HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Luongo Thread - OMG Guyz Schneider is Hurt - MOD WARNING IN OP

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-06-2013, 07:38 PM
  #126
thepuckmonster
Global Moderator
Professional Winner.
 
thepuckmonster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,729
vCash: 50
I don't know about this in the CBA, but is there anyway to trade Luongo and we agree to absorb the full penalty if he retires early?

thepuckmonster is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 07:44 PM
  #127
Hal 9000*
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
He would be free to go anywhere. And why would he agree to go cheap, when plenty of teams would be willing to offer him a substantial contract?
That's what people don't seem to understand. It's like those who think gillis should buyout Luongo, then resign Lu for cheap....yeah sure. If Lu gets bought out, he'd sign somewhere for 5yr/25m$ somewhere and laugh his way all to the bank.

Hal 9000* is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 07:48 PM
  #128
I in the Eye
Registered User
 
I in the Eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country:
Posts: 4,937
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hal 9000 View Post
That's what people don't seem to understand. It's like those who think gillis should buyout Luongo, then resign Lu for cheap....yeah sure. If Lu gets bought out, he'd sign somewhere for 5yr/25m$ somewhere and laugh his way all to the bank.
I don't think you can re-sign a player you buyout yourself... If Lu is bought out by the Canucks, he can't sign with the Canucks, if I understand correctly...

I in the Eye is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 07:52 PM
  #129
WestleySnipez
Christmas came early
 
WestleySnipez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Vancouver. Duh.
Country: Canada
Posts: 525
vCash: 500
I think the League should make a rule saying that if Players and GMs agree that a contract is bad, they can void it.

That's how it works with contracts outside of the NHL, if both parties agree, the contract can be torn up.

WestleySnipez is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 07:54 PM
  #130
billvanseattle
Registered User
 
billvanseattle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: bellingham
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,129
vCash: 500
As we said before, you can't buy a player out without waivers first ....

billvanseattle is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 07:55 PM
  #131
thepuckmonster
Global Moderator
Professional Winner.
 
thepuckmonster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,729
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by billvanseattle View Post
As we said before, you can't buy a player out without waivers first ....
I think the amnesty buyout is the exception.

thepuckmonster is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 07:56 PM
  #132
Hal 9000*
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I in the Eye View Post
I don't think you can re-sign a player you buyout yourself... If Lu is bought out by the Canucks, he can't sign with the Canucks, if I understand correctly...
Of course, I'm pretty sure that once Luongo is run out of town, this would be the last place he'd ever agree to come back to anyway. I'm saying, he'd be offered a size able contract elsewhere. And, after all is said and done, make more money.

Hal 9000* is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 07:57 PM
  #133
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 10,997
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thepuckmonster View Post
I don't know about this in the CBA, but is there anyway to trade Luongo and we agree to absorb the full penalty if he retires early?
No, it gets attached to whichever team reaps the "cap advantage" for each season.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thepuckmonster View Post
I think the amnesty buyout is the exception.
Compliance buyouts still require waivers. They're basically identical to normal buyouts except they don't count towards the cap.

opendoor is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 07:57 PM
  #134
I in the Eye
Registered User
 
I in the Eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country:
Posts: 4,937
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thepuckmonster View Post
I think the amnesty buyout is the exception.
I think it's an exception, when that player has a NMC... If it's a NTC, that player has to go through waivers first... I'm getting this info from a post in the Business of Hockey board...

I in the Eye is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 08:00 PM
  #135
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thepuckmonster View Post
I don't know about this in the CBA, but is there anyway to trade Luongo and we agree to absorb the full penalty if he retires early?
We would absolutely crazy to absorb his recapture penalty. Again, he has four years at the end for small amounts of money. Were he to play all his big money years (he would be 39 by that time), his contract represents a $14M savings divided by those 4 years. That's $3.5M a year in recapture penalty, which will still be around the price of an elite 3rd liner or decent 2nd liner at that time

I'm going to say it again. All that has to happen is that Lu is traded every 2-3 years to a new team. Each team will then only incur a $700k-$1M per year recapture penalty.

As for us, we're stuck with a $1.9M penalty if Lu plays until 39. There's almost nothing we can do about it.

The only problem is if you can't offload Lu every 2-3 years. He is now the ultimate rental. Of course if you don't offload Lu in that time period you are going to get stuck with an increasingly large penalty. But that's your own fault - you could just trade him for really low picks.

mossey3535 is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 08:12 PM
  #136
Canucker
Go Hawks!
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Frisco, Texas
Posts: 21,056
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hal 9000 View Post
Of course, I'm pretty sure that once Luongo is run out of town, this would be the last place he'd ever agree to come back to anyway. I'm saying, he'd be offered a size able contract elsewhere. And, after all is said and done, make more money.


Still haven't come to grips with the fact that Luongo WANTS out huh? If he didn't want out he'd make Gillis' job MUCH easier.

