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
Notices

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.

Staple (via Kyper) on Dipietro/Luongo

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-28-2013, 03:27 PM
  #76
TorstenFrings
Co-Trainer
 
TorstenFrings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Country: Zimbabwe
Posts: 5,054
vCash: 500
Question: Would VAN even be able to buy out DiPietro instantly? I thought there was some provision about the player having been on the payroll at the previous trade deadline, but could be rembering this wrong from all the other "we buy out your players for draft picks" threads.

If they had to carry his cap hit for even only one season, they are better off shoveling that 2.5m out the window after all.

TorstenFrings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:27 PM
  #77
Darth Milbury
Registered User
 
Darth Milbury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Searching for Kvasha
Country: Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 44,583
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
You just can't admit when you're wrong can you...that's ok, it's hard for aus all. The Luongo/DP swap was clearly not invented or manufactured.

One of the key things to note about that tweet: Isles are indeed interested in Luongo.

As for the other assets that might be exchanged, sure, that was speculated on. As always because that is the point of this website and why we're all here.

So what does that tell you - one, perhaps sources such as twitter and the blogosphere can, at times, be a legitimate source of rumours and information. In this instance Staple is confirming what others have already stated.

Nice to see you do a 180 on this, although I am disappointed you are not man enough to admit when you were wrong. You did ask me to quote that post, and I happily obliged.

Here's hoping to see Bobby Lou in Brooklyn.
Sigh. I'm not going back and forth with you about blogs vs. real reporters anymore. It was a dumb discussion to start.

If you want to post something substantive, let me know. Otherwise, I'm not responding to you.

Darth Milbury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:28 PM
  #78
Skead
Registered User
 
Skead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NugentHopkinsfan View Post
Because Gillis is the most overrated GM in the NHL.
Overrated? Disagreed.
He has his pro's and cons, I admit the way he handled this situation by being "Stay Still Gill" blew up in his face but his signings are extremely good Edler just a shade step (offensively) behind Letang making 5M, Sedins making 6.1, Hamhuis at 4.5M etc etc.

Skead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:28 PM
  #79
Nucks N Canes
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sm0ka47 View Post
Yes but nobody will pick him up when they know he will be a UFA... So I don't care about that. Time is ticking so we will see what happens in the yearly Luongo saga.
Why wouldn't a team that knows he won't sign there not take him for free? (aka Edmonton or basically any team other than Florida)

Nucks N Canes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:28 PM
  #80
boredmale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 27,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverback91 View Post
Didn't bob Mackenzie start the whole dipietro + for luongo thing or even if he didn't start it he tweeted it saying it was a possibility. So how is that crap but this tweet isn't? Bobby Mack is the most credible reporter when it comes to the NHL.
I could be wrong but I think Bob Mackenzie stated it might not be a bad idea, but didn't claim it was a rumor or even speculation. Then it went from their(ie Canuck fans thinking they could get top assets from the Islanders, while Islanders fan claimed they would only do it if Loungo was a potential buyout candidate)

The tweet in question now that I look at it seems like speculation(ie the ISlander would be interested IF the Canucks have no other options)

boredmale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:28 PM
  #81
Alchemy
Philadelphia Flyers
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 13,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuckles View Post
Yes, why bother wasting time to see if they can save $25+ million. That's pocket change.
If they had a deal in place they would have been moved him already. GMs aren't budging for Gillis colossal mistake. You think they are going to bail him out?

Alchemy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:30 PM
  #82
Ruston*
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 614
vCash: 500
Martin Brodeur, who appears set to play the upcoming season, will be 42 years old at the end of the 2013-2014 campaign. And he's still starting.

Luongo's deal ends when he, too, turns 42. And he does't have any chronic health issues. I think the chances of Roberto playing out his contract are very good.

This talk of cap recapture with regard to Luongo is premature, to say the least.

For those wondering, DiPietro's buyout is an even $24M, which runs through '28-'29. Luongo's buyout is $27,046,674, which runs through '30-'31, leaving a difference of about $3M between the two.


Last edited by Ruston*: 06-28-2013 at 03:45 PM.
Ruston* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:30 PM
  #83
Nuckles
& Knuckles
 
Nuckles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Benning's empty head
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by sm0ka47 View Post
Yes but nobody will pick him up when they know he will be a UFA... So I don't care about that. Time is ticking so we will see what happens in the yearly Luongo saga.
Not necessarily. A not-so-great team needing a goalie might claim him since they might not be an attractive destination for a UFA Luongo (who would have many options for places to sign).

Kipper might be retiring, Bobrovsky might be KHL-bound, maybe Winnipeg or Edmonton might want a veteran proven goalie.

__________________
Richer's Ghost made my avatar

Fire Benning. Fire Linden. Fire Desjardins. Hire competent people.
Nuckles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:30 PM
  #84
arsmaster*
semantic romantic
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 25,746
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sm0ka47 View Post
Yes but nobody will pick him up when they know he will be a UFA... So I don't care about that. Time is ticking so we will see what happens in the yearly Luongo saga.
You don't think a team will claim him to make sure they end up with him?

