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.

More Luongo Talk

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-04-2013, 12:21 AM
  #951
blankall
Registered User
 
blankall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,570
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
All this conjecture. Lu is still in a Canucks jersey. Now, and for the foreseeable future. Many Canuck fans think that he will be carried into the season, and that a trade won't go down with any team for a while yet, but so much posturing here regardless.


4 months he was on the block, and nothing. No deal. Maybe no market? Sure. But then there were rumours attaching him to multiple teams. Yes, even CHI. But he hasn't moved. So if it was simply to dump him, why hasn't he moved? First team to offer scraps would allow the Canucks to dump the contract, but it appears that's not sufficient to Gillis.


So where are we? Same place we were 4 months prior to October. Holding pattern. And if Gillis held that long, why not hold some more? Make other teams lose games without Lu's services. Makes no difference. He held onto Lu for this long, might as well ride this out and see what happens.
With the cap decreasing and big raises scheduled for Edler and Burrows, the Canucks have to choose between icing a much worse team or trading a goalie. Meanwhile the window to win with the Sedins won't stay open forever. Riding it out means losing your chance at a cup. You need to trade a goalie.

blankall is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 12:59 AM
  #952
Sergei Shirokov
Registered User
 
Sergei Shirokov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: British Columbia
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,221
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Intense Rage View Post
Except it was a rumor that never made any sense from the Hawks point of view. Our center depth looks horrific without Bolland. So yeah I am sure this rumor counts as "history".

I am not even sure why you think the Hawks would be even interested. Luongo has so often crapped the bed right in front of the Hawks management that I am sure they wouldn't touch him with a 10 foot pole.
I don't think the Hawks are a likely partner either, it would take a star player coming back for MG to send Lu to a division rival, and that won't happen.

And even if there was any truth behind the Bolland Rumour I wouldn't do it, I don't want that rat near our team, and I doubt our managment wants him either.



As for Lu, I don't think he is top 5 but he is definitely top 10

Sergei Shirokov is online now  
Old
01-04-2013, 01:50 AM
  #953
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 16,880
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blankall View Post
With the cap decreasing and big raises scheduled for Edler and Burrows, the Canucks have to choose between icing a much worse team or trading a goalie. Meanwhile the window to win with the Sedins won't stay open forever. Riding it out means losing your chance at a cup. You need to trade a goalie.


The cap decreases next year. 2013-2014. There is a season, or at least 6 months before anything _needs_ to occur to fit other pieces in. Plenty of time. Until such time, Luongo is in a Canucks jersey, helping the Canucks. That's all that really matters to people here.



It's not a choice between losing a chance at the cup, and riding it out either. That is a false dichotomy you are creating. Last year, the Canucks ran both goalies to the PT. The year before that, they had both goalies, onto the 2011 SCF run and the other PT. There is no choice here that precludes the other option. The chance at the cup is still there.



In the end, Luongo is helping the Canucks win in the meantime, and the fans don't see that as a negative here. No matter how much it is being coloured as such. We've seen the tandem work here for 2 years straight, a 3rd isn't likely going to change things.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 03:03 AM
  #954
FerrisRox
Registered User
 
FerrisRox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by racerjoe View Post
TSN and sportsnet. Believe what you want.
Considering I work for one of those networks, let me tell you, unequivocally, you are deep into fantasy land.

FerrisRox is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 06:14 AM
  #955
SufferingCatFan
Registered User
 
SufferingCatFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: fort lauderdale
Country: United States
Posts: 1,995
vCash: 500
I have already expressed my view that Lou is far more likely to be amnestied than traded because under the new CBA it makes no sense to pay 6.7 million per year to Lou until he turns 40. If that occurs and Lou is paid in full, then Lou will have made $80 million for playing 3 or 4 seasons for the Nucks. If paid two thirds of the remaining balance, he will have made about $60 million. Either way, he will then be free to sign with another team, where he will be able to make another $20 million or so. Either way, I hope Lou sent his agent something nice for Christmas.

SufferingCatFan is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 06:22 AM
  #956
jumptheshark
McDavid Headquarters
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: EVIL EMPIRE
Country: United Nations
Posts: 59,214
vCash: 2458
it is fun goining around to different teams depth charts and trying to figure out who needs him and what they are willing to give up.

for me the team list about 5 or 6 and that is about it, Trying to figure out what they would be willing to give up is the fun part

__________________
"If the Detroit Red Wings are defying gravity" by consistently contending without the benefit of high draft picks, "the Edmonton Oilers are defying lift.

