Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.
Except you conveniently ignored the part about the cap hit returning to the team that signed the contract (ie. Vancouver). If this is the case then GM's would not be hesitant about taking Luongo's contract.
I didn't hear anything about that, my mistake. I wasn't trying to downplay Luongo's value just to be a dick, I was just making a point based on the information I heard, which apparently turned out to be false.
I disagree. I think the clause was added to punish teams who signed players to these cap circumventing deals during the last CBA. The cap circumventing contracts made Bettman look foolish. Now he's getting his revenge.
We can always just pull an Edmonton for the retirement years - tank for 1st overalls. Timing is about right with the age of the team.
that is what they may have been saying in Vancouver--but many other places found it more amusing then anything and thought it said more about the state of Vancouver leadership or lack there of. I remember listening to the late sports talk out of ottawa and the talking head predicted then that it would last year and giving the C to Luongo was a statement about the lack of leadership on the nucks.
He was still the leader in the dressing room. That is saying something, no? Do you honestly refuse to believe that when Luongo was named captain it said something positive about his character? Are you really too stubborn to agree to that?
And also, I don't care AT ALL what talk radio was saying. Those shows are a joke.
at talking about him having the c--that will go down as one of the silliest things in the last 50 years
Luongo has been one of the top goalies in the NHL but he has played a lot of games and at some point in time the wheels will fall off. He has played 50+ games for 10 years 70+games many times as well.
One of my concerns is his wheels falling off sooner then later, but that is the gamble when dealing with goalies
Martin Brodeur has played 18 NHL seasons 12 being 70+ games, I think he should be a good comparable.
Not to mention the other goalies that have played until late ages, like Thomas, Rolson, Joseph, Hasek.
that is what they may have been saying in Vancouver--but many other places found it more amusing then anything and thought it said more about the state of Vancouver leadership or lack there of. I remember listening to the late sports talk out of ottawa and the talking head predicted then that it would last year and giving the C to Luongo was a statement about the lack of leadership on the nucks.
So you're going to listen to a couple of sports radio hosts on how to run a team? How do you know what goes on in the locker room?
So you're going to listen to a couple of sports radio hosts on how to run a team? How do you know what goes on in the locker room?
the question was how was Luongo giving the C viewed from OUTSIDE of Vancouver and it was viewed as a statement as to the LACK of leadership in Vancouver and was predicted to last just a season--which it did.
Giving the C to Luongo was a statement and message to the players on the team--atleast that is how it was viewed by many
Canuck fans can toss as much importance on it as the like, but many, many people down play the role that a Captain plays on a team over the last few seasons
btw
Remember I am one of the posters that IS saying Luongo has been one of the best goalies over the last ten years--but some of the facts being tossed up by the vancouver faithful needs to be disputed and him having the C is one of those topic that I believe led to a nasty debate on several boards and was viewed by many to be a joke
the question was how was Luongo giving the C viewed from OUTSIDE of Vancouver and it was viewed as a statement as to the LACK of leadership in Vancouver and was predicted to last just a season--which it did.
Giving the C to Luongo was a statement and message to the players on the team--atleast that is how it was viewed by many
Canuck fans can toss as much importance on it as the like, but many, many people down play the role that a Captain plays on a team over the last few seasons
btw
Remember I am one of the posters that IS saying Luongo has been one of the best goalies over the last ten years--but some of the facts being tossed up by the vancouver faithful needs to be disputed and him having the C is one of those topic that I believe led to a nasty debate on several boards and was viewed by many to be a joke
But giving the C to guys like Ryan Smyth or Horcoff makes total sense.
the question was how was Luongo giving the C viewed from OUTSIDE of Vancouver and it was viewed as a statement as to the LACK of leadership in Vancouver and was predicted to last just a season--which it did.
Giving the C to Luongo was a statement and message to the players on the team--atleast that is how it was viewed by many
Canuck fans can toss as much importance on it as the like, but many, many people down play the role that a Captain plays on a team over the last few seasons
btw
Remember I am one of the posters that IS saying Luongo has been one of the best goalies over the last ten years--but some of the facts being tossed up by the vancouver faithful needs to be disputed and him having the C is one of those topic that I believe led to a nasty debate on several boards and was viewed by many to be a joke
I agree with a lot of what you are saying, and we are not that far off in our thinking, but some of your facts also need to be looked at like him losing his game soon.
We can always just pull an Edmonton for the retirement years - tank for 1st overalls. Timing is about right with the age of the team.
As much as I enjoy having 3 1st overall picks on the team, I'm secretly glad that I was unable to watch a lot of the last 3 seasons due to working nights during the winters.
