Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

[Discussion] Roberto Luongo Trade Thread 4.0


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
3455 replies to this topic

#391 sampy

sampy

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,076 posts
  • Joined: 05-May 07

Posted 07 January 2013 - 08:53 PM

Uh oh. Canucks are going to get screwed from Lu's contract.



TSN Lebrun
http://espn.go.com/b...ore-cba-details


NEW YORK -- On Sunday, I broke down the more obvious key components of the tentative agreement.

Now after getting our hands on more details of the agreement from a source, we bring you more:

RETAINING SALARY IN TRADES
This was Brian Burkeís baby, an idea he pushed for years at GM meetings. Under the old CBA, teams could not absorb any part of a salary from a player they were trading -- unlike baseball for example.

But in this new agreement, teams will be able to do that.

Here are the main parameters of the rule: a club cannot absorb more than 50 percent of the playersí annual cap hit/salary in any trade. Any NHL club can only have up to three contracts on their payroll where the contract was traded away under the retaining salary proviso. Also, only up to 15 percent of your upper limit cap amount can be used up by the money you have retained in trades.

For example, letís say the Maple Leafs want to trade little-used blueliner Mike Komisarek and his $4.5-million cap hit ($3.5 million salary this year) to the New York Islanders (hypothetically). The Leafs could retain half the cap hit -- $2.25 million -- and half the salary -- $1.75 million -- in order to facilitate the deal. The Islanders would pay him the other half. This should facilitate more trades around the league, no question.

THE LUONGO RULE
This is another rule from the league aimed at hammering current back-diving deals (front-loaded, "cheat deals." However, this has changed from its original form when the NHL first proposed it in October.

In the original formula, if a player like Roberto Luongo was traded and retired before the end of his deal, the Canucks (the team who signed him to the contract) would assume his remaining $5.33-million cap early hit in retirement. The new rule in this tentative agreement is different. Now, for any contract in excess of six years, both teams involved in a trade on a contract like Luongoís would be penalized if he retired before the end of his deal.

To wit: letís say the Canucks trade Luongo soon. Luongo has played two years of his 12-year contract, the Canucks paying him $16.716 million in salary but only absorbing a $5.33 million cap hit each year. Thatís a cap savings of $6.056 million over two years so far for Vancouver. Under this new rule, should the Canucks trade him now and he retires with three years left on his contract, Vancouver would be charged that $6.056 million in cap savings over the final three years left on his deal from 2019 to 2022. However, letís say for argumentís sake Luongo gets traded to Toronto, the Maple Leafs also would be subject to cap penalties if Luongo retires before the end of his deal.

To wit, part 2: If Luongo were to play the next seven years of his deal in Toronto before retiring, the Leafs would be paying him $43.666 million in salary but only counting $37.31 million against the cap over those seven years, a cap savings of $6.356 million. So if Luongo retires with three years left on his deal (because his salary falls to $1.618 million in the 10th year and then $1 million in the last two years of the deal), the Leafs would get charged that $6.356 million on their cap spread evenly over the remaining three years of his deal.

And obviously, if players under these back-diving deals are never traded, but retire before the end of their deals (Marian Hossa in Chicago), their current teams get charged the cap savings spread evenly over the remaining years of the deal.

COMPLIANCE BUYOUTS
Teams will be allowed up to two buyouts over the next two summers -- 2013 and 2014 -- either one in each summer or two in one summer and none in the other. The new detail here that I found interesting is that any player bought out under these circumstances CANNOT be re-acquired by that same team during the upcoming season, not by waivers, not by trade and not by free-agent signing.

Obvious reason here: league doesnít want teams to cheat the system and get a player back under a cheaper salary (since the buyout doesnít count against the salary cap).

PLAYERSí PENSIONS
The pension plan shall be frozen at the termination of this CBA, whether thatís in eight years or 10 years. The NHL and the NHLPA will have to either agree to continue the pension under similar guidelines in the next CBA, or renegotiate new terms for it. No small detail there, given the acrimony over this pension negotiation, which was only resolved at the 11th hour Sunday morning.

UFA FREE AGENCY INTERVIEW PERIOD
Similar to the NBA, the NHL has instituted a free-agency interview period prior to the actual signing period. UFAs will be able to meet and interview with potential clubs from the day after the NHL draft until June 30, prior to the July 1 opening of free agency.

Whatís interesting about this is that I donít think youíll have a Parise/Suter situation where you wait all the way to July 4 to sign with a team. Instead, their decisions will be made by June 30 for the most part, you would have to assume.

