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 use the RUMOR prefix in thread title. Proposals must contain the PROPOSAL prefix in the thread title.

*ALL* Luongo Talk (News/Speculation/Rumors/Proposals)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-27-2013, 12:40 PM
  #151
EvoLu7ioN
Registered User
 
EvoLu7ioN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,461
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dubey View Post
I wonder if Luongo gets claimed if he is waived

Can't hide salary in the minors anymore

EvoLu7ioN is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 12:43 PM
  #152
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,236
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Question:

How much would Luongo be worth if he were signed for two years?(i.e. this one and the next)

You're barking up the wrong tree VKW. People here will refuse to answer this honestly because it undermines their fictitious bargaining position here. Luongo at 5.3m over 2 years? You have to start at the 1st and 2nd that Varlamov got and begin to add... big time.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 12:46 PM
  #153
K2B
HFBoards Sponsor
 
K2B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Vancouver
Country: United States
Posts: 42,633
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by dubey View Post
I wonder if Luongo gets claimed if he is waived

Can't hide salary in the minors anymore
Wonder if Phaneuf gets claimed if he is waived.

Can't hide salary in the minors anymore.

K2B is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 12:46 PM
  #154
Vankiller Whale
Fire Benning
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,222
vCash: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
You're barking up the wrong tree VKW. People here will refuse to answer this honestly because it undermines their fictitious bargaining position here. Luongo at 5.3m over 2 years? You have to start at the 1st and 2nd that Varlamov got and begin to add... big time.

I only ask because if any deep pocketed team decides to buy out Luongo in two years time, it would be equivalent to having him on a two year contract.

Vankiller Whale is online now  
Old
01-27-2013, 12:49 PM
  #155
Lonny Bohonos
$15mil Mentor-pede
 
Lonny Bohonos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: United Nations
Posts: 10,630
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halibut View Post
Sorry buddy but this is one of the biggest stories hanging over the league for the past 9 months. Anyone who is interested in the NHL will have interest in this story and fans of every other team have just as much right to come into this thread and say they are for/against trading for him and think that a deal will cost x amount in the end as Canucks fans do. If you only want to talk to Canuck fans about a possible deal go to the Vancouver board.
Strange that a player whos only worth spare parts and protected picks would garner so much attention.

Lonny Bohonos is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 12:52 PM
  #156
LeftCoast
Registered User
 
LeftCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,157
vCash: 50
Anders Lindback went for 2 2nd round picks.

Semyon Varlomov went for a 1st and a 2nd.

Luongo is certainly worth more than either of these.

LeftCoast is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 12:54 PM
  #157
rune74
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,973
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoast View Post
Anders Lindback went for 2 2nd round picks.

Semyon Varlomov went for a 1st and a 2nd.

Luongo is certainly worth more than either of these.
NO! Just say no to that logic.

rune74 is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 12:54 PM
  #158
luongo321
Registered User
 
luongo321's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 12,058
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Canuck View Post
Wonder if Phaneuf gets claimed if he is waived.

Can't hide salary in the minors anymore.
Can his minor team waive him?

luongo321 is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 12:55 PM
  #159
Lonny Bohonos
$15mil Mentor-pede
 
Lonny Bohonos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: United Nations
Posts: 10,630
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
You're barking up the wrong tree VKW. People here will refuse to answer this honestly because it undermines their fictitious bargaining position here. Luongo at 5.3m over 2 years? You have to start at the 1st and 2nd that Varlamov got and begin to add... big time.
Nah then the argument would be hes worthless because of the risk he could leave after 2 years/ask for more money after 2 years etc

Lonny Bohonos is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 01:00 PM
  #160
Seatoo
Never Stop Poasting
 
Seatoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: The Interior of BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,448
vCash: 400
I'd seriously consider Hemsky + Gagner + 5th for Luongo + Schroder + 2nd

Seatoo is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 01:00 PM
  #161
A1LeafNation
Welcome to Toronto
 
A1LeafNation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,574
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoast View Post
Anders Lindback went for 2 2nd round picks.

