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.
Burke has also shown he undervalues goaltending in addition to what you posted about overvaluing his own players. Therefore, it doesn't look like a deal is likely...
I still can't believe Burke refused Kadri + Kulemin for Richards. Just outside the realm of reason there.
And for the 10 millionth time, he did not refuse, he said he wanted to speak to his staff and he would call him back, then Philly made the trade....
Indeed. As I've been saying all summer until now, a deal between Vancouver and Toronto for Roberto is not going to happen unless Mike Gillis has no other trading options and is willing to take a deal centered around a cap dump like Mike Komisarek or Tim Connolly.
There is no "unless" IMO. If Gillis has no trading options and Luongo must go, then he will be waived before Gillis accepts a cap dump. It seems the most logical course of action. Take no return over taking a bad return.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueBaron
And for the 10 millionth time, he did not refuse, he said he wanted to speak to his staff and he would call him back, then Philly made the trade....
There is no "unless" IMO. If Gillis has no trading options and Luongo must go, then he will be waived before Gillis accepts a cap dump. It seems the most logical course of action. Take no return over taking a bad return.
Getting rid of a long-term albatross >>>>> short-term albatross in Tim Connolly / Mike Komisarek.
That would not be a bad return, especially in a league dominated by cap management.
Some of the prices being thrown out by Leafs fans for Luongo here are crazy.... Toronto's not going to part with core pieces for a 33 year old goaltender. One thing about Brian Burke, he's as stubborn as they come, and he's the type that would rather go with the players who's tires he's been pumping then make such a drastic move.
Remember, this is a guy who could've had a 26-year old Mike Richards for Kulemin & Kadri, a player who embodies basically everything he was boasting about -- truculence, beligerence, pugnacity, leadership, and who also happened to fill the glaring hole at #1C. He turned it down.
If an unwillingness to part with core pieces means that another team's offer for Luongo is better, then so be it.
no he didnt they made the deal with the kings before he could respond
Would Vancouver fans be fine with Lupul for Luongo straight up?
no, too much risk
UFA to be, injury history, coming off a career year
add one of those prospects like Finn or Biggs and id have to think about it seriously
Getting rid of a long-term albatross >>>>> short-term albatross in Tim Connolly / Mike Komisarek.
That would not be a bad return, especially in a league dominated by cap management.
It would be a terrible return. Without a doubt. Here are the reasons:
- A lot of Canucks fans do not view Lu's contract as an albatross. Instead, they view it as the cap circumvention deal it was meant to be -- A deal that flaunts cap rules to give its team an unfair advantage. To many, it is excellent.
- I'm betting Gillis views Lu's deal as the same. He should know, he offered it.
- What's better? Taking on a short term albatross or having to take on no cap dump at all? If there's a chance _any_ team picks up Luongo on waivers, it will be tried before Komisarek/Connolly are touched.
Lastly, in a league "dominated by cap management", Gillis has been at the forefront of signing his players to efficient contracts. Lu's may be the best of all, especially if they aren't allowing BDCs anymore... It's clear you and I have very different viewpoints on what constitutes and "albatross".
Getting rid of a long-term albatross >>>>> short-term albatross in Tim Connolly / Mike Komisarek.
That would not be a bad return, especially in a league dominated by cap management.
not sure you read his post
better to get nothing than some bad contracts, should it come to that.
but I think most can see it's nowhere near come to that.
He's in his prime, rock solid #s last year as per his history, a steal for 5-6 years anyway, then there are outs. The albatross thing is just wishful thinking for would-be suitors..
I'm very happy to have him for another year and have Gillis wait for his price; status quo is pretty good in Vcr; not so much in TO, i think...
Except three of our players are producing. Regardless, the point isn't about who the better GM is. The point is that we don't have to trade him for anything that does not make us a noticeably better team.
In fairness the Tucker buyout was not Burkes contract or choice. As for Armstrong well he was over paid to come as most UFA's are and was injured most of the time. Say what you want about Burke I give him credit for trying to do things when players haven't worked out as they hoped. Trading Beauchimen for Gardiner, and lets face it Lupul has turned out well but was a cap dump, we lucked out there. Buying out Army to give a younger player a chance.
It would be a terrible return. Without a doubt. Here are the reasons:
- A lot of Canucks fans do not view Lu's contract as an albatross. Instead, they view it as the cap circumvention deal it was meant to be -- A deal that flaunts cap rules to give its team an unfair advantage. To many, it is excellent.
- I'm betting Gillis views Lu's deal as the same. He should know, he offered it.
- What's better? Taking on a short term albatross or having to take on no cap dump at all? If there's a chance _any_ team picks up Luongo on waivers, it will be tried before Komisarek/Connolly are touched.