Welcome to Edmonton Connor McDavid--the rest of you HA HA HA HA HA HA
jumptheshark is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 06:24 AM
  #957
NYVanfan
Registered User
 
NYVanfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,188
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by SufferingCatFan View Post
I have already expressed my view that Lou is far more likely to be amnestied than traded because under the new CBA it makes no sense to pay 6.7 million per year to Lou until he turns 40. If that occurs and Lou is paid in full, then Lou will have made $80 million for playing 3 or 4 seasons for the Nucks. If paid two thirds of the remaining balance, he will have made about $60 million. Either way, he will then be free to sign with another team, where he will be able to make another $20 million or so. Either way, I hope Lou sent his agent something nice for Christmas.
In what universe does it make sense for canuck ownership to cut luo a check for some $40M, just for the privilige of losing the asset for nothing?
Thats just astoundingly illogical.

NYVanfan is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 06:51 AM
  #958
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 16,880
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SufferingCatFan View Post
I have already expressed my view that Lou is far more likely to be amnestied than traded because under the new CBA it makes no sense to pay 6.7 million per year to Lou until he turns 40. If that occurs and Lou is paid in full, then Lou will have made $80 million for playing 3 or 4 seasons for the Nucks. If paid two thirds of the remaining balance, he will have made about $60 million. Either way, he will then be free to sign with another team, where he will be able to make another $20 million or so. Either way, I hope Lou sent his agent something nice for Christmas.


I completely disagree that Lou is more likely to be amnestied than traded. Will you be on here admitting you were wrong if he is traded? If you agree, then I will do the same and admit I was wrong if the opposite should occur.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 07:32 AM
  #959
SufferingCatFan
Registered User
 
SufferingCatFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: fort lauderdale
Country: United States
Posts: 1,995
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
I completely disagree that Lou is more likely to be amnestied than traded. Will you be on here admitting you were wrong if he is traded? If you agree, then I will do the same and admit I was wrong if the opposite should occur.
Yup.

The great unknown is how the new CBA ultimately shakes out. For example, if the cap is set at $65 million or the new CBA allows a team to retain salary in a trade, I imagine that structuring a trade for him would be possible. With a hard cap of $60 million in 2013-14 and no salary retention, I firmly believe that Lou gets an amnesty buy out. Since I believe that something closer to the latter is probable, I believe that Lou gets cut.

SufferingCatFan is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 07:37 AM
  #960
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,567
vCash: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by SufferingCatFan View Post
Yup.

The great unknown is how the new CBA ultimately shakes out. For example, if the cap is set at $65 million or the new CBA allows a team to retain salary in a trade, I imagine that structuring a trade for him would be possible. With a hard cap of $60 million in 2013-14 and no salary retention, I firmly believe that Lou gets an amnesty buy out. Since I believe that something closer to the latter is probable, I believe that Lou gets cut.
There is no scenario we use a buyout on Luongo. Even in a cap reduction world he will be traded, just for less than what was originally anticipated. To presume Canuck ownership is going to cut a check for literally nothing is asinine.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 07:39 AM
  #961
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 16,880
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SufferingCatFan View Post
Yup.

The great unknown is how the new CBA ultimately shakes out. For example, if the cap is set at $65 million or the new CBA allows a team to retain salary in a trade, I imagine that structuring a trade for him would be possible. With a hard cap of $60 million in 2013-14 and no salary retention, I firmly believe that Lou gets an amnesty buy out. Since I believe that something closer to the latter is probable, I believe that Lou gets cut.



These caveats weren't in your original statement.



What if it's 60m and the ability to retain salary in trade?



It's a waste time trying to get someone on the ledger when they throw caveats out after the fact. It muddies the situation. Allows for backtracking and hiding in ambiguity. This just went from something I felt very secure in challenging to now confronting a mean nothing statement.






Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
There is no scenario we use a buyout on Luongo. Even in a cap reduction world he will be traded, just for less than what was originally anticipated. To presume Canuck ownership is going to cut a check for literally nothing is asinine.



This thread has gone nowhere because of statements like the one you are referencing. To think people actually project Aqua to cut a check that big, to be of no use, is quite amusing indeed. Why not waive him first? If there's no re-entry condition due to 1way contracts counting against the cap regardless, waiving Lu doesn't hurt the Canucks. But what it might do is to get one team to get a prime goaltender for free, without having the Canucks to eat his salary... To follow a situation to an extreme that is.


Last edited by Bleach Clean: 01-04-2013 at 07:47 AM.
Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 08:05 AM
  #962
Seventeen Twos
Registered User
 
Seventeen Twos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 464
vCash: 500
what do you guys suppose all this talk about waivers and amnesty means for his trade value?

If either is a reasonable option, that means his value's hit rock bottom, no?

Seventeen Twos is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 08:13 AM
  #963
Spazmatic Dan
Kane for GM
 
Spazmatic Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chatham, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
These caveats weren't in your original statement.



What if it's 60m and the ability to retain salary in trade?



It's a waste time trying to get someone on the ledger when they throw caveats out after the fact. It muddies the situation. Allows for backtracking and hiding in ambiguity. This just went from something I felt very secure in challenging to now confronting a mean nothing statement.