Semyon Varlomov went for a 1st and a 2nd.

Luongo is certainly worth more than either of these.
Players with the careers in front of them should garner more in a trade.

Luongo is worth more even at his age, but that contract plummets his trade value.

A1LeafNation is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 01:05 PM
  #162
KeninsFan
"Unintentional" Tank
 
KeninsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3,475
vCash: 50
Luongo's contract is bad?

Do you honestly believe the NHL banned the cap circumventing deals because they are bad?

KeninsFan is online now  
Old
01-27-2013, 01:05 PM
  #163
Nuckles
Bim Jenning
 
Nuckles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Benning's empty head
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,922
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seatoo View Post
I'd seriously consider Hemsky + Gagner + 5th for Luongo + Schroder + 2nd


There's no reason for us to be adding a 2nd AND a prospect that has been playing well for us in the NHL this season.

__________________
Richer's Ghost made my avatar

Fire Benning. Fire Linden. Fire Desjardins. Hire competent people.
Nuckles is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 01:21 PM
  #164
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,993
vCash: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Question for Nucks fans, (no trolling) with Chi being 5-0, Bryz bring solid in his last 3, Edm looking good so far....does it worry you that you may be back to the 2 original favoured teams (FLA/TO)? Tallon doesn't seem to be any more interested and Nonis has said he won't pay. (and Luongo won't waive for TO).

Vankiller seems to think the market is growing, right now it seems to be shrinking.
Not particularly. Bryzgalov and Crawford could choke at any moment, as neither are reliable starters, while Edmonton could sink or swim in a heartbeat. Washington is new to the dance. Simply put, it is far too soon for us to worry about the state of any potential team's interest or lack thereof.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 01:24 PM
  #165
tempest2i
You and Whose Army?
 
tempest2i's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cowtown
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
Luongo's contract is bad?

Do you honestly believe the NHL banned the cap circumventing deals because they are bad?
No, I think the NHL banned cap circumventing deals because they bothered Bettman. Those deals appeared to be structured in such a way that the player and team had little to gain by fulfilling the entire contract.

Looking at Luongo's contract today, it's hard to believe that he will play at an elite level for his entire contract. The fear is, you're stuck with a healthy Luongo, eating 5.3M of the cap, who has lost it around 39.

tempest2i is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 01:28 PM
  #166
Skead
Registered User
 
Skead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,144
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
Not particularly. Bryzgalov and Crawford could choke at any moment, as neither are reliable starters, while Edmonton could sink or swim in a heartbeat. Washington is new to the dance. Simply put, it is far too soon for us to worry about the state of any potential team's interest or lack thereof.
Exactly; here is the facts. Some teams are going to lead the NHL and secure playoffs, other teams are going to tank and miss the playoffs, and a large chunk is going to be on the bubble battling for playoff spots.

Why trade now for less, when you KNOW there will be an increase demand for players (Goalies, Forwards, Defense, all players). It may not a be a huge increase of demand, but there will be an increase nonetheless.

Gillis is doing the smart thing by being patient and waiting for the demand to rise. Maybe Reimer/Scrivens starts playing awesome? Possible. Maybe Reimer/Scrivens, Theodore/Clemmenson all start playing awesome? Unlikely, but still possible. Maybe Reimer/Scrivens, Theodore/Clemmenson, Holtby/Neuvirth all start playing awesome? Very unlikely. Etc, etc.

Skead is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 01:31 PM
  #167
KeninsFan
"Unintentional" Tank
 
KeninsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3,475
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by tempest2i View Post
No, I think the NHL banned cap circumventing deals because they bothered Bettman. Those deals appeared to be structured in such a way that the player and team had little to gain by fulfilling the entire contract.