Canucker is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 08:14 PM
  #137
billvanseattle
Registered User
 
billvanseattle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: bellingham
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,129
vCash: 500
yeah the only real hope is that he want s to play out his contract with a cap basement team wanting the hit, and him adding to his stats

billvanseattle is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 08:15 PM
  #138
Hardyvan123
[email protected]
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
The Leafs have made offers for Luongo, so obviously they've been willing to take on his contract; they just want to get him for basically nothing which is what him being on waivers would accomplish.
And the media and many Canuck fans think that Nonis was screwing around with Gillis.

I'm pretty sure the last 3 offers were made by the Canucks, haven't heard of any "official offers " made by Toronto other than the stipulation that the Canucks take on part of Lou's contract which might have been a legitimate request or a ploy.






[/QUOTE]1) Lecavalier is only 1 year younger than Luongo

2) The cap for next year is not $60M

3) Jake Allen plays for the Blues[/QUOTE]

To your last points in reverse order

Okay it's Ben bishop, fire my editor if you want.

The cap is going down, even if I don't know the exact amount off the top of my head, the point remains the same the Canucks are up against it and can't keep both Lou and Cory and other teams know it thus reducing the Canucks bargaining potion on two full counts there.

For Vinny sure it's 1 year but still doesn't favor Lou's contract over Vinnys which was the point I was countering.

Hardyvan123 is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 08:16 PM
  #139
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by I in the Eye View Post
Do you think Lacavalier would prefer to play with Luongo, or Bishop... or both?
I think Lecavalier would rather play for $5M/season than $1M/season, no matter what he received in way of buyout. If Tampa wants him back, they would almost certainly have to pay him something resembling market value.

In which case they may as well stay with the contract they gave him.

 
Old
04-06-2013, 08:19 PM
  #140
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canucker View Post
Still haven't come to grips with the fact that Luongo WANTS out huh? If he didn't want out he'd make Gillis' job MUCH easier.
How would it make Gillis's job easier? He doesn't want a $5M+ backup and he does want Schneider as the starter.

Luongo is making Gillis's life easier by allowing himself to be traded, not the other way 'round.

 
Old
04-06-2013, 08:21 PM
  #141
Hal 9000*
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canucker View Post


Still haven't come to grips with the fact that Luongo WANTS out huh? If he didn't want out he'd make Gillis' job MUCH easier.
And you can't come to grips with the idea that we're running the best goalie we've ever had out of town.

Hal 9000* is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 08:21 PM
  #142
Hardyvan123
[email protected]
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I in the Eye View Post
There is no formal pre-arranged deal... Canucks acquire a contract that can be bought out... That contract has a NMC, so that player doesn't need to pass through waivers... As a UFA, that player can choose to play with whatever team he wants, and if that team wants him... From what I can tell, Lacavalier would be free, to return to TB, for cheap...

My scenario meets the needs of the Canucks... My scenario meets the needs for Lu (it's real close to home, with Florida and being on a cup contender are real important considerations for him)... does it meet the needs for TB? I don't know... I don't know if TB is thinking about ways to get out of the Lecavalier contract, given this golden opportunity with compliance buyouts... I don't know if TB feels that their goaltending is now solved or not... In my scenario, TB would receive Luongo (solve their goaltending, for a real long time, between Luongo and their young guy) + a real good prospect (with good drafting in a deep draft, at 20) + Lacavalier at a new, real good contract (turn the Vinny contract from a real big negative, to a real big positive) + a significant amount of extra cap space (difference between Lacavalier's old cap hit ($7.7?) and Lu's $5.3, plus Lacavalier's new contract)... If TB considers that valuable or not, I can't say... TB might be pleased with their goaltending, pleased with the Lacavalier contract as is until 2020... and don't see either as a problem...
Well given that Lou's main concern is being a #1 goalie, he is already on a SC contending team (well not really but let's assume for the sake of all the Pollyanna fans here) it doesn't really meet his needs in TB.

They just traded for Ben Bishop with whom the TB coach is very familiar with and they have a great young Russian goalie prospect as well.

You also keep alluding to Vinny resigning with TB back at the league minimum of which the league would ahve some strong thoughts on I would think.

Hardyvan123 is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 08:23 PM
  #143
Canucker
Go Hawks!
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Frisco, Texas
Posts: 21,056
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
How would it make Gillis's job easier? He doesn't want a $5M+ backup and he does want Schneider as the starter.

Luongo is making Gillis's life easier by allowing himself to be traded, not the other way 'round.
If Luongo didn't want to be traded, Gillis would have no choice but to either waive Luongo, buy him out or trade Schneider. Those options are much easier to deal with than trying to trade Luongo and get decent value back in this market.

Canucker is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 08:24 PM
  #144
Hardyvan123
[email protected]
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
He would be free to go anywhere. And why would he agree to go cheap, when plenty of teams would be willing to offer him a substantial contract?
Exactly if he signed say for league minimum and there were offers of 3-4 million per year wouldn't an investigation of collusion take place?