Edited by sampy, 07 January 2013 - 08:56 PM.

  • 0

#392 shazzam

shazzam

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,539 posts
  • Joined: 26-July 07

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:00 PM

Another article from CBC's Friedmen
http://www.cbc.ca/sp...rto-luongo.html



Since the various reports of a Roberto Luongo trade to Toronto aren't already insane enough...let's throw some gasoline on the fire!


One of the intricacies of the new yet-to-be-ratified CBA is the "cap-recapture system." Basically, this affects players with long-term deals (minimum five or six years, I'm not 100 per cent certain).


Either way, Luongo's counts because his is a 12-year deal. Therefore, there will be a penalty if he retires before the contract is completed.


How does it work?


The simplest way to explain it is this: Let's assume the Canucks and Maple Leafs make the deal. Vancouver would be responsible for the "cap benefit" that it received in the first two years. Toronto would be responsible for any remaining "cap benefit" it gets as a result of contract structure if he walks away early.


Here's the math. Luongo salary:


2010-11: $10 million US

2011-12: $6,716,000


That's a total of $16,716,000.


Luongo's cap hit is $5,333,333. You multiply it by how many years he spent with the Canucks, so, in this case, that figure is doubled. That's $10,666,666.


What was the cap benefit to Vancouver? You take the actual salaries paid ($16,716,000) and subtract the total amount of cap space the Canucks used ($10,666,666). The answer is $6,049,334.


That is the "cap benefit" Vancouver received in the first two years of Luongo's contract. The key -- and the thing I had to check -- is that this number has zero immediate effect on the Canucks' cap situation. It is basically "frozen" and does not become an issue unless he retires before his contract is up.


So let's say he happily goes to Toronto (and really, who wouldn't happily go there?), spending seven seasons there before saying, "I've had enough" in the summer of 2019.


Actual cash numbers


Here are his actual cash numbers for those years:


2012-13 through 2017-18: $6,714,000

2018-19: $3,382,000


He would then walk away from three years at a combined $3,618,000. And, it's time for the penalties.


Vancouver's "frozen" $6,049,334 thaws. It is divided by the number of "unused" years in Luongo's contract -- three. The figure is $2,016,445. The Canucks will get a "cap penalty" at that amount for the 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 seasons.


As for Toronto, the Maple Leafs will pay Luongo $43,666,000. (I'm not pro-rating this year's lockout-infected salary. Going for the easy math here). The total cap hit for those seven seasons is $37,333,331. The difference is $6,332,669. Divide it by the three unused years in Luongo's contract, and the penalty per season is $2,111,890 -- slightly larger than Vancouver's.


I wasn't really tuned into the outside world today, but heard people were wondering if it made more sense for Vancouver to buy out Luongo. These figures make it seem non-sensical. First of all, with the opt-out clauses attached to the length of the new CBA, there's no guarantee the rules will be the same by the time the penalties are scheduled to take effect.


Second, there may just be a loophole. From what I understand, Long-Term Injury Reserve still exists. (For example, it allows Chris Pronger to come off the Philadelphia cap while he recovers from concussions).


God forbid Luongo (or anyone else) goes through that. But he will be 40 in the summer of 2019. Who knows what happens to a goalie's body by then? Maybe he's had enough and is battling some nagging groin or hip or knee problem. He goes on LTIR, still gets paid and neither Toronto nor Vancouver gets any kind of penalty.


Could work.

  • 0

#393 Onions

Onions

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 449 posts
  • Joined: 07-March 11

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:00 PM

I certainly do too. But the fans...


well, just be glad the fans aren't the GMs

plus, I think, when the offer is right between now and the beginning of next season, we will pull the trigger and one of our goalies will go bye bye.
  • 0
Posted ImagePosted Image

#394 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,766 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:02 PM

The CBA may also have fundamentally changed the landscape where Luongo is concerned, in a good way for Vancouver.

The CBA didn't quite go as Burkie had hoped.

The reason I say that is because I think once the dust settles on the new CBA, it might have created a new front-runner interested in Luongo.

Holmgren, fresh with a buyout option in one hand, loads of cash in the other, and desperate to improve Philly on the back end could very realistically be seriously interested in Luongo. Can he not now divorce Bryz's contract and buy him out? He has a lot of assets up front to work with, and is rather suspect on the back end. He could also be as interested as anyone in Edler.

Wouldn't surprise me one bit if Gillis gets some calls from Philadelphia in the next week. We've all seen that Holmgren is anything but shy about wheeling and dealing. The penalties around long term contracts are not as stiff as Burke had hoped. It may play out in Phillly (and Vancouver's) favour.

