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.

Tallon won't trade Bjugstad for Luongo

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-16-2012, 03:35 PM
  #401
The Saurus
Registered User
 
The Saurus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Country: United Nations
Posts: 8,231
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Bet? Even with their farm team in the same city, the Leafs will still be carrying 7+ defensemen on their roster to have an extra guy with the team on road trips and practising with the team.

If I'm wrong, I rock a Leaf avatar for the whole season. If you're wrong, you rock the Canucks.

Deal?
Mark Fraser or Mike Kostka or Paul Ranger, who were told they would have a shot at a roster spot. The Marlies have a whole bunch of guys signed that could contribute in the NHL, so they are not going to go out and add to their glut on D.

I'll take that deal. The Leafs will not add another D, meaning you will be sporting a Leaf avatar.

The Saurus is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 03:45 PM
  #402
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saurus View Post
Mark Fraser or Mike Kostka or Paul Ranger, who were told they would have a shot at a roster spot. The Marlies have a whole bunch of guys signed that could contribute in the NHL, so they are not going to go out and add to their glut on D.

I'll take that deal. The Leafs will not add another D, meaning you will be sporting a Leaf avatar.
Just to be clear, if the Leafs carry 6 defensemen on their roster, you win.

If the Leafs carry 7 or more, I win.

That's the deal I'm offering. They may not need to add a defensemen to the organization but they are definitely going to add one to the roster, eating up cap space.

Scurr is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 04:03 PM
  #403
The Saurus
Registered User
 
The Saurus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Country: United Nations
Posts: 8,231
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Just to be clear, if the Leafs carry 6 defensemen on their roster, you win.

If the Leafs carry 7 or more, I win.

That's the deal I'm offering. They may not need to add a defensemen to the organization but they are definitely going to add one to the roster, eating up cap space.
I was under the assumption that you thought they need to sign someone else.

If they bring someone up from the Marlies, it's league minimum anyways. Doesn't matter.

Regardless, back to the conversation at hand: I'm liking the rock and the hard place the Canucks currently find themselves in.

The Saurus is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 04:06 PM
  #404
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saurus View Post
I was under the assumption that you thought they need to sign someone else.

If they bring someone up from the Marlies, it's league minimum anyways. Doesn't matter.

Regardless, back to the conversation at hand: I'm liking the rock and the hard place the Canucks currently find themselves in.
Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs.

StringerBell is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 04:09 PM
  #405
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 50,066
vCash: 696
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saurus View Post
I was under the assumption that you thought they need to sign someone else.

If they bring someone up from the Marlies, it's league minimum anyways. Doesn't matter.

Regardless, back to the conversation at hand: I'm liking the rock and the hard place the Canucks currently find themselves in.
The only rock and hard place that exists is the one that you assume exists because that's what you want to see. In fact, such rock and hard place does not exist.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 04:15 PM
  #406
Scottrockztheworld*
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saurus View Post
Regardless, back to the conversation at hand: I'm liking the rock and the hard place the Canucks currently find themselves in.
ok

Is this presumed rock & hard place worse then the one the Leafs are in? More specifically the one Burke is in with what he has said to your media? Nothing worse then hyping up a big fan base with false hope about making it to a place every other single team has been since the lockout besides yours.

Scottrockztheworld* is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 04:44 PM
  #407
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,975
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saurus View Post
Regardless, back to the conversation at hand: I'm liking the rock and the hard place the Canucks currently find themselves in.
Yes. A team with no legitimate number one goalie is in a much stronger position than one with two legitimate number ones. I just hope Gillis trades both Luongo and Schneider so that we don't end up being between a rock and a hard place again if Eddie Lack ends up being a great goalie.

vanwest is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 04:50 PM
  #408
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,503
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saurus View Post
Regardless, back to the conversation at hand: I'm liking the rock and the hard place the Canucks currently find themselves in.
Uhh yeah, about that..

@Real_ESPNLebrun: Am told league offer also will allow teams to go over salary cap in Year 1 - up to $70 M max - as part of transition rules

So I guess the problem you fabricated isn't going to be an issue.

dave babych returns is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 05:05 PM
  #409
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
A team is going to get Luongo with a 5.3m hit on a 70m cap and they'll get to claw back some of the 6.7m in real money in escrow... great deal.