This thread has gone nowhere because of statements like the one you are referencing. To think people actually project Aqua to cut a check that big, to be of no use, is quite amusing indeed. Why not waive him first? If there's no re-entry condition due to 1way contracts counting against the cap regardless, waiving Lu doesn't hurt the Canucks. But what it might do is to get one team to get a prime goaltender for free, without having the Canucks to eat his salary... To follow a situation to an extreme that is.

I don't understand why you are upset.

The guy you are quoting is submitting a theory based upon the most recent NHL proposal. That's all we have been doing and can do in this thread because the thread can't "go anywhere" until a CBA is actually done and the trade or (unlikely IMO) buyout will go down.

I'm also not sure why you are complaining about not being able to keep "a ledger". Are you really that concerned about being right? Its a discussion forum. Lighten up a bit man, its for fun.

Spazmatic Dan is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 08:15 AM
  #964
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 16,880
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seventeen Twos View Post
what do you guys suppose all this talk about waivers and amnesty means for his trade value?

If either is a reasonable option, that means his value's hit rock bottom, no?


Nope. It's following scenarios through to an extreme to illustrate the possibilities. There's a difference between what is likely to occur, and can occur given extreme circumstances. Some choose to see the latter as more meaningful, while most understand the former to be more accurate over time.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 08:19 AM
  #965
Spazmatic Dan
Kane for GM
 
Spazmatic Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chatham, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
There is no scenario we use a buyout on Luongo. Even in a cap reduction world he will be traded, just for less than what was originally anticipated. To presume Canuck ownership is going to cut a check for literally nothing is asinine.
I agree that he will probably still be traded in a $60M cap world and that his value will take a hit in that scenario but a buyout wouldn't be for nothing. I mean, you still do get cap space and Luongo gets to move on like he originally requested way back whenever.

Probably not in the team's best interests (unless absolutely no trade possbility exists in which case I'm confused) but there are a few benefits.

Spazmatic Dan is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 08:19 AM
  #966
jumptheshark
McDavid Headquarters
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: EVIL EMPIRE
Country: United Nations
Posts: 59,214
vCash: 2458
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seventeen Twos View Post
what do you guys suppose all this talk about waivers and amnesty means for his trade value?

If either is a reasonable option, that means his value's hit rock bottom, no?
This place could and would become fun if Fehr does the scortch earth policy threat and nuke the NHLPA--that would nuke all current contracts and make this place a trade free zone for awhile

jumptheshark is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 08:29 AM
  #967
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 16,880
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spasmatic Dan View Post
I don't understand why you are upset.

The guy you are quoting is submitting a theory based upon the most recent NHL proposal. That's all we have been doing and can do in this thread because the thread can't "go anywhere" until a CBA is actually done and the trade or (unlikely IMO) buyout will go down.

I'm also not sure why you are complaining about not being able to keep "a ledger". Are you really that concerned about being right? Its a discussion forum. Lighten up a bit man, its for fun.




It's supposed to be fun. Sure, ideally. But as you can tell from the _many_ mod interjections over the countless number of Lou threads, people don't always abide by what it's supposed to be. It's gotten this way over time.




This SC statement is a reason why. It lists an outlier as a probable course of action. That's a mistake given what has already transpired in this thread. What good is going to come out of a statement like that when it's basis in reality is as thin as it is? Nothing. Immediately, fans other than myself have scoffed at the notion. Was the intent to incite discussion then? If it was, the quality sought couldn't have been too high...



Every time something like this comes up, it moves the discussion away from what is relevant. Away from what is likely. And no one remains accountable. My attempt was to get some accountability back into the outlandish claims being made.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 08:47 AM
  #968
Spazmatic Dan
Kane for GM
 
Spazmatic Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chatham, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
It's supposed to be fun. Sure, ideally. But as you can tell from the _many_ mod interjections over the countless number of Lou threads, people don't always abide by what it's supposed to be. It's gotten this way over time.




This SC statement is a reason why. It lists an outlier as a probable course of action. That's a mistake given what has already transpired in this thread. What good is going to come out of a statement like that when it's basis in reality is as thin as it is? Nothing. Immediately, fans other than myself have scoffed at the notion. Was the intent to incite discussion then? If it was, the quality sought couldn't have been too high...



Every time something like this comes up, it moves the discussion away from what is relevant. Away from what is likely. And no one remains accountable. My attempt was to get some accountability back into the outlandish claims being made.
It lists an opinion of a poster that a certain course of action is probable.

Of course it was meant to incite discussion. Just because you and several other posters disagree with what he said doesn't mean he shouldn't say it. That's the whole point of the boards. If everyone agreed, this place would be boring.