Luo, 3rd for Couturier and Voracek

Luo and Edler for Couturier, Vorachek, Coburn, and a 1st.

Edited by oldnews, 07 January 2013 - 09:15 PM.

  • 0

#395 thad

thad

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,246 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:08 PM

I certainly do too. But the fans...


Huh?
  • 0

#396 70seven

70seven

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,187 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 09

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:13 PM

Very interesting stuff!

Still not really sure if the helps or hinders the deal, but good on the NHL for making teams pay for their cap circumvention in a very intreguing manner.
  • 0

#397 sampy

sampy

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,076 posts
  • Joined: 05-May 07

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:17 PM

Very interesting stuff!

Still not really sure if the helps or hinders the deal, but good on the NHL for making teams pay for their cap circumvention in a very intreguing manner.


IMO this clause hinders the trade quite a bit and will come back to screw the Canucks in the future.
  • 0

#398 Tangelos

Tangelos

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,718 posts
  • Joined: 16-April 12

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:18 PM

Luo, 3rd for Couturier and Voracek

Luo and Edler for Couturier, Vorachek, Coburn, and a 1st.


Luongo wouldn't get you Couturier alone.
  • 1

(Sig removed by mod)
Previously Doug The Thug Glatt


#399 shazzam

shazzam

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,539 posts
  • Joined: 26-July 07

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:21 PM

The cap penalty is a huge blow to Luongo's value.

Plus, we are already 6 mill in the hole in the future. Luongo is not going to play out his entire contract.
  • 0

#400 thad

thad

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,246 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:30 PM

The CBA may also have fundamentally changed the landscape where Luongo is concerned, in a good way for Vancouver.

The CBA didn't quite go as Burkie had hoped.

The reason I say that is because I think once the dust settles on the new CBA, it might have created a new front-runner interested in Luongo.

Holmgren, fresh with a buyout option in one hand, loads of cash in the other, and desperate to improve Philly on the back end could very realistically be seriously interested in Luongo. Can he not now divorce Bryz's contract and buy him out? He has a lot of assets up front to work with, and is rather suspect on the back end. He could also be as interested as anyone in Edler.

Wouldn't surprise me one bit if Gillis is getting a few calls from Philadelphia. We've all seen that Holmgren is anything but shy about wheeling and dealing.

Luo, 3rd for Couturier and Voracek

Luo and Edler for Couturier, Vorachek, Coburn, and a 1st.


I highly doubt they buy out a 9yr contract unless the owner bleeds more orange and black than any flyers fan in Philly.

I agree they could be interested though if they could find a taker for the guy that's a bigger headcase than luongo. Holmgren always seems itchy to make a move too and seems to make a trade for even the slightest improvement. I could definitely see him working the phones tossing bryz name around as well as talkin to gillis.

IMO trades you suggest would be a little much though. Couturier and Voracek are 2 really good young players, might get a deal centered around 1 of them.
  • 0

#401 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,766 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:33 PM

IMO this clause hinders the trade quite a bit and will come back to screw the Canucks in the future.


I don't see it that way. The penalites are spread out over the remaining years on contracts. That's not that much money really - and what kind of appreciation will we see by the year 2020 for example.

The two buyouts also give more teams the option of shedding contracts and creating cap space.

I think the implications are pretty good for Vancouver and Luongo.
  • 0

#402 Lui's Knob

Lui's Knob

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,042 posts
  • Joined: 13-May 10

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:37 PM

If the new contract rules are in place maybe it's Schneider that gets dealt for blue chip prospects? Why trade Lui if in 5 years he retires and the Canucks are cap punished?
  • 0

#403 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,766 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:43 PM

I highly doubt they buy out a 9yr contract unless the owner bleeds more orange and black than any flyers fan in Philly.

I agree they could be interested though if they could find a taker for the guy that's a bigger headcase than luongo. Holmgren always seems itchy to make a move too and seems to make a trade for even the slightest improvement. I could definitely see him working the phones tossing bryz name around as well as talkin to gillis.

IMO trades you suggest would be a little much though. Couturier and Voracek are 2 really good young players, might get a deal centered around 1 of them.