Scurr is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 05:13 PM
  #410
KeninsFan
Registered User
 
KeninsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3,155
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
A team is going to get Luongo with a 5.3m hit on a 70m cap and they'll get to claw back some of the 6.7m in real money in escrow... great deal.
If the "Redden rule" comes into effect then GMs wont be able to dump Luongo if his play deteriorates.

However if Luongo's ego can't handle splitting time with Schnieider a demotion to the AHL would almost surely mean his retirement.

KeninsFan is online now  
Old
10-16-2012, 05:13 PM
  #411
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 50,066
vCash: 696
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
A team is going to get Luongo with a 5.3m hit on a 70m cap and they'll get to claw back some of the 6.7m in real money in escrow... great deal.
Luongo's value just went up.

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 05:18 PM
  #412
jumptheshark
McDavid Headquarters
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: EVIL EMPIRE
Country: United Nations
Posts: 59,222
vCash: 2458
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
A team is going to get Luongo with a 5.3m hit on a 70m cap and they'll get to claw back some of the 6.7m in real money in escrow... great deal.
the fun would be if the nhl got the clause in that penelizes teams holding contracts of players who retire with over 2 years left on their contract.

While the cap hit is good, it is only good while you look at the fact he wont play the last few years of his contract. IF he retires and the contract stays on the books, not so good of a hit

__________________
"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
10-16-2012, 05:24 PM
  #413
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,903
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saurus View Post

Regardless, back to the conversation at hand: I'm liking the rock and the hard place the Canucks currently find themselves in.
I'm liking that place the Canucks currently find themselves in as well. Sitting between a rock (Schneider) and a hard place (Luongo), they have won back to back Presidents' trophies, with Luongo a year removed from a Vezina finalist and was arguably the Presidents' trophy winning team's MVP last season, and Schneider who's posted the best numbers of any goalie in the game over the past 2 seasons.

I'd much rather be in the Leafs situation sitting between 2 question marks that have led to back to back 13th place finishes over the past 2 years.

Absolute worst case scenario for the Canucks - the new CBA hits them hard and the cap goes down, and no rollbacks, the Canucks lose Luongo for nothing. They waive him - and really who here believes that no team will pick him up on waivers?? He wouldn't pass through waivers, even with a drop in cap and no rollbacks (which btw would make Luongo's $5.3mill cap hit that much better in a market where quality starters make more than that now, and won't see their salaries rolled back either).

So they lose him for nothing - or as you suggested all he's worth is a 4th round pick. The Canucks would then be in a situation where they retain Schneider, the rest of their President's trophy winning team, have no cap issues dropping Luongo's salary for nothing, while watching the top teams around them having to manage their own cap situation under a tough restrictive cap. They'll likely sign a cheap veteran backup for a season and give Lack a chance to work his way up.

Even with the worst case scenario with the cap dropping and Luongo's return diminishing, the Canucks are still in a situation where they retain their top team, rectify all their cap concerns in one move, and still have a great goalie situation that led them to their recent successes.

What's the Leafs situation like in a worst cap scenario? They get to retain all their pieces which led to futility over the past several years, while having less cap space overall to build around that?

Regardless of what happens with Luongo, the Canucks situation is fine moving forward. Minus Luongo's cap hit off the roster and replace it with Lack (or another backup) and their team cap is the same as Toronto's, with a much better roster to work with.

And again, all that is worst case scenario. What happens if the new CBA isn't as restrictive as people think and there are little to no cap drops and/or with cap rollbacks in place? Last time we saw a 24% rollback in salaries... what's Luongo's value look like at a $4mill cap hit with half the teams in the league currently sitting at or below the $60mill cap payroll?

Regardless of what happens, the Canucks will come out of this just fine. They'll still be a top contender, still strong in goal and still be able to retain their overall depth. Much better situation than many other teams will find themselves in under a worst cap scenario.

NFITO is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 05:33 PM
  #414
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 50,066
vCash: 696
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
The cap is not expected to go down, so the Canucks are fine.

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 05:36 PM
  #415
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,903
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jumptheshark View Post
the fun would be if the nhl got the clause in that penelizes teams holding contracts of players who retire with over 2 years left on their contract.

While the cap hit is good, it is only good while you look at the fact he wont play the last few years of his contract. IF he retires and the contract stays on the books, not so good of a hit
So how valuable is an asset to a cap floor team that gets to add $5.3mill to their cap hit to reach a floor in order to get revenue sharing, without actually paying any real dollars at all?

