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: The Neverending Story

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-07-2013, 10:55 AM
  #951
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,385
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by dannyboy8920 View Post
To Toronto:
Upshall
Theodore

To Florida:
Luongo
Lombardi

To Vancouver:
Bozak
Trocheck
Franson
Nope. No one of interest for the Nucks and I doubt the Leafs want the inferior goalie in any three-way.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 10:55 AM
  #952
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,332
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy Boucher View Post
It doesn't take away any risk. All it does is punish Vancouver.

The risk of having a player near the end (or at the end) of his prime with a long-term deal (and fairly significant cap-hit) still remains.

It won't change Luongo's value positively or negatively than whatever it was before. The risk is still there, just teams like Vancouver, Philadelphia and others will be punished as well.


This is more or less correct. However, there was at one point speculation that the team with such a contract would be saddled with the retirement cap-hit. So in that sense, TOR is off scott free.


But yes, in actuality, all this does is punish VAN. And from what some are saying, the punishment doesn't seem severe at all.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 10:56 AM
  #953
HABSFTW
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 265
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StringerBell View Post
With the compressed schedule and shortened season the starter/backup roles would likely be interchangeable. They would each get 45-55% of the games and coach would play the hot hand going into the playoffs. I'm not sure that causes much tension between a close knit locker room, regardless of how sure you are.
Didn't Luo say something along the lines of he looks forward to being traded? Pretty sure he said last year about he would prefer to go to Florida as there's family there etc. Either way I'm sure you can agree that Luo feels he's a number 1 goalie, and I just don't see a backup or hybrid situation working with him. I could be 100% wrong of course.. just saying plus him having a known value right now I think makes more sense for Van to get rid of him sooner rather then later.

HABSFTW is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 10:56 AM
  #954
Coolburn
Registered User
 
Coolburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: South Florida
Country: Hungary
Posts: 7,781
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Coolburn Send a message via MSN to Coolburn Send a message via Yahoo to Coolburn
I was curious and looked up what Luongo was originally traded for when he went to Vancouver. I think his value is probably a little higher but not much IMO:

Vancouver Canucks traded Todd Bertuzzi, Bryan Allen and Alex Auld to the Florida Panthers for Roberto Luongo, Lukas Krajicek and a 6th round selection in 2006.

So it works out to a top 6 forward with some issues, top 4 d-man with injury concerns and backup goalie for Lu, a d-man prospect and useless pick thrown in. I'm not sure I would want to give up too much more than that considering his age & contract (regardless of cap hit, he's getting paid about $7M per season for the next several yrs).

Coolburn is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 10:57 AM
  #955
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
Then Weise walks. %5 does little to alter Tanev and Cannauton's contracts to make it relevant.

Can still be accomplished under the cap.

Higgins is not liable to receive much of a raise under the new cap; Lapierre even less so. Were it to happen we have both internal and external means of replacing them. I never said this would be the ideal scenario but merely to show plausibility there is no proverbial gun to our head in dealing Luongo.
I also doubt Connauton would be making more than $900,000. More likely he signs a 1 way deal at less money than accept a two way QO at slightly more.

StringerBell is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 10:58 AM
  #956
HABSFTW
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 265
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coolburn View Post
I was curious and looked up what Luongo was originally traded for when he went to Vancouver. I think his value is probably a little higher but not much IMO:

Vancouver Canucks traded Todd Bertuzzi, Bryan Allen and Alex Auld to the Florida Panthers for Roberto Luongo, Lukas Krajicek and a 6th round selection in 2006.

So it works out to a top 6 forward with some issues, top 4 d-man with injury concerns and backup goalie for Lu, a d-man prospect and useless pick thrown in. I'm not sure I would want to give up too much more than that considering his age & contract (regardless of cap hit, he's getting paid about $7M per season for the next several yrs).
I'm pretty sure he was unsigned at the time though.. about to be UFA.. or close to it. Prolly hurt his value a tad.

HABSFTW is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 10:59 AM
  #957
New Liskeard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,843
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Hopeful reach? This is terrible for the Canucks. How is that hopeful? More than likely, Luongo retires around 38-39 and VAN is saddled with the cap-hit. How is that good for the Canucks?



TOR is not saddled with his retirement number = good for TOR. Sure he could keep playing, but that's just a part of the package regardless.
So maybe you can show where the value is for the leafs to aquire a goalie who may only play for 4 years and possibly not at a high level?

New Liskeard is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 10:59 AM
  #958
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HABSFTW View Post
Didn't Luo say something along the lines of he looks forward to being traded? Pretty sure he said last year about he would prefer to go to Florida as there's family there etc. Either way I'm sure you can agree that Luo feels he's a number 1 goalie, and I just don't see a backup or hybrid situation working with him. I could be 100% wrong of course.. just saying plus him having a known value right now I think makes more sense for Van to get rid of him sooner rather then later.
Luongo has said a lot of things (just check his twitter) but he has yet to say anything that implies he would be unprofessional if kept in Vancouver next year.