Lastly, in a league "dominated by cap management", Gillis has been at the forefront of signing his players to efficient contracts. Lu's may be the best of all, especially if they aren't allowing BDCs anymore... It's clear you and I have very different viewpoints on what constitutes and "albatross".
I have a serious question for you about the "value" Lou's contract is. If, note I said if, Bettman gets his way and those "cap friendly" long term deals are now the exact hit for the entire contract regardless of retirement during the phantom years, still a good contract? Espacially if that hit is only to the team that signed the player to the deal, as lets face it there is more then just Lou's out there like that. This is not a shot at Lou, just a serious question about these type of deals.
I have a serious question for you about the "value" Lou's contract is. If, note I said if, Bettman gets his way and those "cap friendly" long term deals are now the exact hit for the entire contract regardless of retirement during the phantom years, still a good contract? Espacially if that hit is only to the team that signed the player to the deal, as lets face it there is more then just Lou's out there like that. This is not a shot at Lou, just a serious question about these type of deals.
I think the best Bettman can hope for is to close the door on future BDCs. The existing ones will be grandfathered in.
These deals were approved on Bettman's watch. Where teams went through league offices, sometimes asking for advice, before they were ratified. What's he going to say now? That he was wrong for first approving them?
Your hypothetical is so implausible so as to not have relevance. Teams that have signed players to these deals will oppose the ruling. It's a negotiating ploy. Most of these teams are the rich ones that line Gary's pockets. IMO, he's trying to close the door, not punish those that have already walked through.
I think the best Bettman can hope for is to close the door on future BDCs. The existing ones will be grandfathered in.
These deals were approved on Bettman's watch. Where teams went through league offices, sometimes asking for advice, before they were ratified. What's he going to say now? That he was wrong for first approving them?
Your hypothetical is so implausible so as to not have relevance. Teams that have signed players to these deals will oppose the ruling. It's a negotiating ploy. Most of these teams are the rich ones that line Gary's pockets. IMO, he's trying to close the door, not punish those that have already walked through.
but hypothetically, it only increases Luo's value if an acquiring team knows retirement caphit will be the Canucks' problem
Yes of course, but I'm sure doorman already knew that? Or let's hope he did.
Either case won't happen though, so it's moot.
I do know, however was simply trying to add a twist to the discussion. It has been pointed out time and time again it is a great contract, so I was simply stating that IF it went through like that, is it still?
I am a Leaf fan and am interested in Lou at the right price for the Leafs. Now before people rag on me, I say the right price for us because of the stage our team rebuild wise. We are not in a position to give up multple assets to a goalie who makes us better but not a contender. It is counter productive going forward, we need to get better all around. Strengthening our goaltending by weaking our overall depth, makes us a middling team. For this team to become a perenial playoff team, we need at least one more blue chip type building block. If that means going with what we have and allowing the youth we have to play, develop and see what we have fine. I am in no way saying tank, as some people wanna do or would say i am suggesting. However a high draft pick maybe the only way to aquire that illusive number 1 centre. I don't believe as many we are a shoe in for Geztlaf, Perry etc. Do we have a shot, sure but so do many other teams, so we can't rely on free agenncy nor should we to build a team.
I do know, however was simply trying to add a twist to the discussion. It has been pointed out time and time again it is a great contract, so I was simply stating that IF it went through like that, is it still?
As NYVANfan pointed out, the current CBA provision to leave the hit with the signing team only increases his value. Not only is the cap hit excellent, there is essentially no long-term cost. A near perfect contract. So I'm not sure what purpose the "twist" would serve? But even then it isn't going to happen IMO, so it's irrelevant I think.
Quote:
I am a Leaf fan and am interested in Lou at the right price for the Leafs. Now before people rag on me, I say the right price for us because of the stage our team rebuild wise. We are not in a position to give up multple assets to a goalie who makes us better but not a contender. It is counter productive going forward, we need to get better all around. Strengthening our goaltending by weaking our overall depth, makes us a middling team. For this team to become a perenial playoff team, we need at least one more blue chip type building block. If that means going with what we have and allowing the youth we have to play, develop and see what we have fine. I am in no way saying tank, as some people wanna do or would say i am suggesting. However a high draft pick maybe the only way to aquire that illusive number 1 centre. I don't believe as many we are a shoe in for Geztlaf, Perry etc. Do we have a shot, sure but so do many other teams, so we can't rely on free agenncy nor should we to build a team.
There is no discount for Burke IMO. If that's what he's looking for, he picked the wrong target. These two GMs don't like each other. Besides, FLA would be the only team Gillis would realistically involve in a discount deal -- And that would be strictly for Lu's benefit.
For TO, I'm afraid it's been about getting a fair deal, or even a premium. It's a reason why a deal hasn't gone down yet, and it only stands to continue. Even despite the Cox rumour, I just don't think Burke will ante up and pay what's necessary to get a deal done. He has never valued goaltending in that way.
