Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Is Lu For Vinny Really That Bad.........if Its The Best Offer?


Southpop45

  

260 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

I like how you tell me to explain, when you can't explain yourself and just use other points from someone else. I know exactly what type of contract this is, and the idiot is you. And I won't need the "luck".

The contract is bad, there's no doubt. You can give me a hundred irrelevant reasons and go into the numbers and statistics but it won't matter. Only a biased and unreasonable Canuck fan would think the contract is good.

Luongo is ALREADY 33, he is beginning to decline. He isn't a top 5 goalie anymore. Yes, goalies can play until an old age, but not all goalies can still play at a high level like Brodeur and Thomas at that kind of age He has 10 more years left in his contract. This is a player who WILL decline in a few more years, and will be lucky to still be a top 10 goalie 2 years from now. He will be a liability in 3/4 years and will be a backup goalie making 5.3 M. With that kind of money you can easily pursue a quality top six forward, or a top four defenseman. Why waste that type of money on a backup? And not many teams can afford to buyout contracts, or want to in the first place. Same with waivers, not every team is willing to place a 5.3M liability in the minors for an X amount of years.

So tell me now, in what way is Luongo's contract NOT bad? I'm sure teams are craving a 33 year old, past his prime goalie with inflated stats from playing on the best team for back to back years, who has 10 more years left on his contract at a hefty amount at 5.3 Million. Answer me, do you think Bryzgalov's contract is bad?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can give you a hundred irrelevant reasons stating why it's good any you will still stick your nose up because you are just one of those people who hate Luongo blindly will never acknowledge facts because of your meaningless hate. This already tells me that no matter what i say, you're mind will never get changed. But i'll post the thread again, and maybe you will read it this time.

/topic/329405-how-luongos-contract-will-affect-trade-value-not-in-the-way-you-might-think/">http://forum.canucks...ou-might-think/

''Luongo is ALREADY 33, he is beginning to decline. He isn't a top 5 goalie anymore''

The season before this recent one, Luongo had a career year and played his best hockey of his life, going the deepest he has ever gone into the playoffs.....not to mention had another good season this year But wait, he's on the decline?

''He has 10 more years left in his contract. This is a player who WILL decline in a few more years, and will be lucky to still be a top 10 goalie 2 years from now.''

This one is a beauty. So all of the sudden you can predict the future? For a goalie who had another fantastic season that ended just months ago....you now paint him being a washed up bum in 2 years. Does this make a lot of sense? Is Luongo showing any signs of being on a decline? No. He was probably our best player this recent post season.

''He will be a liability in 3/4 years and will be a backup goalie making 5.3 M''

Oh more story telling? Here you go again with your baseless predictions of the future. Again, Luongo has shown no signs of slowing down.

''With that kind of money you can easily pursue a quality top six forward, or a top four defenseman. Why waste that type of money on a backup?''

Lol, First of all, seeing as you didn't read the thread that clearly points out as to why Luongos contract is great and not the least bit ''untradeable'' as many people here seem to think, i'll make it easier for you to understand. 5.3M for a very good goalie is not a bad cap hit at all, in fact it's probably a bargain.

The salary cap has gone up consistently the past 7 YEARS. From 39 Million to 64.3 Million. Do you realize the affects this has on certain large contracts? It makes the value of these long term deals go up and up and up. From the day Luongo signed that deal it may have seemed too big and overwhelming, but the salary cap has gone up 8 million since then, that's more than enough to make room for a very good goaltender.

Now if the cap continues to go up, as it is predicted to do so, Luongos contract can only get better and better. As it stands right now Luongo is 8th on the list in terms of goalies with the highest cap hits. Yet you keep blabbering on about how he isn't a top 5 goalie. Who said he has to be a top 5 goalie? He is without a doubt a top 10 goalie in this league and his cap hit is a mere 5.3 million, where guys like Pekka Rinne will have a cap hit of 7M, that is a scary high amount of cap for a goalie.

''So tell me now, in what way is Luongo's contract NOT bad?''

Well there you go, and instead of just predicting the future like yourself, i have stated reasons why Luongos contract isn't bad, where you have just told a fairy tale about how bad Luongo is because you have hate on for him, making up your mind without realizing the facts.

