HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
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.

More Luongo Talk

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-08-2012, 08:47 PM
  #276
Ho Borvat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
So NHL contracts can and are insured that are longer than 7 years? Love to see this.
Feel free to provide me with a link saying that deals longer than 7 years arent covered.

Ho Borvat is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 08:49 PM
  #277
DougGilmour93
Registered User
 
DougGilmour93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,127
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
See, my scenario is based on realistic possibility, whereas yours is reaching to extremes. How long as the league clung to Phoenix despite the catastrophe that experiment has been? Odds are incredibly remote any team will be contracted within the duration of Lu's contract.

However, I'll go you one better. What if Lu continues to play like Kipper, Brodeur, Khabibulin, Thomas and Roloson?

We will. What's another President's Trophy to go with the matching set? We can also move Schneider if worse comes to worse. So yeah, I think we're good.
The reason why the are so vested in PHX is because the NHL owns part of them. If PHX folds, the NHL would lose the money they invested.

As of now I know of PHX, Columbus, Florida, Nashville, New Jersey, and Tampa Bay as teams that have struggled financially as of late. Who's to say that one if not more of them face the possibility of collapsing? I surely couldn't say nor predict. I guess it's a possibility.

DougGilmour93 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:00 PM
  #278
New Liskeard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,784
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kack zassian View Post
Feel free to provide me with a link saying that deals longer than 7 years arent covered.
Too lazy to look it up I see.
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/D...ven-Years.aspx

New Liskeard is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:04 PM
  #279
Ho Borvat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
Ok well I believe you are misinterpreting it.

That is what I looked up when I said it covers seven years of the contract.

Is there a particular part that says players with deals longer than 7 years arent covered?

Because I read that it covers 7 years, and anything beyond that isnt covered.
NOT that 7+ year deals aren't covered.

Ho Borvat is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:23 PM
  #280
Liferleafer
Golf....again....
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,200
vCash: 500
Ok...just got home from the Marlies game (4-3 win) and two things i know, i hope Burke doesn't consider moving Gardiner...(2 goals on the PP) and our goaltending is shakey...gave up 2 he should have had and made a 4-0 game alot closer than it should have been. Also, Kadri had a solid game.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:30 PM
  #281
racerjoe
Registered User
 
racerjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,098
vCash: 500
Is it safe to come back here yet?

It's a little bit funny how we seem to work out deals both sides can live with

Kadri
Finn
Frattin
Bozak

I think is what it was but it was a few pages back. Then all the haters come back... The ones who don't understand his contract, and think losing for 8 plus years is good for a hockey team, and easy to turn around.

racerjoe is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:31 PM
  #282
New Liskeard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,784
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kack zassian View Post
Ok well I believe you are misinterpreting it.

That is what I looked up when I said it covers seven years of the contract.

Is there a particular part that says players with deals longer than 7 years arent covered?

Because I read that it covers 7 years, and anything beyond that isnt covered. NOT that 7+ year deals aren't covered.
Re-read my posts. That is exactly what i said,seems that Cannuck fans seem to like to omit from these conversations.

New Liskeard is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:31 PM
  #283
Numbers
Registered User
 
Numbers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,989
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
Now we're talking. We'll trade for 5 years of service of Luongo. After which we deal him back to Vancouver for some sort or compensation.

Luongo

for

Bozak + Kadri + Ashton + Franson + 1st in 2014
Would you swap Ashton with Blacker? Both have similar value. If so this is a good deal for both sides.

Numbers is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:32 PM
  #284
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,536
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by racerjoe View Post
Is it safe to come back here yet?

It's a little bit funny how we seem to work out deals both sides can live with

Kadri
Finn
Frattin
Bozak

I think is what it was but it was a few pages back. Then all the haters come back... The ones who don't understand his contract, and think losing for 8 plus years is good for a hockey team, and easy to turn around.
Bit iffy on mostly a future's deal but I certainly wouldn't mind that. We do need to address the prospect pool.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:35 PM
  #285
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,830
vCash: 5555
To be honest I don't like too much deals with more than 3 players coming back. We're close enough to the contract limit as it is, imo.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:36 PM
  #286
DougGilmour93
Registered User
 
DougGilmour93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,127
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
Would you swap Ashton with Blacker? Both have similar value. If so this is a good deal for both sides.
I would, as long as it was understood that in 5 years we trade Luongo BACK. Obviously, I'm uncertain of the compensation. Most likely in the form of draft picks.