To acquire a goalie of that caliber, signed, for ZERO assets, I think would be quite tantalizing for teams with poor goaltending who cannot attract free agents.

For example, lets say Edmonton wants him....even at his "albatross" (HF speak)...does Edmonton really think they'll get him as a UFA?

Makes more sense to claim him then, doesn't it?

Either way, I'm guessing some leafs fans will weigh in with a stupid answer and I'll ignore this thread....just wanted to bring this scenario up.

arsmaster* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:32 PM
  #85
Darth Milbury
Registered User
 
Darth Milbury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Searching for Kvasha
Country: Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 44,583
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverback91 View Post
Didn't bob Mackenzie start the whole dipietro + for luongo thing or even if he didn't start it he tweeted it saying it was a possibility. So how is that crap but this tweet isn't? Bobby Mack is the most credible reporter when it comes to the NHL.

The ol' spin it to win it hf mentality. Where people change their opinions on topics as soon as it is to their liking
I'm sorry but you have no idea what the two of were discussing.
We were arguing about the validity of blogposts (which the earlier poster seems to view as hard data) versus real reports from actualy sports correspondents.

And, McKenzie never tweeted it was a possiblity or a likelihood. You guys just made that stuff up. McKenzie tweeted that it was believed it might make sense under some circumstancs, and you guys ran with it.

For the record though, I also see the tweet above as kind of silly. Duh, the Isles would have an interest if Luongo if Nucks would eat Dipietro's contract and not expect any assets. Are we at all suprised by that?

Darth Milbury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:32 PM
  #86
CalgaryCanuck03
@calgarycanuck03
 
CalgaryCanuck03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9,729
vCash: 500
Anyone who thinks the Canucks trading Luongo for Dipietro straight up is a good idea for the Canucks needs to give their head a shake, it's a horrible deal for them. They give up the better player for a player on an equally bad or worse contract and not get anything to make up for it?

They are better off just buying out Luongo then making that deal.

CalgaryCanuck03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:33 PM
  #87
Alchemy
Philadelphia Flyers
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 13,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nucks N Canes View Post
Why wouldn't a team that knows he won't sign there not take him for free? (aka Edmonton or basically any team other than Florida)
I don't understand why the oilers would penalize themselves with that contract when hey will be having major raises from a couple valuable players in the future when they start coming off their ELC? Also they are looking to bolster their overall roster.

Alchemy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:33 PM
  #88
Peter Griffin
Registered User
 
Peter Griffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,364
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Milbury View Post
No, I don't think there is any chance of that happening. I also think the Nino/first rounder stuff you were coming up with earlier is ridiculous. I think it is all silly. I'm just connecting the dots as to what COULD happen.
I don't recall "coming up" with anything? I may have


Quote:
If you are worried about the cap recapture, sounds like the intial fantasies you guys had about trading him to the Island never made much sense to start, eh? You guys didn't seem to care about cap recapture then, why care now?
Really? Is this a serious question? Swapping Luongo's buyout for DiPietro's buyout makes no sense when you factor in the recapture penalty. But if the Isles add something to entice the Cancuks, it may. Seems pretty straightforward to me...

Peter Griffin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:33 PM
  #89
Konk
Registered User
 
Konk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,149
vCash: 500
You would think this news would help curb some of that "Strome + 1st for Luongo" nonsense, but I realize some have too much pride.

In the end, despite Luongo's current talent level and abilities, his contract makes him an undesired asset. The Islanders are not willing to give up anything else but a bad contract for another bad contract. It's that simple. If it comes down to the Canucks buying him out, the swap would save them money. Some fans might not like it, but it could come down to that.

Konk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:33 PM
  #90
Darth Milbury
Registered User
 
Darth Milbury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Searching for Kvasha
Country: Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 44,583
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by boredmale View Post
I could be wrong but I think Bob Mackenzie stated it might not be a bad idea, but didn't claim it was a rumor or even speculation. Then it went from their(ie Canuck fans thinking they could get top assets from the Islanders, while Islanders fan claimed they would only do it if Loungo was a potential buyout candidate)

The tweet in question now that I look at it seems like speculation(ie the ISlander would be interested IF the Canucks have no other options)

Yup. Exactly how I see it.

I posted it for good natured fun. Let's not get into flaming each other, please. We're all friends here.

Darth Milbury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:33 PM
  #91
boredmale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 27,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruston View Post
For those wondering, DiPietro's buyout is an even $24M, which runs through '28-'29. Luongo's buyout is $34,476,671, being a difference of about $10.5M between the two.
Loungo's buyout is slightly over 27M. Basically both get 1.5M(Loungo gets like 1.502M) a year, DP gets it for 16 years, Loungo 18

boredmale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:33 PM
  #92
YP44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,949
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kesler2Burrows View Post
You do realize Luongo was to pass through waivers for him to get bought out.
Luongo has a no movement clause. He would not have to go through waivers. Players choice.