Looking at Luongo's contract today, it's hard to believe that he will play at an elite level for his entire contract. The fear is, you're stuck with a healthy Luongo, eating 5.3M of the cap, who has lost it around 39.
I doubt Bettman's personal feelings had anything to do with it. The deals like Luongo provide a huge benefit to teams who spend to the cap so much so that they had to penalize all deals in the new CBA.

Even now if Luongo's play falls off (and for whatever reason he's waived and decides to play in the AHL) a cap floor team can easily trade for him and pay him 1M-3M and carry a 5.3M caphit and save the owner money.

To say that Luongo's value had dramatically dropped the same would have to be said for a player like Hossa.

KeninsFan is online now  
Old
01-27-2013, 01:34 PM
  #168
LeftCoast
Registered User
 
LeftCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,157
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by A1LeafNation View Post
Players with the careers in front of them should garner more in a trade.

Luongo is worth more even at his age, but that contract plummets his trade value.
The potential negative impacts of Luongo's contract do not come into play for at least another 8 years. The average lifespan of an NHL general manager is considerably less than that and the current CBA has an opt out in 8 years, so we may be into another lockout before then. When a real NHL GM weighs having an elite goal tender with a $5.3M cap hit for the next 5-7 years years versus a potential cap liability 8 to 10 years from now the Cap Savings Recapture doesn't really come into play. It's a non-issue.

LeftCoast is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 01:48 PM
  #169
tempest2i
You and Whose Army?
 
tempest2i's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cowtown
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
I doubt Bettman's personal feelings had anything to do with it. The deals like Luongo provide a huge benefit to teams who spend to the cap so much so that they had to penalize all deals in the new CBA.

Even now if Luongo's play falls off (and for whatever reason he's waived and decides to play in the AHL) a cap floor team can easily trade for him and pay him 1M-3M and carry a 5.3M caphit and save the owner money.

To say that Luongo's value had dramatically dropped the same would have to be said for a player like Hossa.
Has any team during the salary cap era traded for a low salary/high cap hit contract like you described?

I mean, look, I realize it's possible what you propose, but that would likely be a very painful trade. Sending a good prospect or something alike along with Luongo/bad contract to facilitate the trade.

Trading for any of these cap circumventing contracts is a huge risk/reward situation. If the player plays well and then gets an injury that allows the contract to get LTIR'd then it's wonderful. If the players play falls off a cliff, you're left holding a very expensive bag that everyone knows you don't want, thus has little value.

tempest2i is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 01:48 PM
  #170
marty111
Registered User
 
marty111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoast View Post
The potential negative impacts of Luongo's contract do not come into play for at least another 8 years. The average lifespan of an NHL general manager is considerably less than that and the current CBA has an opt out in 8 years, so we may be into another lockout before then. When a real NHL GM weighs having an elite goal tender with a $5.3M cap hit for the next 5-7 years years versus a potential cap liability 8 to 10 years from now the Cap Savings Recapture doesn't really come into play. It's a non-issue.
1. Part of the problem is that many people disagree with how long his contract will be considered a 'non-issue'. You suggest that is it 8 years. I understand. I feel like 4 years with many years of penalty. Others will say 2 years and another group will say none at all. Since there is no way to truly measure that one aspect of his value, you will get vastly varying opinions.

2. Just out of curiosity, what are the numbers of the cap-recapture rule for Vancouver if say they never traded him and kept him? Are we talking 4M cap penalty for 4 years? Is that non issue?

marty111 is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 02:00 PM
  #171
nhlfan9191
Registered User
 
nhlfan9191's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,870
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
Luongo's contract is bad?

Do you honestly believe the NHL banned the cap circumventing deals because they are bad?
They are good for teams tight against the cap, like Vancouver always is. His contract was structured to fit into Vancouvers long term plans specifically. The new CBA found away to not only punish the team who signed the player, but also the team who has traded for him.

nhlfan9191 is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 02:01 PM
  #172
KeninsFan
"Unintentional" Tank
 
KeninsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3,475
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by tempest2i View Post
Has any team during the salary cap era traded for a low salary/high cap hit contract like you described?