Bozak + Kadri + Blacker + Franson + 1st in 2014

for

5 yrs of Luongo.

DougGilmour93 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:36 PM
  #287
Ho Borvat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
Re-read my posts. That is exactly what i said,seems that Cannuck fans seem to like to omit from these conversations.
So 5/12 years are uninsured years, and 4/5 of those years are retirement/reduced salary years...

Hes insured for every year he makes 6.7 million (minus 1).

Ho Borvat is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:39 PM
  #288
Ho Borvat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
Re-read my posts. That is exactly what i said,seems that Cannuck fans seem to like to omit from these conversations.
Actually, you said


Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
So NHL contracts can and are insured that are longer than 7 years? Love to see this.

Ho Borvat is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:39 PM
  #289
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,830
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
I would, as long as it was understood that in 5 years we trade Luongo BACK. Obviously, I'm uncertain of the compensation. Most likely in the form of draft picks.

Bozak + Kadri + Blacker + Franson + 1st in 2014

for

5 yrs of Luongo.
....

If you actually had a way to know for sure that you'd only have Luongo for 5 years before trading him back to us, you'd be looking at Gardiner+, easily.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:40 PM
  #290
Numbers
Registered User
 
Numbers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,989
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
I would, as long as it was understood that in 5 years we trade Luongo BACK. Obviously, I'm uncertain of the compensation. Most likely in the form of draft picks.

Bozak + Kadri + Blacker + Franson + 1st in 2014

for

5 yrs of Luongo.
Apparently I missed something here, trade back? This idea is not even possible. Luongo would never agree, who can guarantee both Gillis and Burke will be GM of there respected teams by then. Im sorry but this is worst trade clause I have ever heard. This is becoming more and more childish.

Numbers is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:40 PM
  #291
The Saurus
Registered User
 
The Saurus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Country: United Nations
Posts: 8,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by racerjoe View Post
Is it safe to come back here yet?

It's a little bit funny how we seem to work out deals both sides can live with

Kadri
Finn
Frattin
Bozak

I think is what it was but it was a few pages back. Then all the haters come back... The ones who don't understand his contract, and think losing for 8 plus years is good for a hockey team, and easy to turn around.
. That kind of deal is never going to happen. Mike Gillis would be looking for that horseshoe up his rear end if he managed to get that kind of package out of Burke & Nonis for Roberto.

Show me a deal Brian Burke has made since coming to Toronto in which he has shipped out youth with good potential like the players you've listed above for an aging veteran.

You won't find one because it has never happened and the Leafs aren't in a position to do such a thing now either. Heck, he wouldn't let go of Jake Gardiner for Rick Nash, and you think he's going to give up a boatload of potential for Roberto? Ain't happenin' bro.

The Saurus is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:40 PM
  #292
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,536
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
To be honest I don't like too much deals with more than 3 players coming back. We're close enough to the contract limit as it is, imo.
I'd prefer to get better but less players. We have Jensen and Kassian itching to crack the roster at this point. Of course, then we get into the "no value" debates.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:43 PM
  #293
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,536
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
Apparently I missed something here, trade back? This idea is not even possible. Luongo would never agree, who can guarantee both Gillis and Burke will be GM of there respected teams by then. Im sorry but this is worst trade clause I have ever heard. This is becoming more and more childish.
He was mocking an earlier post from me because I said cap floor teams would find Lu's contract enticing if he didn't retire around 39-40. So this is a "Vancouver get the 'crappy' contract back! See how they like it!" post.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:49 PM
  #294
DougGilmour93
Registered User
 
DougGilmour93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,127
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
Apparently I missed something here, trade back? This idea is not even possible. Luongo would never agree, who can guarantee both Gillis and Burke will be GM of there respected teams by then. Im sorry but this is worst trade clause I have ever heard. This is becoming more and more childish.
You agreed to it earlier? You must have missed that caveat.

