto's a trade that offers the best value to Vancouver.

His contract is not an albatross and in fact is a big reason Toronto is and should be in the Lu sweepstakes. Burke has not managed the cap well, Lu allows him to get our from under some mistakes while being a big upgrade to the current team.



I'm sure Burke will, as he should. If solving your goaltending issue was that easy, I think he would have got around to it before now.
Honestly, I'd be much more comfortable with a 6.7M cap hit on a 3-4 year term based on our current team. Its a lot more flexible.

5.3M with length its probably preferable from Vancouver's perspective, but from Toronto's perspective it becomes much more restrictive in my mind. For a team in flux, this is a negative I think.

And you're right. It will be interesting to see what comes out of it. I think its a battle in Burke's mind on risk and price vs reward. (Not Rask and Price vs Howard).

Spazmatic Dan is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:07 PM
  #436
Spazmatic Dan
The Circle of Leaf
 
Spazmatic Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chatham, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
You may not, but Burke doesn't have 6.7m kicking around to give Lu.
I think he'd rather make $1.4M in cap space than have to deal with 7 more years of contract.

Spazmatic Dan is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:10 PM
  #437
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
I acknowledge Luongo could be an upgrade in our goaltending position, but that still doesn't have any barring on his current status. His contract IS AN ALBATROSS. Burke is against cap circumvention, and is on record for saying so.

This isn't about what Burke would offer, it's about what I believe would be offered under the circumstances.


What you believe would be offered by whom? Who is this imaginary GM?


Again, how can his contract be a cap-circumvention deal and an albatross at the same time? Please explain that - this should be fun.


I think Canuck fans on here should be well aware of the contradiction in DG93's posts when dealing with him. There's no understanding of what cap-circumvention actually means. Therefore, his proposals will inherently be flawed.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:12 PM
  #438
Jax Teller
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
Gardiner and your first or Lupul. Some Nuck fans would prefer the pick, others an impact forward. That is pretty much around what you could expect the demand for Schneider to be. Obviously, I'd prefer Lupul.
I would do Gardiner + 2013 1st for Schneider.

If the Leafs can re-sign Lupul I'd prefer to not move both him and Gardiner in the same deal. If however, the Leafs were having trouble signing Lupul I would definately include him.

Jax Teller is online now  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:14 PM
  #439
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,785
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying High View Post
Neutral fan here. I think the deal will be Kulemin, Kadri, conditional first. Condition bring leafs making playoffs or it becomes a second and third.
Canucks wouldn't do it. Kulemin isn't an upgrade on what we already have too much of (Booth, Higgins, Raymond, Hansen), Kadri isn't the type of prospect who would do well under AV, and if we aren't getting a first round pick guaranteed to us there's no point in even discussing a trade for Luongo.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:15 PM
  #440
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,785
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spasmatic Dan View Post
I think he'd rather make $1.4M in cap space than have to deal with 7 more years of contract.
You prefer cap space over a goalie that will help your team win?

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:23 PM
  #441
Luck 6
\\_______
 
Luck 6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,372
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
With no CBA, there is no certainty. With our luck, Luongo will want to play til he's 42 (still at a cap hit of 5.3) and his play will have declined and we'll be paying our than 42 yr old backup (yes the odds are that he would be a backup at that time) 5.3 mil. Not great money management.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
I acknowledge Luongo could be an upgrade in our goaltending position, but that still doesn't have any barring on his current status. His contract IS AN ALBATROSS. Burke is against cap circumvention, and is on record for saying so.

This isn't about what Burke would offer, it's about what I believe would be offered under the circumstances.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
If Luongo was younger than the landscape of the deal would change.

If Luongo was only signed for 3-4yrs than I'd give up more value in a trade.

Truth is this...

1.He lost his job to a younger cheaper alternative due to his play.

2.He has a NTC which limits where he can be dealt.

3.He has an albatross of a contract.

All those lower his value to a potential suitor. GM's will take advantage of all those factors.

Sure, Luongo is a former allstar, I'm not debating that. There is just too many negative factors there for me to want to pay top dollar for him. No GM would.
I don't get you. You are either choosing to ignore facts or you are simply unaware of them. Assuming the CBA grandfathers Luongo's contract it really isn't bad at all, in fact it's quite good for a team like Toronto who has money to spend as the cap hit is lower than the salary. Let's break it down...

- Luongo has 10 years @ 5.33mil cap hit with a NTC. If he hit UFA status last offseason, he'd likely get more than that. Bryzgalov, a far worse goalie, just recently got a 9 year deal @ 5.67mil with a NMC.

- After the final game of the 17/18 season (when Luongo is 37) his NTC goes away until September 1. This gives any team that owns his rights a few months to trade him if they see fit. There will be takers as Luongo only has 1 year left at full salary, then his salary starts to dip far below his cap hit. It's unlikely Luongo's play will regress much if at all by that age, many goalies play their best hockey in their mid to late 30s.

- Luongo has a NTC, not a NMC. If Luongo wants to play until age 42 and you don't want him around, you waive him. There will be a number of cap floor teams that would be interested in grabbing a journeyman starting goalie with a 5.33mil cap hit at a salary of about 1.5mil. That's basically 3.85mil in the owners pocket.

- In the new CBA, they seem hell bent on hanging any penalties associated with long term contracts right on the necks of the team that originally signed them. As such, you get to take advantage of a longterm contract with zero reprecussion.

Luck 6 is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:37 PM
  #442
Scottrockztheworld*
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,301
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luck 6 View Post
I don't get you. You are either choosing to ignore facts or you are simply unaware of them. Assuming the CBA grandfathers Luongo's contract it really isn't bad at all, in fact it's quite good for a team like Toronto who has money to spend as the cap hit is lower than the salary. Let's break it down...