Again, i know you won't understand and will probably never change your mind about Luongo because of your hate for him. But the fact of the matter is, with the cap going up, Luongo is one hell of a bargain, rather than a bad contract. Most open minded people will understand this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7.8 million in cap hit, and 40 million in salary over the next 4 years for a guy who hasnt scored more that 70 points in the last 5 seasons?

Even if hte NHL allowed buy out clauses that wouldnt effect the cap.... worst effin contract in the league.

MUCH rather keep Luongo and his 5.3 cap hit.

IF this deal were to happen, it would have to look more like:

Lecavallier, Hedman

for

Luongo, Ballard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7.8 million in cap hit, and 40 million in salary over the next 4 years for a guy who hasnt scored more that 70 points in the last 5 seasons?

Even if hte NHL allowed buy out clauses that wouldnt effect the cap.... worst effin contract in the league.

MUCH rather keep Luongo and his 5.3 cap hit.

IF this deal were to happen, it would have to look more like:

Lecavallier, Hedman

for

Luongo, Ballard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I predicted you would tell me how well he's been doing these recent years. He's been playing behind the best team in the regular season for back to back years, yet posting average numbers this year for a supposedly "very good" goalie. He lost his own job to an inexperienced backup goalie, played poorly in numerous playoff series, and is mentally weak. The team carried him to the finals, Luongo didn't carry us to the finals. He just played well enough to advance, likewise other average goalies can win the cup. Winning a cup doesnt make a certain player more valuable unless he made huge contributions to the cup run. So you can shove all these "stats" in my face, but he has been declining ever since his first year in Vancouver.

Why do you keep mentioning cap hit? The cap hit was never the problem. No one's arguing about the cap hit, but the LENGTH of the contract which you continue to neglect about because you can't put up a decent argument when you consider the length of the contract. He has TEN more years left in his contract. I bolded it this time so maybe you'll have the wit to realize the problem of the contract is not the cap hit, but rather the length.

Baseless predictions?

Lundqvist, Quick, Rinne, Smith, Thomas, Howard, Schneider, Backstrom, Kippursoff, Miller, Halak

All of these goalies will probably do as well as Luongo next year, if not better. An argument could be made for several other goalies out there as well (Lehtonen, Ellliot, Price, Bryzgalov). He's barely a top 10 goalie now, in a couple years, Luongo will NOT be a top 10 goalie anymore. You can quote me on it if you want, but it's an educated guess with a great chance that it will be come true.

Rinne will be 36 when his contract ends, Luongo will be 43. You see the difference? No wonder why Rinne costs so much more eh?

I don't have any hatred for Luongo, as a matter of fact I greatly appreciate what he has done but he missed his chance for the cup and now it's time to move on Yet you completely neglect my question again, do you think Bryzgalov's contract is a bargain?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right, but it's not about Yzerman being an idiot as much as it's about getting the best for our team. Who gives a FK about Stevie?

The point 70seven was making (and sorry if I'm putting words into your mouth) is that Lecalvier alone isn't worth Luongo so why the hell would we trade straight up for him.

After all, we aren't idiots here either right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like how you tell me to explain, when you can't explain yourself and just use other points from someone else. I know exactly what type of contract this is, and the idiot is you. And I won't need the "luck".

The contract is bad, there's no doubt. You can give me a hundred irrelevant reasons and go into the numbers and statistics but it won't matter. Only a biased and unreasonable Canuck fan would think the contract is good.

Luongo is ALREADY 33, he is beginning to decline. He isn't a top 5 goalie anymore. Yes, goalies can play until an old age, but not all goalies can still play at a high level like Brodeur and Thomas at that kind of age He has 10 more years left in his contract. This is a player who WILL decline in a few more years, and will be lucky to still be a top 10 goalie 2 years from now. He will be a liability in 3/4 years and will be a backup goalie making 5.3 M. With that kind of money you can easily pursue a quality top six forward, or a top four defenseman. Why waste that type of money on a backup? And not many teams can afford to buyout contracts, or want to in the first place. Same with waivers, not every team is willing to place a 5.3M liability in the minors for an X amount of years.

So tell me now, in what way is Luongo's contract NOT bad? I'm sure teams are craving a 33 year old, past his prime goalie with inflated stats from playing on the best team for back to back years, who has 10 more years left on his contract at a hefty amount at 5.3 Million. Answer me, do you think Bryzgalov's contract is bad?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't think that rich teams go out and massively overpay for players as it is?? This happens all the time.... it wouldn't just start happening out of the blue if the cba was changed. It wouldn't matter if teams have the option to buy out a player or not, New York, Toronto etc will be throwing money at players regardless. Its not like Florida is on an even playing field with the way it works right now....