You may be right - I'm considering Luongo's value to be slightly less than Richards and Carter, who have similar contracts, and younger, but are also skaters - ie not as likely to play them out. I don't consider skaters to be more valuable than goaltenders, but the reality is that's the trend.
If anyone can afford to buyout a contract like Bryz's, I'd guess that Ed Snider would be a candidate. Holmgren has been extremely aggressive, particularly in pursuing Weber. I think including Edler could really be irresistable to Holmgren.
I wouldn't expect to land both Couturier and Vorachek for Luongo alone, but Luo and a pick would be my starting point. Might have to up that asset or substitute Read for Vorachek, but if you look at Philly at RW, they have a ridiculous amount of talent to work and deal with. And Holmgren set the value this high in the deals he cut last offseason. Anyway, part of me is simply baiting King :shock: , waiting for the "ARE YOU KIDDING ME? LUONGO for Couturier and more? You're nuts!!!"
  • 1

#404 shazzam

shazzam

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,539 posts
  • Joined: 26-July 07

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:43 PM

If the new contract rules are in place maybe it's Schneider that gets dealt for blue chip prospects? Why trade Lui if in 5 years he retires and the Canucks are cap punished?


we are already going to be cap punished for the first 2 years of his contract. Which ever team he plays for, they will be cap punished as long as his salary is higher than his cap hit for that year (Doesn't happen till 18/19 season). Of course I'm assuming he retires before the end of his contract.
  • 0

#405 ccc44

ccc44

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,423 posts
  • Joined: 29-April 09

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:45 PM

Another article from CBC's Friedmen
http://www.cbc.ca/sp...rto-luongo.html



Since the various reports of a Roberto Luongo trade to Toronto aren't already insane enough...let's throw some gasoline on the fire!

One of the intricacies of the new yet-to-be-ratified CBA is the "cap-recapture system." Basically, this affects players with long-term deals (minimum five or six years, I'm not 100 per cent certain).

Either way, Luongo's counts because his is a 12-year deal. Therefore, there will be a penalty if he retires before the contract is completed.

How does it work?

The simplest way to explain it is this: Let's assume the Canucks and Maple Leafs make the deal. Vancouver would be responsible for the "cap benefit" that it received in the first two years. Toronto would be responsible for any remaining "cap benefit" it gets as a result of contract structure if he walks away early.

Here's the math. Luongo salary:

2010-11: $10 million US
2011-12: $6,716,000

That's a total of $16,716,000.

Luongo's cap hit is $5,333,333. You multiply it by how many years he spent with the Canucks, so, in this case, that figure is doubled. That's $10,666,666.

What was the cap benefit to Vancouver? You take the actual salaries paid ($16,716,000) and subtract the total amount of cap space the Canucks used ($10,666,666). The answer is $6,049,334.

That is the "cap benefit" Vancouver received in the first two years of Luongo's contract. The key -- and the thing I had to check -- is that this number has zero immediate effect on the Canucks' cap situation. It is basically "frozen" and does not become an issue unless he retires before his contract is up.

So let's say he happily goes to Toronto (and really, who wouldn't happily go there?), spending seven seasons there before saying, "I've had enough" in the summer of 2019.

Actual cash numbers

Here are his actual cash numbers for those years:

2012-13 through 2017-18: $6,714,000
2018-19: $3,382,000

He would then walk away from three years at a combined $3,618,000. And, it's time for the penalties.

Vancouver's "frozen" $6,049,334 thaws. It is divided by the number of "unused" years in Luongo's contract -- three. The figure is $2,016,445. The Canucks will get a "cap penalty" at that amount for the 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 seasons.

As for Toronto, the Maple Leafs will pay Luongo $43,666,000. (I'm not pro-rating this year's lockout-infected salary. Going for the easy math here). The total cap hit for those seven seasons is $37,333,331. The difference is $6,332,669. Divide it by the three unused years in Luongo's contract, and the penalty per season is $2,111,890 -- slightly larger than Vancouver's.

I wasn't really tuned into the outside world today, but heard people were wondering if it made more sense for Vancouver to buy out Luongo. These figures make it seem non-sensical. First of all, with the opt-out clauses attached to the length of the new CBA, there's no guarantee the rules will be the same by the time the penalties are scheduled to take effect.

Second, there may just be a loophole. From what I understand, Long-Term Injury Reserve still exists. (For example, it allows Chris Pronger to come off the Philadelphia cap while he recovers from concussions).

God forbid Luongo (or anyone else) goes through that. But he will be 40 in the summer of 2019. Who knows what happens to a goalie's body by then? Maybe he's had enough and is battling some nagging groin or hip or knee problem. He goes on LTIR, still gets paid and neither Toronto nor Vancouver gets any kind of penalty.

Could work.