If we're stuck with him for the duration fo the contract the best I do is...


Bozak + Kadri + Blacker + 2nd

DougGilmour93 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:51 PM
  #295
Liferleafer
Golf....again....
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,200
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
You agreed to it earlier? You must have missed that caveat.

If we're stuck with him for the duration fo the contract the best I do is...


Bozak + Kadri + Blacker + 2nd
See this to me is doable.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:54 PM
  #296
Numbers
Registered User
 
Numbers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,989
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougGilmour93 View Post
You agreed to it earlier? You must have missed that caveat.

If we're stuck with him for the duration fo the contract the best I do is...


Bozak + Kadri + Blacker + 2nd
When did I agree? If I did I misunderstood. Leaf fans have already made an agreement with me earlier close to this. No reason to take less now.

Bozak
Kadri
Colborne
Blacker

Not sure why you wouldn't agree to this this, value is very close, and who knows you might get another Finn by keeping that 2nd.

Numbers is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 09:56 PM
  #297
dubey
The Best (per IIHF)
 
dubey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Hockey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,511
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vancouver_2010 View Post
value is close, maybe add a third round pick from the leafs.
We just need to trade for Blake Kessel first and we'll have a deal

dubey is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 10:01 PM
  #298
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,830
vCash: 5555
From what I can gather, it seems to me like:

Kessel
Grabovski
Phaneuf
Rielly

Are completely untouchable. Understandable.

But then you have the next tier, of

Lupul
Kulemin
JVR
Finn
2013 1st
Gardiner

type pieces, and imho none of these guys should be untouchable. Toronto has an abundance of wingers and left-side defensemen, and if your trading for a player who instantly becomes your MVP, having that many untouchables is ridiculous.(I'm not saying they all have the same value, simply in terms of current importance to the team)

Out of curiousity, if Toronto was unwilling to come to contract terms with Lupul, would you be willing to include him as a piece?

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 10:09 PM
  #299
Kegs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by racerjoe View Post
Is it safe to come back here yet?

It's a little bit funny how we seem to work out deals both sides can live with

Kadri
Finn
Frattin
Bozak

I think is what it was but it was a few pages back. Then all the haters come back... The ones who don't understand his contract, and think losing for 8 plus years is good for a hockey team, and easy to turn around.

if i was vancouver id make this trade but not if i was toronto... from a non biased point of view... i know kadri takes a lot of heat but i think he will be a good nhl player.

1st issue. isnt this the majority of the leafs centres?

2nd issue. luongo is getting a bit old.

3rd issue. luongo is clearly being moved because he doesnt want to be a backup goalie. this is known by every gm in the league. this lowers his value im pretty sure. esp with luongos no trade clause. he actually has full controll over where he lands... unless he doesnt have this clause?

Kegs is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 10:10 PM
  #300
Rare Jewel
Patience
 
Rare Jewel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Leaf Land
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,531
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
From what I can gather, it seems to me like:

Kessel
Grabovski
Phaneuf
Rielly

Are completely untouchable. Understandable.

But then you have the next tier, of

Lupul
Kulemin
JVR
Finn
2013 1st
Gardiner


type pieces, and imho none of these guys should be untouchable. Toronto has an abundance of wingers and left-side defensemen, and if your trading for a player who instantly becomes your MVP, having that many untouchables is ridiculous.(I'm not saying they all have the same value, simply in terms of current importance to the team)

Out of curiousity, if Toronto was unwilling to come to contract terms with Lupul, would you be willing to include him as a piece?
You can add them to the top list.

Also Lupul would be a tough deal as well. Taking 65 points(potentially) could be enough of a subtraction that would make bringing in another goalie(Luongo or whoever) be a counter productive move.

Rare Jewel 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 05:53 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.