And in "real life" if you were payed a certain wage your employer would expect you to live up to specific expectations, so if you all of a sudden only put in 50% of the effort you would most likely be fired. Why then do you think that millionaire athletes should be exempt from this?

Theres a reason why alot of players play better in a contract year, because they know they have to perform at a certain level... just like the rest of us do daily. If somebody gave you 5 million dollars a year or more and said it was guaranteed regardless of what you did, do you think you would put in as much effort compared to if it could be taken away at any given moment?

Being an athlete is a privelage, and the fact that 100% of what they do is based on performance why should they be guaranteed anything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, LET'S TALK LUONGO:

We simply aren't going to agree here. The only ones who would ever contemplate a Lu for Vinny swap are haters. They just don't think we can win with him, so they want to go with the other guy even if it's not the best way to improve the rest of the team. Now, I don't think he's declining in fact. And I think that for the goaltending he gives you, his contract is one of the most cap friendly in the league. But some will disagree. Some are worried about four years down the road when we will have "missed our chance" to trade him, because they can predict the future and think Luongo is going to be a really bad goalie in four years. Still others think he sucks today! I don't know what to say to those people, except that if you are really so convinced that this contract is THAT BAD, you'll be taken more seriously if you aren't in the same breath advocating that we pick up a contract that just about everyone else is convinced is EVEN WORSE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not a privilege. Coaches and GM's get their salaries even if they are fired, why should players not? Even more to the point, should it work both ways - if you think a team should be able to cancel or renegotiate a contract, should a player? It's only fair. Think about that.

Of course rich teams overpay players, and each time the Rangers are allowed to bury or rid themselves of a Redden, Drury or Gomez contract without consequence it only encourages them to go do it again, and that drives up the salary expectations of ALL free agents. I didn't say you would see rich teams overpaying players out of the blue, I said it would exacerbate the problem.

LET'S TALK LECAVALIER:

Go to capgeek.com and make a roster out of a Luongo for Lecavalier swap, and you will see why I am against it for cap reasons. It puts us in cap hell, we don't have any rookies on ELC's waiting to step in, we can't improve the defense or sign a decent fourth line, even if we magically make Malhotra and Ballard disappear - and the difference between being tight up against the cap for a contract like Rick Nash's and being tight up against it for a contract like Lecavalier's is that Lecavalier is half the player!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luongo posted a 0.919 save percentage this year, you know his career average, last year he posted a .928. If he was declining like some apparantly mathematically illeterate people are saying you would expect his numbers from the past two seasons to be at least 1 percent (.010)lower than his career average not equal to or better than it. To further prove my point Luongo's save percentage in Vancouver is .920 while in Florida it was .919 (statistically insignificant but absolute proof he is not declining) and his save percentage from the last two seasons is well over .920 showing he is in fact improving. And Tim Thomas wasn't even good enough to play in the NHL as a back up until 5 years ago and has had 2 stellar seasons and two mediocre seasons, he doesn't exactly compare to Luongo if you want to take their entire hockey careers into account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Nobody knows what ye future will bring. Lu has a great chance of being a great goalie at 40. VL could perform well for 5-6 years easy.

2. It's not about the cap hit itself, but whether u can afford it. Of course we have screwed our space by taking under performing Ballard and Booth... Wouldn't u rather have VL who can at least perform in the playoffs????? Earth to capologists...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luongo posted a 0.919 save percentage this year, you know his career average, last year he posted a .928. If he was declining like some apparantly mathematically illeterate people are saying you would expect his numbers from the past two seasons to be at least 1 percent (.010)lower than his career average not equal to or better than it. To further prove my point Luongo's save percentage in Vancouver is .920 while in Florida it was .919 (statistically insignificant but absolute proof he is not declining) and his save percentage from the last two seasons is well over .920 showing he is in fact improving. And Tim Thomas wasn't even good enough to play in the NHL as a back up until 5 years ago and has had 2 stellar seasons and two mediocre seasons, he doesn't exactly compare to Luongo if you want to take their entire hockey careers into account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...