Teams find loopholes to everything and then in the next CBA big bad Gary will go and put a band aid on the next loophole while the children (owners) find another way around it
  • 0
Posted Image
SHOTS ! SHOTS ! SHOTS !

#406 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,766 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:45 PM

If the new contract rules are in place maybe it's Schneider that gets dealt for blue chip prospects? Why trade Lui if in 5 years he retires and the Canucks are cap punished?


I may be misunderstanding the terms of the CBA, but wouldn't it be the case that the cap savings ie 6 million - would be spread out over the remaining years of his contract - ie 7 years - in other words, those will likely be peanuts by 2018 or 2020 terms...

Also - Luongo's salary for the next five years is 6.7 million - meaning no matter who he plays for, the cap savings will be 1.4 million per year - for a total of 7 million. The four years after that his salary is less than his cap hit.

Burke wanted it that the cap hit remained complete.
This CBA penalizes the savings, which is nowhere near the penalty he was looking for - in other words, 6 or 7 million dollars spread out over remaining seasons - and again, we are talking about dollar values a half decade or more in the future. I don't think this is anywhere as much of an obstruction as Burke was looking for, and not as big of an obstacle to deals as people might initially think.

Edited by oldnews, 07 January 2013 - 09:52 PM.

  • 1

#407 zombieksa

zombieksa

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,272 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 11

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:51 PM

I love the idea of Lu going to Philly as he goes from a team that hates Boston and Chicago to a team that hates Boston and Chicago :)
  • 1
"All religion, my friend, is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination, and poetry."
-Edgar Allen Poe

#408 Tangelos

Tangelos

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,718 posts
  • Joined: 16-April 12

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:55 PM

Luongo is going to Florida for 4 reasons:

1) He wants to go there.
2) Florida has better trade assets than Toronto (Weiss > Bozak)
3) Florida wants him, and Dale Tallon isn't afraid to make a big move.
4) Canucks and Panthers have been great trading partners for more than a decade.
  • 0

(Sig removed by mod)
Previously Doug The Thug Glatt


#409 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,766 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:58 PM

Luongo wouldn't get you Couturier alone.


We'll be getting more than LaFlamme Doug.
  • 1

#410 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,962 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:59 PM

I don't see it that way. The penalites are spread out over the remaining years on contracts. That's not that much money really - and what kind of appreciation will we see by the year 2020 for example.

The two buyouts also give more teams the option of shedding contracts and creating cap space.

I think the implications are pretty good for Vancouver and Luongo.


And were Luongo to retire with four years left (rather than hte suggested three) the penalty would be about $500,000 less, yes?

Another thing to consider is that probably half the teams in the NHL will have (at least) one of these contracts to work out of their system before it is all said and done. And they are all, for the most part, the larger market teams which have somewhat deeper pockets and who would be Vancouver's primary competitors for signing UFA's.


regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#411 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,962 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:01 PM

Anyway, part of me is simply baiting King :shock: , waiting for the "ARE YOU KIDDING ME? LUONGO for Couturier and more? You're nuts!!!"


Those are fun, aren't they?

regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#412 Tangelos

Tangelos

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,718 posts
  • Joined: 16-April 12

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:02 PM

We'll be getting more than LaFlamme Doug.


LaFlamme is a man possessed when he's not coked up.
  • 0

(Sig removed by mod)
Previously Doug The Thug Glatt


#413 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,195 posts
  • Joined: 05-November 12

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:02 PM

A top 2 D man 'is not enough' :lol:


Yes it is. I would love to see Seabrook for Schneider. That's an excellent trade.
  • 0

#414 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,766 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:03 PM

Luongo is going to Florida for 4 reasons:

1) He wants to go there.
2) Florida has better trade assets than Toronto (Weiss > Bozak)
3) Florida wants him, and Dale Tallon isn't afraid to make a big move.
4) Canucks and Panthers have been great trading partners for more than a decade.


Luongo said all the right things in his interview, but I got the sense nevertheless that he wasn't particularly thrilled with the idea of going to TO.
I hope you're right (and have thought Florida is most likely all along). I'd like to see him go where he wants (although he didn't say as much, I'd bet he's pining to go back to Florida).
And as you say, Florida has a lot of young talent at center and on the blueline.
Toronto media is starting to sound a little antzy about getting a deal for Luongo done quickly lol. I'd love to see Tallon (or Holmgren) swoop in and get it done.

Also - you'll have to change your 2018/19 Florida Panthers... ::D

Edited by oldnews, 07 January 2013 - 10:06 PM.