YP44 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:35 PM
  #93
Darth Milbury
Registered User
 
Darth Milbury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Searching for Kvasha
Country: Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 44,583
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Griffin View Post
I don't recall "coming up" with anything? I may have...
Hah! I call foul. I have not been on this board much until very recently but I saw many posts from you speculating about scenarios in which the Nucks get all sorts of good stuff from the Isles in a Dipetro/Luongo swap.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Griffin View Post
I

Really? Is this a serious question? Swapping Luongo's buyout for DiPietro's buyout makes no sense when you factor in the recapture penalty. But if the Isles add something to entice the Cancuks, it may. Seems pretty straightforward to me...
Yeah, what they would add to entice the Nucks might be eating Ballard or Booth's contract. Everybody wins!

Darth Milbury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:36 PM
  #94
Nuckles
& Knuckles
 
Nuckles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Benning's empty head
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perro View Post
Luongo has a no movement clause. He would not have to go through waivers. Players choice.
Nope, he only has a no trade clause.

http://capgeek.com/player/683
Quote:
KNOWN CLAUSES (note: if player has been traded, clauses may no longer apply): Full NTC (Exception 1: Player can supply five-team trade list following final game of 2013-14, valid through July 15, 2014; Exception 2: If player does not submit trade list as documented in Exception 1, team can request a five-team trade list following final game of 2017-18 season, valid through Sept. 1, 2018. If player submitted a trade list in 2014 and was not moved, team loses right to request trade list in 2018.)

Nuckles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:36 PM
  #95
arsmaster*
semantic romantic
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 25,746
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sm0ka47 View Post
I don't understand why the oilers would penalize themselves with that contact when hey will be having major raises from a couple valuable players in the future when they start coming off their ELC? Also they are looking to bolster their overall roster.
HOw is bolstering their roster going to hurt them....is getting Luongo for free and replacing Devan Dubnyk with the active leader in all goaltending categories behind Brodeur not bolstering their roster?

Anyways, you just seem like a guy who is upset that your team paid big money for a flop and feel like lumping Luongo into the same category might make you feel better.

arsmaster* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:36 PM
  #96
Alchemy
Philadelphia Flyers
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 13,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuckles View Post
Not necessarily. A not-so-great team needing a goalie might claim him since they might not be an attractive destination for a UFA Luongo (who would have many options for places to sign).

Kipper might be retiring, Bobrovsky might be KHL-bound, maybe Winnipeg or Edmonton might want a veteran proven goalie.
Wouldn't those teams rather rebuild? I don't know we'll see. Teams just don't want to be on the hook for that contract when he retires. That's just too much money tied up on a non roster player.

Alchemy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:37 PM
  #97
tempest2i
Fitter Happier
 
tempest2i's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cowtown
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
You don't think a team will claim him to make sure they end up with him?

To acquire a goalie of that caliber, signed, for ZERO assets, I think would be quite tantalizing for teams with poor goaltending who cannot attract free agents.

For example, lets say Edmonton wants him....even at his "albatross" (HF speak)...does Edmonton really think they'll get him as a UFA?

Makes more sense to claim him then, doesn't it?

Either way, I'm guessing some leafs fans will weigh in with a stupid answer and I'll ignore this thread....just wanted to bring this scenario up.
My opinion alert: If Edmonton wants him they can make a pitch once he's a UFA. Sign him to a contract they like and move on. If Luongo turns down the Oilers, they'll look elsewhere for a goalie. No harm, no foul. Certainly no need to grab him on the contract he is currently signed to.

tempest2i is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:37 PM
  #98
Ruston*
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by boredmale View Post
Loungo's buyout is slightly over 27M. Basically both get 1.5M(Loungo gets like 1.502M) a year, DP gets it for 16 years, Loungo 18
You're right. I'll fix my numbers.

Ruston* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:38 PM
  #99
Skead
Registered User
 
Skead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perro View Post
Luongo has a no movement clause. He would not have to go through waivers. Players choice.
Luongo possesses as No TRADE Clause, not a No Movement Clause.

Skead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 03:38 PM
  #100
Alchemy
Philadelphia Flyers
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 13,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
HOw is bolstering their roster going to hurt them....is getting Luongo for free and replacing Devan Dubnyk with the active leader in all goaltending categories behind Brodeur not bolstering their roster?

Anyways, you just seem like a guy who is upset that your team paid big money for a flop and feel like lumping Luongo into the same category might make you feel better.
I'm not upset at all. You seem mad just because you had to even take a cheapshot. Edmonton needs better defenseman and a better bottom six. Luongo does nothing to solve that.

Alchemy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 04:03 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.