StringerBell is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 11:00 AM
  #959
blankall
Registered User
 
blankall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,237
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy Boucher View Post
It doesn't take away any risk. All it does is punish Vancouver.

The risk of having a player near the end (or at the end) of his prime with a long-term deal (and fairly significant cap-hit) still remains.

It won't change Luongo's value positively or negatively than whatever it was before. The risk is still there, just teams like Vancouver, Philadelphia and others will be punished as well.
This.

Under the old CBA, the cap hit would have just disappeared. Now it will revert back to Vancouver. Either way, it makes zero difference to the team acquiring him.

blankall is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 11:00 AM
  #960
s7ark
LeonTheProfessional
 
s7ark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,749
vCash: 500
I am not sure that Mirtle's tweet means what some are saying it does. The "cap benefit recapture formula" was the PA's response to the NHL's desire that teams that signed the contracts get dinged with the penalties. From this article, it means this:

Quote:
In response to the league’s call for such an alteration, the NHLPA devised something called a “cap benefit recapture formula,” which would punish teams with players who retired early on long-term deals by putting the money they saved over the term of the deal on their cap after they’ve retired.
But I am not sure if that applies to the team that currently has the contract, or the team that signed the contract, or both. More info is needed before people assume Vancouver will be on the hook if RL retires early.

s7ark is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 11:02 AM
  #961
Flat Stanley
Registered User
 
Flat Stanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,241
vCash: 500
Vancouver and Florida have been good trading partners in the past, I think Luongo said he has family in Florida, they are a playoff team, adding him over Theodore would make them a better team. I think if Luongo is getting traded, the Florida Panthers are the favorite.

Flat Stanley is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 11:03 AM
  #962
Spazmatic Dan
The Circle of Leaf
 
Spazmatic Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chatham, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark View Post
I am not sure that Mirtle's tweet means what some are saying it does. The "cap benefit recapture formula" was the PA's response to the NHL's desire that teams that signed the contracts get dinged with the penalties. From this article, it means this:



But I am not sure if that applies to the team that currently has the contract, or the team that signed the contract, or both. More info is needed before people assume Vancouver will be on the hook if RL retires early.
Hmm...interesting post.

If in fact the team that acquires Luongo gets this applied to them, that adds a concern...

Spazmatic Dan is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 11:07 AM
  #963
NYVanfan
Registered User
 
NYVanfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
This is more or less correct. However, there was at one point speculation that the team with such a contract would be saddled with the retirement cap-hit. So in that sense, TOR is off scott free.


But yes, in actuality, all this does is punish VAN. And from what some are saying, the punishment doesn't seem severe at all.
so we're on the hook for $5.3M per year for the last 3-4 years of the deal after he retires? That's absolutely brutal, no? Same thing for Kovy, Hossa, etc I guess..?

NYVanfan is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 11:08 AM
  #964
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,332
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
So maybe you can show where the value is for the leafs to aquire a goalie who may only play for 4 years and possibly not at a high level?


Actually 5 years, if you count this shortened season. I think having high end goaltending over that span is worth something no?



Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark View Post
I am not sure that Mirtle's tweet means what some are saying it does. The "cap benefit recapture formula" was the PA's response to the NHL's desire that teams that signed the contracts get dinged with the penalties. From this article, it means this:



But I am not sure if that applies to the team that currently has the contract, or the team that signed the contract, or both. More info is needed before people assume Vancouver will be on the hook if RL retires early.



You're right, more info is needed. As it was explained on the VAN boards, this could translate to only about 1m on the books for 3-4 years (depending on when he retires). As is my understanding. But like you said, it's still unclear as to who is on the hook. Not enough info yet to know.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 11:10 AM
  #965
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,332
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYVanfan View Post
so we're on the hook for $5.3M per year for the last 3-4 years of the deal after he retires? That's absolutely brutal, no? Same thing for Kovy, Hossa, etc I guess..?


No, it's "money saved", so that would be actual salary saved.


What you are thinking here is what I initially thought, which would have been worse. But then, I still don't know for sure the full implications. So we'll have to wait and see.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 11:11 AM
  #966
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,385
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coolburn View Post
I was curious and looked up what Luongo was originally traded for when he went to Vancouver. I think his value is probably a little higher but not much IMO:

Vancouver Canucks traded Todd Bertuzzi, Bryan Allen and Alex Auld to the Florida Panthers for Roberto Luongo, Lukas Krajicek and a 6th round selection in 2006.

So it works out to a top 6 forward with some issues, top 4 d-man with injury concerns and backup goalie for Lu, a d-man prospect and useless pick thrown in. I'm not sure I would want to give up too much more than that considering his age & contract (regardless of cap hit, he's getting paid about $7M per season for the next several yrs).
Allow us to use that example to draw a parallel.