  • 0

#415 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,766 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:05 PM

Yes it is. I would love to see Seabrook for Schneider. That's an excellent trade.


Please stop, for your own good, you should start preparing yourself. It's only going to hurt more.
  • 0

#416 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,766 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:10 PM

Well, we've been prattling in this thread throughout the whole GD lockout.

Now, Holy S#!t!, something is actually possible!
  • 0

#417 Tangelos

Tangelos

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,718 posts
  • Joined: 16-April 12

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:11 PM

Luongo said all the right things in his interview, but I got the sense nevertheless that he wasn't particularly thrilled with the idea of going to TO.
I hope you're right (and have thought Florida is most likely all along). I'd like to see him go where he wants (although he didn't say as much, I'd bet he's pining to go back to Florida).
And as you say, Florida has a lot of young talent at center and on the blueline.
Toronto media is starting to sound a little antzy about getting a deal for Luongo done quickly lol. I'd love to see Tallon (or Holmgren) swoop in and get it done.

Also - you'll have to change your 2018/19 Florida Panthers... ::D


I don't care where Luongo goes, I just want the best possible return. The insiders on tsn said that the Panthers probably won't be able to re-sign Weiss in the offseason so they are likely to trade him. And right now he has an amazing cap (3.1M) for a legitimate top 6 forward. Put him on the wing when Kesler gets back, and you have someone who actually knows how to pass! Unbelievable I know! Plus he has chemistry with Booth from Florida. It's really a no brainer, MG has to be targeting Weiss over Bozak.

Oh and regarding my 2018-2019 Florida Panthers, I just won the presidents trophy with this team (55 wins).

Edited by Doug The Thug Glatt, 07 January 2013 - 10:18 PM.

  • 0

(Sig removed by mod)
Previously Doug The Thug Glatt


#418 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,195 posts
  • Joined: 05-November 12

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:15 PM

The cap penalty is a huge blow to Luongo's value.

Plus, we are already 6 mill in the hole in the future. Luongo is not going to play out his entire contract.


Yeah, don't blame the guy that offered the contract and signed him in the first place. Blame Luongo for signing.

I offer you a sheet of paper worth around $60.000 MIL, I'm sure you'd sign it too regardless of your situation. Or would you be humble enough and say no and take less because the fans will hate you?
  • 1

#419 thad

thad

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,246 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:17 PM

You may be right - I'm considering Luongo's value to be slightly less than Richards and Carter, who have similar contracts, and younger, but are also skaters - ie not as likely to play them out. I don't consider skaters to be more valuable than goaltenders, but the reality is that's the trend.
If anyone can afford to buyout a contract like Bryz's, I'd guess that Ed Snider would be a candidate. Holmgren has been extremely aggressive, particularly in pursuing Weber. I think including Edler could really be irresistable to Holmgren.
I wouldn't expect to land both Couturier and Vorachek for Luongo alone, but Luo and a pick would be my starting point. Might have to up that asset or substitute Read for Vorachek, but if you look at Philly at RW, they have a ridiculous amount of talent to work and deal with. And Holmgren set the value this high in the deals he cut last offseason. Anyway, part of me is simply baiting King :shock: , waiting for the "ARE YOU KIDDING ME? LUONGO for Couturier and more? You're nuts!!!"


Hahaha first thing I thought was king is gonna go bananas over this post. I agree with the Lu and edler being a major temptation for them. That would round out their team quite nicely but it's such a blockbuster gillis won't pull the trigger unless we're getting major assets in return. His asking price for Lu was huge and it would be even bigger for edler. Looking at it from our stand point, it would have to be to make it worth it. Take a major downgrade on defense even if we get one back in the deal, so the offensive players we acquire would have to start with couturier and simmonds/voracek just to make it worthwhile. We would also want a dman back in the deal so it's going to be a steep price for Holmgren to swallow.

For it to be worth it to trade edler we would have to get close to the original package you suggested and It would be a tough sell for sure.
  • 0

#420 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,960 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:22 PM

Yes it is. I would love to see Seabrook for Schneider. That's an excellent trade.

You say Luongo for Seabrook is not enough. Then after that you propose Schneider for Seabrook. Sorry, but unless Kane, Morin and a 1st are added Gillis laughs at Chicago.
  • 0

In my eyes drouin is overrated he can score in the qmjhl but did nothing in last two gold medal games that canada lost. Fox will be better pro than him talk to me in five yrs


   ryan kesler is going to the chicago blackhawks ...       quote me on it





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.