I mean, look, I realize it's possible what you propose, but that would likely be a very painful trade. Sending a good prospect or something alike along with Luongo/bad contract to facilitate the trade.

Trading for any of these cap circumventing contracts is a huge risk/reward situation. If the player plays well and then gets an injury that allows the contract to get LTIR'd then it's wonderful. If the players play falls off a cliff, you're left holding a very expensive bag that everyone knows you don't want, thus has little value.
Visnovsky? Cap floor teams would love using low salary/high cap hit because it saves the owners real dollars. NYI/CBJ/PHO all have 2M+ in bonuses they use.

Considering Luongo's contract has a "penalty" of a portion of his cap hit after he retires it has even more appeal to a cap floor team. If that fails teams can elect to pay for 50% of his salary.

There are many outs to Luongo's contract, the worst of which happens 8 years from now. I doubt GMs are weary of his contract, just unwilling to pay Gillis' asking price.

KeninsFan is online now  
Old
01-27-2013, 02:01 PM
  #173
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,236
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by A1LeafNation View Post
Players with the careers in front of them should garner more in a trade.

Luongo is worth more even at his age, but that contract plummets his trade value.

Varlamov's youth in his favour, but in no fashion does a player's youth trump ability. Luongo has _proven_ to be great over a very long period of time. Varlamov has his work cut out for him to prove the same.


And no, Luongo's contract does not plummet his value. This narrative has no basis in fact. A poor contract does not get penalized, nor does it get issued by one of the brightest GMs in the biz.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 02:03 PM
  #174
KeninsFan
"Unintentional" Tank
 
KeninsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3,475
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by nhlfan9191 View Post
They are good for teams tight against the cap, like Vancouver always is. His contract was structured to fit into Vancouvers long term plans specifically. The new CBA found away to not only punish the team who signed the player, but also the team who has traded for him.
The "punishment" isn't much if it all. A possible 2M cap hit 8 years from now is something GMs of teams take everyday.

If the penalty was severe enough then contracts like his would still be allowed.

KeninsFan is online now  
Old
01-27-2013, 02:03 PM
  #175
EvoLu7ioN
Registered User
 
EvoLu7ioN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,461
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by marty111 View Post
1. Part of the problem is that many people disagree with how long his contract will be considered a 'non-issue'. You suggest that is it 8 years. I understand. I feel like 4 years with many years of penalty. Others will say 2 years and another group will say none at all. Since there is no way to truly measure that one aspect of his value, you will get vastly varying opinions.

2. Just out of curiosity, what are the numbers of the cap-recapture rule for Vancouver if say they never traded him and kept him? Are we talking 4M cap penalty for 4 years? Is that non issue?
I agree with your time frame, I think he has 4 more years where he can provide world class goaltending.

After that Luongo will retire - he has stated multiple times he has no desire to play in the NHL when he can't play at a high level anymore. So the team who owns his contract at that point in time will only be on the hook for his cap hit and not his salary as he will have retired.

At the point when he retires the NHL cap will likely be between 75-80M. I guarantee you there will be teams with internal budget constraints that will need to get to the cap floor, they will be more than wiling to take the contract (straight hit to cap without having to pay out actual cash) to help save their ownership cash. The team that acquires him in the coming weeks and has to take a cap hit penalty must also realize when the cap is at 75-80M a small cap hit penalty is diluted compared to today's salary cap - not a big deal at all.

There's also the possibility Luongo becomes injured with old age and is "unable to play out his contract", where there wouldn't be any cap penalties applicable at all.

People can believe whatever they want, but his cap hit isn't going to be a big liability down the road and I think a lot of GMs understand this.


Last edited by EvoLu7ioN: 01-27-2013 at 02:13 PM.
EvoLu7ioN 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 03:34 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.