Sure he has no value to top payroll teams like the Canucks, Rangers, Leafs, etc... how much value does he have to a team like Columbus, Phoenix, Florida etc... teams that are losing tons of money every year or struggle to make the cap floor? Teams that will never be anywhere close to within $5mill of the league ceiling, but could use that cap hit (again without paying a $$ for it as the player is retired) to reach the floor and/or revenue sharing markers.

A $5.3mill cap hit that costs a franchise zero actual dollars is going to be valuable to more than just a few teams. Easy to see that by looking at the number of teams around the league still losing money and forced to reach floors that their budgets don't justify.

NFITO is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 05:38 PM
  #416
Yzlamic Preacher
Believes in Yzergod
 
Yzlamic Preacher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Vancouver BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,309
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
The cap is not expected to go down, so the Canucks are fine.
Cap not expected to go down for one year. After that we don't know. So if Lou was on a 1 year contract then fine. Sadly this isn't the fact. We can also speculate the cap will lower the second year, not reach the current cap until year 6 which would make Lou's contract un appealing still. This all goes to say the cba is accepted which I don't think it will be. So this news IMO changes nothing with Lou's value.

Yzlamic Preacher is online now  
Old
10-16-2012, 05:47 PM
  #417
The Saurus
Registered User
 
The Saurus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Country: United Nations
Posts: 8,231
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stryfe604 View Post
So this news IMO changes nothing with Lou's value.
If this proposal sticks, it does not bode well for Roberto's value. That's a fact you cannot deny. With the inevitable cap decrease, the Canucks are going to have a heck of a time finding an 'out' of that contract.

I think the Canucks will inevitably be stuck with Roberto unless they are willing to give him up for a mid-round pick, or even a second, and perhaps a short term cap hit going back.

If Florida agrees to such a deal, I could see Luongo going back there. Otherwise, he's staying in Canuck colours and could potentially contribute to locker-room issues if he becomes disgruntled.

The Saurus is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 05:51 PM
  #418
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saurus View Post
If this proposal sticks, it does not bode well for Roberto's value. That's a fact you cannot deny. With the inevitable cap decrease, the Canucks are going to have a heck of a time finding an 'out' of that contract.

I think the Canucks will inevitably be stuck with Roberto unless they are willing to give him up for a mid-round pick, or even a second, and perhaps a short term cap hit going back.

If Florida agrees to such a deal, I could see Luongo going back there. Otherwise, he's staying in Canuck colours and could potentially contribute to locker-room issues if he becomes disgruntled.
Once again,

Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs.

StringerBell is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 05:54 PM
  #419
CanuckLuck
Registered User
 
CanuckLuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Kelowna, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,455
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saurus View Post
If this proposal sticks, it does not bode well for Roberto's value. That's a fact you cannot deny. With the inevitable cap decrease, the Canucks are going to have a heck of a time finding an 'out' of that contract.

I think the Canucks will inevitably be stuck with Roberto unless they are willing to give him up for a mid-round pick, or even a second, and perhaps a short term cap hit going back.

If Florida agrees to such a deal, I could see Luongo going back there. Otherwise, he's staying in Canuck colours and could potentially contribute to locker-room issues if he becomes disgruntled.


you're such a broken record man.

CanuckLuck is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 06:03 PM
  #420
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 50,066
vCash: 696
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by stryfe604 View Post
Cap not expected to go down for one year. After that we don't know. So if Lou was on a 1 year contract then fine. Sadly this isn't the fact. We can also speculate the cap will lower the second year, not reach the current cap until year 6 which would make Lou's contract un appealing still. This all goes to say the cba is accepted which I don't think it will be. So this news IMO changes nothing with Lou's value.
Wouldn't this mean that a goalie as good as Luongo with as cheap of a cap hit that he carries (relative to other top 10 goalies) would be valuable?

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 06:06 PM
  #421
CanuckLuck
Registered User
 
CanuckLuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Kelowna, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,455
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Wouldn't this mean that a goalie as good as Luongo with as cheap of a cap hit that he carries (relative to other top 10 goalies) would be valuable?
y2k, I think at this point we should just concede that Luongo has negative value and if we even want to just give him to another team it's unlikely anyone bites.

CanuckLuck is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 06:10 PM
  #422
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,975
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saurus View Post
If this proposal sticks, it does not bode well for Roberto's value. That's a fact you cannot deny. With the inevitable cap decrease, the Canucks are going to have a heck of a time finding an 'out' of that contract.