- Luongo has 10 years @ 5.33mil cap hit with a NTC. If he hit UFA status last offseason, he'd likely get more than that. Bryzgalov, a far worse goalie, just recently got a 9 year deal @ 5.67mil with a NMC.

- After the final game of the 17/18 season (when Luongo is 37) his NTC goes away until September 1. This gives any team that owns his rights a few months to trade him if they see fit. There will be takers as Luongo only has 1 year left at full salary, then his salary starts to dip far below his cap hit. It's unlikely Luongo's play will regress much if at all by that age, many goalies play their best hockey in their mid to late 30s.

- Luongo has a NTC, not a NMC. If Luongo wants to play until age 42 and you don't want him around, you waive him. There will be a number of cap floor teams that would be interested in grabbing a journeyman starting goalie with a 5.33mil cap hit at a salary of about 1.5mil. That's basically 3.85mil in the owners pocket.

- In the new CBA, they seem hell bent on hanging any penalties associated with long term contracts right on the necks of the team that originally signed them. As such, you get to take advantage of a longterm contract with zero reprecussion.
Can this be stickied to the beginning of every page please????


VVVV LOL ACC1224 those deals TOGETHER aren't even good enough!


Last edited by Scottrockztheworld*: 11-29-2012 at 04:51 PM.
Scottrockztheworld* is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:42 PM
  #443
ACC1224
Steelers 4 - 3
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 28,821
vCash: 500
I'd be ok with Kulemin + 3rd if Bozak + 2nd isn't enough.

ACC1224 is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:53 PM
  #444
Spazmatic Dan
The Circle of Leaf
 
Spazmatic Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chatham, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
You prefer cap space over a goalie that will help your team win?
What? No. Not at all.

All I was saying was that I'd prefer Luongo taking up $1.4M more in cap hit with 3-4 years left instead of 10. That's it.

If you read the chain you'll see it was a purely hypothetical point.

Spazmatic Dan is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:53 PM
  #445
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,882
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACC1224 View Post
I'd be ok with Kulemin + 3rd if Bozak + 2nd isn't enough.
What you're really saying is "I'm fine with our current goalies" because there is no way either of those deals is enough. You could combine them and the offer still isn't very attractive.

Scurr is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:55 PM
  #446
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,882
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spasmatic Dan View Post
All I was saying was that I'd prefer Luongo taking up $1.4M more in cap hit with 3-4 years left instead of 10. That's it.
This is ignoring the benefits, which would be big for your team right now with more than one bad contract eating up cap space, in favour of a chicken little argument. Who are these players that hang around forever to collect a paycheque? What has Luongo done in his career to make you think he's that guy?

Scurr is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 05:15 PM
  #447
Spazmatic Dan
The Circle of Leaf
 
Spazmatic Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chatham, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
This is ignoring the benefits, which would be big for your team right now with more than one bad contract eating up cap space, in favour of a chicken little argument. Who are these players that hang around forever to collect a paycheque? What has Luongo done in his career to make you think he's that guy?
You're blowing this way out of proportion.

This is not a chicken little argument. What I'm saying is that, whatever you may think, a contract's length is a contract's length. Luongo may retire when he becomes less useful and he may not. Its a risk. The length is not a positive. The reduced cap hit is (I've said that already FYI - I am NOT ignoring the benefits).

All I was saying (in response to someone else's comment that Leaf fans would complain about the cap hit if the contract length was shorter) was that I personally would prefer a slightly higher cap hit in favour of a much shorter term because with the current Leaf team (young and in flux) the flexibility would be more valuable than the proposed $1.4M in cap space.

Spazmatic Dan is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 05:25 PM
  #448
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,411
vCash: 500
The length of Lu's contract can only be viewed as a negative if there is irrefutable proof Luongo will play it out. Since there is not such proof, and since Luongo has come out implied his exit strategy to anyone that will listen, what is the negative?


The fact that he could choose to go back on what he has said? Ok. But if so, there still remain the outclauses built into the deal to help any prospective GM.



When it is "a risk", I don't think people get that Gillis took on this "risk" willingly when giving out his contract. Did he think the risk was too much? Nope.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 05:27 PM
  #449
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,882
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spasmatic Dan View Post
the flexibility would be more valuable than the proposed $1.4M in cap space.
This is exactly what I'm talking about and it is a chicken little argument. You're arguing that the possibility, however slim, that Lu's contract comes back to bite you later is more important than the cap savings now, despite your team being in need of such a contract. If you had lots of cap room now, or a significant amount of money guaranteed going forward, your argument would make some sense. As your situation sits right now, it doesn't. Burke needs to improve the team and has limited cap space to do it. Even if you could fit Lu in @ 6.7m, it wouldn't leave any room to improve the team further. Lu's cap hit is a boon for your team, not the albatross Leaf fans would have us believe.

Scurr is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 05:31 PM
  #450
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,858
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnybaby View Post
I would do Gardiner + 2013 1st for Schneider.

If the Leafs can re-sign Lupul I'd prefer to not move both him and Gardiner in the same deal. If however, the Leafs were having trouble signing Lupul I would definately include him.
I'd do either but our fanbase is very much divided on moving Schneider. If we could get Gardiner and Lupul/First (even if getting Lupul meant a slight add) then I'm happy. We just flip Gardiner or possibly Edler to address other needs and call it done. And the first teams I'm eying that want to improve their defense are: Detroit (Franzen+), Anaheim (Ryan), Philadelphia (Voracek), Washington (Kuznetsov) Just to name a few.

Bourne Endeavor 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 05:01 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.