Fleischmann/Versteeg = Bertuzzi
Kulikov - Allen (Technically, Garrison but yeah...)
Auld = Clemmensen

Now for Toronto

Lupul = Bertuzzi
Gunnarsson = Allen
Auld = Reimer

Sub in Kadri over Gunnarsson because we don't need him and Toronto does. You could also swap Lupul for Kulemin if something enticing was added.

Point remains those are distinctly superior offers to what most from either of those fanbases have tossed here.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 11:11 AM
  #967
New Liskeard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,843
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Actually 5 years, if you count this shortened season. I think having high end goaltending over that span is worth something no?






You're right, more info is needed. As it was explained on the VAN boards, this could translate to only about 1m on the books for 3-4 years (depending on when he retires). As is my understanding. But like you said, it's still unclear as to who is on the hook. Not enough info yet to know.
So aquiring a goalie at 34 who could be on the decline with 4 and a half years left is not a risk ,no?

New Liskeard is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 11:14 AM
  #968
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,385
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
So aquiring a goalie at 34 who could be on the decline with 4 and a half years left is not a risk ,no?
It is, thus most of us are not demanding Gardiner. Risk is inherent to trades. Were Luongo younger, and therefore less of a risk. The cost were be significantly greater.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 11:14 AM
  #969
New Liskeard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,843
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
Allow us to use that example to draw a parallel.

Fleischmann/Versteeg = Bertuzzi
Kulikov - Allen (Technically, Garrison but yeah...)
Auld = Clemmensen

Now for Toronto

Lupul = Bertuzzi
Gunnarsson = Allen
Auld = Reimer
Sub in Kadri over Gunnarsson because we don't need him and Toronto does. You could also swap Lupul for Kulemin if something enticing was added.

Point remains those are distinctly superior offers to what most from either of those fanbases have tossed here.
What do the players traded for Lou previously have anything to do with today?? Honestly, do you believe the potential return is anywhere close to that today??? Lou was alot younger and didnt have a massive contract and cap hit at the time. There is no comparisson there whatsoever.

New Liskeard is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 11:16 AM
  #970
Chandrashekhar Limit
ORANJE 4 LYFE
 
Chandrashekhar Limit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Waterloo, ON
Country: Bangladesh
Posts: 15,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
Nope. No one of interest for the Nucks and I doubt the Leafs want the inferior goalie in any three-way.
Yea, if that's the price, the Leafs would much rather add an equivalent prospect to Trocheck and get Luongo.

Chandrashekhar Limit is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 11:17 AM
  #971
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,385
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
What do the players traded for Lou previously have anything to do with today?? Honestly, do you believe the potential return is anywhere close to that today??? Lou was alot younger and didnt have a massive contract and cap hit at the time. There is no comparisson there whatsoever.
I advise you go and read Coolburn's post again. Had you, you would have understood my response and why those players were relevant.

Correct, Luongo is older. He also has six years of elite numbers and retained a level of consistency that remains quite rare today. Age and contract only prevent us from demands like Gardiner+

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 11:17 AM
  #972
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,577
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by dannyboy8920 View Post
To Toronto:
Upshall
Theodore

To Florida:
Luongo
Lombardi

To Vancouver:
Bozak
Trocheck
Franson
One of these names is not like the others...

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 11:17 AM
  #973
New Liskeard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,843
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
It is, thus most of us are not demanding Gardiner. Risk is inherent to trades. Were Luongo younger, and therefore less of a risk. The cost were be significantly greater.
I'm sure youre right. But real life and reality will tell you Lou is not younger, this is not 5 years ago; so to talk about what could and couldnt happen is an absolute waste. The reality is this, the cap will go down next year, his contract cannot be burried, he is going to be 34 soon, and has a 5.3 cap hit till he is 42. That is the reality, and you are right about one thing, there is risk in aquiring him.

New Liskeard is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 11:19 AM
  #974
New Liskeard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,843
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
I advise you go and read Coolburn's post again. Had you, you would have understood my response and why those players were relevant.
Unless it is relevant to today, rather than what was and what could be, as so many here seem to enoy doing it is a waste of time. The discusion is of today, and a potential trade involving Lou.

New Liskeard is offline  
Old
01-07-2013, 11:20 AM
  #975
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,600
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
I'm sure youre right. But real life and reality will tell you Lou is not younger, this is not 5 years ago; so to talk about what could and couldnt happen is an absolute waste. The reality is this, the cap will go down next year, his contract cannot be burried, he is going to be 34 soon, and has a 5.3 cap hit till he is 42. That is the reality, and you are right about one thing, there is risk in aquiring him.
There is risk in everything being offered too. What if Kadri busts? Bozak/Lupul/Macarthur walk? Kulemin remains a 7 goal scorer? Etc. Luongo is by far a surer bet to be an impact player than any package offered by fans here.

Vankiller Whale 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 05:40 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.