Why is its basis in reality thin? Its a theoretical opinion based upon a CBA proposal. I, like you, don't agree with it but I can see where he's coming from. A potential $60M cap makes it more difficult to trade Luongo or anybody with a cap hit of that size for that matter.

Spazmatic Dan is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 08:49 AM
  #969
eyeball11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 12,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
All this conjecture. Lu is still in a Canucks jersey. Now, and for the foreseeable future. Many Canuck fans think that he will be carried into the season, and that a trade won't go down with any team for a while yet, but so much posturing here regardless.


4 months he was on the block, and nothing. No deal. Maybe no market? Sure. But then there were rumours attaching him to multiple teams. Yes, even CHI. But he hasn't moved. So if it was simply to dump him, why hasn't he moved? First team to offer scraps would allow the Canucks to dump the contract, but it appears that's not sufficient to Gillis.


So where are we? Same place we were 4 months prior to October. Holding pattern. And if Gillis held that long, why not hold some more? Make other teams lose games without Lu's services. Makes no difference. He held onto Lu for this long, might as well ride this out and see what happens.
You may not have noticed but there's a lockout right now and that lockout promises to have impacts on the overall. Don't know what yet but to assume the world 4 months ago is the same as the world tomorrow doesn't make sense.

eyeball11 is online now  
Old
01-04-2013, 09:03 AM
  #970
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 16,880
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spasmatic Dan View Post
It lists an opinion of a poster that a certain course of action is probable.



Possible vs. Likely. That's the contention. SC listed something that is possible, even in extreme, as the likely case. Hope that's clear.



And I'm not the only one who responded the way that I did. Take some note from that as well.



Quote:
Of course it was meant to incite discussion. Just because you and several other posters disagree with what he said doesn't mean he shouldn't say it. That's the whole point of the boards. If everyone agreed, this place would be boring.

Why is its basis in reality thin? Its a theoretical opinion based upon a CBA proposal. I, like you, don't agree with it but I can see where he's coming from. A potential $60M cap makes it more difficult to trade Luongo or anybody with a cap hit of that size for that matter.



What type of discussion did it incite? Look at the responses he got. We disagree, in short order, because the claim is outlandish. If he had made a reasonable claim, there wouldn't be such a dismissive attitude towards it.



You say that it was meant to incite discussion, does a troll (Not calling SC one, just listing an extreme) post incite discussion? Yes. It does. What type of discussion does it incite? The quality of the response falls in line with the post, more often than not.



If the possibility is remote, the basis is thin. But let's leave the cap considerations aside for a moment, and the possibility of a waiver wire resolving all, when was the last time a player this good was bought out? This CBA is unprecedented, but with guys like Ballard and even Booth on the team, how does Luongo even enter the discussion as a buyout candidate? The calibre of player that he is, despite him wanting out, is never bought out. That's why the premise of the statement is thin.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 09:30 AM
  #971
Liferleafer
Bring on Stome-afin!
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 12,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
There is no scenario we use a buyout on Luongo. Even in a cap reduction world he will be traded, just for less than what was originally anticipated. To presume Canuck ownership is going to cut a check for literally nothing is asinine.
I agree, why not trade him for less instead of paying 40 million??

EDIT: Before the backlash...i'm not saying they should trade him for less, just that if they HAD to move him, it would make more sense.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 09:33 AM
  #972
Vankiller Whale
Win it for AV
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,329
vCash: 1675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
So, you think way back when....long before Howden even asked for a list....when Burke and Howden talked....and Burke stated Gardiner's name came up....and Howden didn't deny talking to Burke....that was all a mirage?

When sources like TSN and Sportsnet report said "fanboy" rumours....one would wonder why. I mean....do they report fiction and lies? Maybe you shoud ask....as you work there.

I'll agree, Nash didn't want to come here. But long before he produced a list, Howden was setting market value with ALOT of teams.
Howden is a prospect with the Florida Panthers. Think you meant Howson.

Sorry for being AR.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 09:33 AM
  #973
FerrisRox
Registered User
 
FerrisRox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LEAFS FAN 4 EVER View Post
At one point Toronto was on his list because why would Scott Howson and now Mike Gillis be asking about having Jake Gardiner included, then we have Brian Burke saying he won't trade him for Nash or Luongo.
Toronto was *never* on Rick Nash's list.

FerrisRox is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 09:34 AM
  #974
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 50,061
vCash: 696
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by jumptheshark View Post
This place could and would become fun if Fehr does the scortch earth policy threat and nuke the NHLPA--that would nuke all current contracts and make this place a trade free zone for awhile
I'm kinda rooting for this actually. At least it would make things more interesting. Would feel very bad for Edmonton though...

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 09:38 AM
  #975
Liferleafer
Bring on Stome-afin!
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 12,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Howden is a prospect with the Florida Panthers. Think you meant Howson.

Sorry for being AR.
Thanks...having a brain fart day.

Liferleafer 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 07:28 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.