I think the Canucks will inevitably be stuck with Roberto unless they are willing to give him up for a mid-round pick, or even a second, and perhaps a short term cap hit going back.

If Florida agrees to such a deal, I could see Luongo going back there. Otherwise, he's staying in Canuck colours and could potentially contribute to locker-room issues if he becomes disgruntled.
LOL! Nice try but if you want Luongo you'll have to pay a fair price. Otherwise we'll talk in January after a few months of Scrivens/Reimer.


Last edited by vanwest: 10-16-2012 at 06:16 PM.
vanwest is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 06:46 PM
  #423
Vipers31
Advanced Stagnostic
 
Vipers31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bergisch Gladbach
Country: Germany
Posts: 13,099
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Wouldn't this mean that a goalie as good as Luongo with as cheap of a cap hit that he carries (relative to other top 10 goalies) would be valuable?
The reason for his cap hit being cheap is the term. That term's and his NTC's ability to narrow down the market always have been countering the admittedly very good cap hit and his exceptional quality as a player (which should go largely unquestioned by reasonable posters). Those things are factors, but it doesn't end there. (As reality rendered obvious.)

Vipers31 is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 06:47 PM
  #424
jumptheshark
McDavid Headquarters
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: EVIL EMPIRE
Country: United Nations
Posts: 59,222
vCash: 2458
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanuckLuck View Post
y2k, I think at this point we should just concede that Luongo has negative value and if we even want to just give him to another team it's unlikely anyone bites.
I do not think Luongo has a negative value, but there are some wild card to factor in when talking trade

1) Does the team he is getting traded to have stud goalie in their system (florida and tampa do and so do a few other teams)
2) Is the team he is getting traded to in a win now mode. If my team was a non-playoff team there are obviously other issues that need to be addressed however if my team was a playoff team that was week in net then I would get Luongo
3)How the new CBA looks. Will contracts like Luongo's and a few others that we commonly called retirement contracts where the last 3 to 4 years we know the player will retire, will the new CBA have a penalty clause or a retroactive clause where the if say Luongo retires after the 17/18 season when he is 39---for the 8 years he played his cap hit should have been 7.1mill a year and not 5.33. So that mean there should have been an additional 1.8mill (give or take 100k) on each of the active years. None of us know what the new CBA will include, we know a few teams have said that there should be some penalty for teams who sign players to contracts they do not fullfil.
4) What is Gillis asking for? if it is the moon he maybe in for a rude awakening. Luongo has played a lot of hockey in the last 12 years and his wheels maybe ready to fall off or they may not. Since 2001 he has played 55+ games every year.


the position that i think non-canuck fans and canuck fans disagree on is how big of a market there is for Luongo and that is the wild card

jumptheshark is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 07:00 PM
  #425
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,975
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jumptheshark View Post
I do not think Luongo has a negative value, but there are some wild card to factor in when talking trade

1) Does the team he is getting traded to have stud goalie in their system (florida and tampa do and so do a few other teams)2) Is the team he is getting traded to in a win now mode. If my team was a non-playoff team there are obviously other issues that need to be addressed however if my team was a playoff team that was week in net then I would get Luongo
3)How the new CBA looks. Will contracts like Luongo's and a few others that we commonly called retirement contracts where the last 3 to 4 years we know the player will retire, will the new CBA have a penalty clause or a retroactive clause where the if say Luongo retires after the 17/18 season when he is 39---for the 8 years he played his cap hit should have been 7.1mill a year and not 5.33. So that mean there should have been an additional 1.8mill (give or take 100k) on each of the active years. None of us know what the new CBA will include, we know a few teams have said that there should be some penalty for teams who sign players to contracts they do not fullfil.
4) What is Gillis asking for? if it is the moon he maybe in for a rude awakening. Luongo has played a lot of hockey in the last 12 years and his wheels maybe ready to fall off or they may not. Since 2001 he has played 55+ games every year.


the position that i think non-canuck fans and canuck fans disagree on is how big of a market there is for Luongo and that is the wild card
I'll give your Florida but I'm not so sure about TBay. I think that most teams think they have a good goaltending prospect somewhere in the system but whether that goalie ever pans out is another issue. Even if he does, Corey Schneider took years to become a starter and benefitted hugely by having a stud goalie teach him the ropes. I don't think that many teams with a top prospect goalie would shy away from acquiring Luongo.

vanwest 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 12:20 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.