Watching a terrible team you cheer for get pumped almost every time you watch them isn't exactly enjoyable.
As much as I enjoy having 3 1st overall picks on the team, I'm secretly glad that I was unable to watch a lot of the last 3 seasons due to working nights during the winters.
Watching a terrible team you cheer for get pumped almost every time you watch them isn't exactly enjoyable.
Agreed. I would never want my team to purposely tank unless change is desperately needed to change the team's direction.
Except you conveniently ignored the part about the cap hit returning to the team that signed the contract (ie. Vancouver). If this is the case then GM's would not be hesitant about taking Luongo's contract.
retracted
Last edited by Reverend Mayhem: 10-17-2012 at 10:18 PM.
the question was how was Luongo giving the C viewed from OUTSIDE of Vancouver and it was viewed as a statement as to the LACK of leadership in Vancouver and was predicted to last just a season--which it did.
Giving the C to Luongo was a statement and message to the players on the team--atleast that is how it was viewed by many
Canuck fans can toss as much importance on it as the like, but many, many people down play the role that a Captain plays on a team over the last few seasons
btw
Remember I am one of the posters that IS saying Luongo has been one of the best goalies over the last ten years--but some of the facts being tossed up by the vancouver faithful needs to be disputed and him having the C is one of those topic that I believe led to a nasty debate on several boards and was viewed by many to be a joke
So I'm assuming that you may agree with what others believe, which could be wrong but if the captaincy means very little now of days, how is that sending a message to everyone else on the team?
Obviously, management and coaching believe something strongly in a player just to give them captaincy, that is we Canadians laud Messier as 'the best captain ever' is it not? Does management not have the choice to NOT give captaincy to anyone at all? That's what Florida is doing aren't they?
Also quick note, Luongo's captaincy debacle last two glorious years, not one unfortunately.
We can always just pull an Edmonton for the retirement years - tank for 1st overalls. Timing is about right with the age of the team.
I wouldn't laugh. With the Sedin's over 30 and the lack of prospects that Vancouver has developed, they might be pushed into years of high draft picks. That said - that's where the Sedins came from, anyway.
So I'm assuming that you may agree with what others believe, which could be wrong but if the captaincy means very little now of days, how is that sending a message to everyone else on the team?
Obviously, management and coaching believe something strongly in a player just to give them captaincy, that is we Canadians laud Messier as 'the best captain ever' is it not? Does management not have the choice to NOT give captaincy to anyone at all? That's what Florida is doing aren't they?
Also quick note, Luongo's captaincy debacle last two glorious years, not one unfortunately.
With being the captian it has lost its luster over the years--I would say which team did the damage and with whom--but that is another topic. When Luongo got the C there was open question as to who the leader on the canucks would be and there were questions to the character of the team and by giving the C to Luongo it sent a message to the team. Other players did step up to show their mettle, leadership and character
The value of being the Captain is not what it once was
With being the captian it has lost its luster over the years--I would say which team did the damage and with whom--but that is another topic. When Luongo got the C there was open question as to who the leader on the canucks would be and there were questions to the character of the team and by giving the C to Luongo it sent a message to the team. Other players did step up to show their mettle, leadership and character
The value of being the Captain is not what it once was
I agree to a certain extent. Just because you are a captain doesn't mean you are a leader and because you aren't a captain doesn't mean you are a leader, but captains do have an expected responsibility from coaches to be a leader.
That said, I believe Luongo got the C because at that time he was the most important player on the team and was unarguably the face of the franchise. Not because other players were not leaders, which in that case Ohlund or Mitchell would have gotten the C but because the were not nearly as important or marketable to the team as Roberto was. That changed as the Sedins developed on the ice and in the room over the 2009-10 season, personally a lot of that can be attributed to Mats Sundin as the catalyst but again, another story for another day.
"• All years of existing SPCs with terms in excess of five (5) years will be accounted for and charged against a team's Cap (at full AAV) regardless of whether or where the Player is playing. In the event any such contract is traded during its term, the related Cap charge will travel with the Player, but only for the year(s) in which the Player remains active and is being paid under his NHL SPC. If, at some subsequent point in time the Player retires or ceases to play and/or receive pay under his NHL SPC, the Cap charge will automatically revert (at full AAV) to the Club that initially entered into the contract for the balance of its term."
Not signed sealed and delivered but this would make many of thise long terms deals crippling.
Timing is about right with the age of the team.
at talking about him having the c--that will go down as one of the silliest things in the last 50 years