Hardyvan123 is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 08:25 PM
  #145
Canucker
Go Hawks!
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Frisco, Texas
Posts: 21,056
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hal 9000 View Post
And you can't come to grips with the idea that we're running the best goalie we've ever had out of town.
I'm not sure you understand what running someone out of town means...but ok, we're running Luongo out of town...we're forcing his wishes straight down his throat.

Canucker is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 08:26 PM
  #146
me2
Callng out the crap
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Blasting the bull***
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 29,762
vCash: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beezeral View Post
Think of it from Tampa's point of view. It would absolutely be cap circumvention if they paid another team a first round pick to buyout a player then re-sign him on a min deal. I havent dived into the CBA to find the exact rule, but I would be absolutely stunned if there wasn't a rule that prevented this.
Amnesty buyouts are new. The rules as written and so far know do not outlaw these types of things. Personally I think that is on the NHL, but nothing in the rules I've seen excludes sending a player to another team to be bought out in exchange for assets.

The league created this option, it's not even a loophole, it is an option. Personally I think it should have been you can only amnesty buyout players on your team at the time of the CBA starting, but the league opened it to buying out any players from any other team as well and they did this on purpose. They aren't stupid they knew this was an option they choose to leave available. Why, I don't know - maybe so rich team could help/exploit weak teams, shrug

If Tampa bought out Luongo and Vancouver bought out Lecavalier I don't think the league would intervene. Even if Lecavalier then resigned cheapishly in Tampa I doubt they would intervene. It'd probably both Luongo resigning cheaply in Van and Lecavalier resigning cheaply in Tampa before the league would be motivated to act.


Last edited by me2: 04-06-2013 at 08:44 PM.
me2 is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 08:53 PM
  #147
Hal 9000*
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canucker View Post
I'm not sure you understand what running someone out of town means...but ok, we're running Luongo out of town...we're forcing his wishes straight down his throat.
Why can't you accept that Luongo committed to this team by signing a deal that would have him finish his career as a Canuck, helped out Gillis by circumventing the cap and now after shouldering 90% of the blame for the SCF's and getting told he's no longer wanted here, he agrees to help out Gillis again by agreeing to a trade (which never comes because Gillis wants his value) - and you people make him out as the guy turning his back on the team. Give your head a shake dude, Luongo is all class here.

I bet you're one of those that feels bad for poor old Pavel and how bad he was treated though.

Hal 9000* is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 08:59 PM
  #148
WestleySnipez
Christmas came early
 
WestleySnipez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Vancouver. Duh.
Country: Canada
Posts: 525
vCash: 500
Lecavalier is still a fantastic player, able to put up 20 goals, 50-60 points a season. If Roy deserves at least 4 mil a year, then so does Vinny.

Only reason the Lightning have to trade him his because of his contract length, and they have no reason to trade him for Loungo on the chance that Gillis might agree to buy him out. But then what reason would he have to go back to the Lightning? He could make more than 5mil/season somewhere else, where he could be a 1st line center again.

WestleySnipez is offline  
Old
04-06-2013, 09:07 PM
  #149
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canucker View Post
If Luongo didn't want to be traded, Gillis would have no choice but to either waive Luongo, buy him out or trade Schneider. Those options are much easier to deal with than trying to trade Luongo and get decent value back in this market.
Gillis doesn't want to trade Schneider - he wants to trade Luongo. That's what started this whole process in the first place. Gillis already has the ability to waive Luongo anytime he wants, regardless of what Luongo wants. Gillis also already has the ability to buy out Luongo, regardless of what Luongo wants.

What's making this difficult is Gillis started the trade-Luongo process under the beilef he could get a good return, and has stuck to that belief.

This disastrous soap opera didn't start with Luongo's post-playoff interview - it started in Game 4 when Gillis & AV decided Schneider really was their guy.

EDIT: Yes, Hal, this organization treated Bure like crap.

 
Old
04-06-2013, 09:37 PM
  #150
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,983
vCash: 50
there have been too many threads so i want to explore a different path, but i don't know if its been discussed:

has anyone acknowledged that even if we get peanuts for luongo, the contract is still not a complete failure? there's literally no chance that we retain both edler and salo in 2011 if luongo was signed to a real cap hit and i'm gonna say missing one of them would have been a pretty big hit to the chances of making the finals that year

like yeah, we're going to lose him for pennies on the dollar and it sucks, but signing him to a real, short term contract would have incurred a lot of opportunity cost in deadline acquisitions, cap gymnastics - etc. we purchased a lot of regular and post-season success with that ~$2m which is literally the thing you do when you trade for players both in the season and at the deadline

that said, i don't doubt that the - in hindsight - optimal way to deal with this would have been to sign him to a 3-4yr contract, trade salo for X and then trade luongo's rights for Y, but i think the difference between that result and the one we have is a lot smaller than most people are assuming, and again, we're only making the comparison in 20/20

edit: are you ****ing kidding me this is at the bottom of the page again?


Last edited by Verviticus: 04-06-2013 at 09:43 PM.
Verviticus 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 12:50 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2017 All Rights Reserved.