It does but marginally. What if he doesn't retire?
Then there are two out-clauses in his contract to mitigate that situation. He can be traded during those times. In such an event, a floor team could be looking for a cap-hit centered contract to fill out their roster. Much like what FLA did with Jovo.
Finally, he does have an NTC and not an NMC, so he can be waived regardless.
Would Vancouver fans be fine with Lupul for Luongo straight up?
i dont see burke parting with lupul. he has acquired him several times over his career via trade. he obviously has some sort of fondness for the kid. lupul has also played really well in toronto. the point is to add pieces not take apart what youve built. i recognize that you can say the same about toronto but subtracting luongo doesnt necessarily make vancouver worse. removing lupul hurts the leafs. he is the top line left winger and one of our only players who is talented enough to keep up with kessel.
obviously toronto needs a goalie. no one is disputing that but i think for a deal to work you need to be looking at areas where toronto has depth, not removing what few actually decent roster players we have
Then there are two out-clauses in his contract to mitigate that situation. He can be traded during those times. In such an event, a floor team could be looking for a cap-hit centered contract to fill out their roster. Much like what FLA did with Jovo.
Finally, he does have an NTC and not an NMC, so he can be waived regardless.
There's a very good chance that the new CBA will contain a cause that requires the cap hit of guys on one-way contracts, who have been send to the minors, to remain on the teams cap.
Any time you have to consider out clauses for someone's contract, there's a really good chance you're not talking about a good contract.
With that said, fake/legitimate injury and using LTIR will be the way his cap hit gets buried.
i dont see burke parting with lupul. he has acquired him several times over his career via trade. he obviously has some sort of fondness for the kid. lupul has also played really well in toronto. the point is to add pieces not take apart what youve built. i recognize that you can say the same about toronto but subtracting luongo doesnt necessarily make vancouver worse. removing lupul hurts the leafs. he is the top line left winger and one of our only players who is talented enough to keep up with kessel.
obviously toronto needs a goalie. no one is disputing that but i think for a deal to work you need to be looking at areas where toronto has depth, not removing what few actually decent roster players we have
Yup, if Burke acquires Luongo he won't want to diminish the roster doing it. The goal will be to compete instantly. Considering the Leafs depth chart, Matt Finn would have to be in the deal.
To Van- Kulemin, Biggs, Finn
To Tor- Luongo, Raymond
Toronto loses virtually nothing off their starting roster and Rielly and Gardiner make Finn expendable. Biggs isn't ready to contribute much of anything over the next 2-3 years, so his loss isn't a big one either...
This deal likely gets the Leafs into the playoffs over the next couple years. Something that will be very important if they want to retain their only 2 1st line talents in Lupul and Kessel going forward.
Burke just can't risk another season on the outside looking in. Too much risk of Lupul wanting to move on to a winning team and Kessel following him a year later.
Yup, if Burke acquires Luongo he won't want to diminish the roster doing it. The goal will be to compete instantly. Considering the Leafs depth chart, Matt Finn would have to be in the deal.
To Van- Kulemin, Biggs, Finn
To Tor- Luongo, Raymond
Toronto loses virtually nothing off their starting roster and Rielly and Gardiner make Finn expendable. Biggs isn't ready to contribute much of anything over the next 2-3 years, so his loss isn't a big one either...
This deal likely gets the Leafs into the playoffs over the next couple years. Something that will be very important if they want to retain their only 2 1st line talents in Lupul and Kessel going forward.
Burke just can't risk another season on the outside looking in. Too much risk of Lupul wanting to move on to a winning team and Kessel following him a year later.
That's a horrible trade for Vancouver
If you're Toronto you take it and run away laughing. If Gillis gives up Luongo for that then it will be a big disappointment considering how long he has held on to him. Gillis said he will wait until he finds a deal that improves the team and not going to trade him for the sake of a trade.
Kulemin and his 5 goals doesn't do that for this club.
Yup, if Burke acquires Luongo he won't want to diminish the roster doing it. The goal will be to compete instantly. Considering the Leafs depth chart, Matt Finn would have to be in the deal.
To Van- Kulemin, Biggs, Finn
To Tor- Luongo, Raymond
Toronto loses virtually nothing off their starting roster and Rielly and Gardiner make Finn expendable. Biggs isn't ready to contribute much of anything over the next 2-3 years, so his loss isn't a big one either...
This deal likely gets the Leafs into the playoffs over the next couple years. Something that will be very important if they want to retain their only 2 1st line talents in Lupul and Kessel going forward.
Burke just can't risk another season on the outside looking in. Too much risk of Lupul wanting to move on to a winning team and Kessel following him a year later.
Counter...
To Van: MacArthur, Colborne/Kadri, Percy + Salary dump (Connolly/Lombardi)
To Tor: Luongo, Raymond
