Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

[Waivers] Islanders Place Dipietro on Waivers

Rumour

  • Please log in to reply
140 replies to this topic

#91 Scott Hartnell's Mane

Scott Hartnell's Mane

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,211 posts
  • Joined: 14-December 12

Posted 23 February 2013 - 06:20 AM

That's the contract you choose to compare to Luongo's? Do you also wear a helmet when not playing hockey?


Well...let's see...it's a long term contract given to a goaltender, which is just ****ing foolish to start with considering the higher risk of injury...Luongo is a goaltender...hmm...who the frack am I supposed to compare it to, Kovalchuk's? Zetterberg's? Last I checked,. those two are actually doing their part to earn their contracts. And they're forwards. I was not comparing the players or what they've done in their careers at all...not by a long shot...are you sure your name shouldn't be PLAGUE...because you're certainly PLAGUING me right now, even before I've had my coffee, ass.
  • 0
Posted Image

Well I tell you what Heretic..if Tim Tebow becomes Terry Bradshaw I will shave off all my hair, convert to Christianity, go into the ministry and become a preacher.


#92 Provost

Provost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,887 posts
  • Joined: 05-September 03

Posted 23 February 2013 - 10:20 AM

If a team could get a really good player out of the deal I'm sure a few teams would take on Dipietro's contract to buyout. 1 million or 1.5 million a year till 2029 is chump change to some teams if they can get a significant player to put them over the top. Even one deep playoff run that a team might not have had would payoff the cost of buying Dipietro out.


It is an interesting concept... I wonder if the league would quash it or not. Using the recent Tim Thomas move, I would say that they would allow this type of thing to happen.

Poor teams could get out from under these contracts by giving up a high draft pick or a good player from their roster. When you have a very limited budget in real dollars this could be pretty helpful for both sides.

Imagine Tampa Bay getting rid of Lecavalier's $10 million (real) dollar contract... that freed cash could get a lot of UFA value this summer when salaries are severely depressed by the lowering cap. Add to that they would actually be able to re-sign Lecavalier himself (they weren't the team that bought him out in this scenario) at a really low salary.
  • 0
Protons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic!

#93 theminister

theminister

    Head Troll

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,759 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 03

Posted 23 February 2013 - 10:25 AM

I really do think that Dipietro will be able to be traded once the NYI agree to absorb 50% of his cap hit/salary.

Yes, they will pay in assets to achieve this. They do, however, have a very strong young base and quality prospects in their system. If they can manage it correctly, the timing of the move to Brooklyn with this movement could be paramount.

If the purse strings can be loosened, and the the monies spent wisely, they could be a big splash player for FAs as soon as this offseason.
  • 0

Posted ImageNEW YORK ISLANDERS ROSTER - CDC GM LEAGUEPosted Image


2013 CDCGML CUP CHAMPIONS


#94 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 23 February 2013 - 10:41 AM

Jesus man, tone down the value on Schneider. A lot.


We are taking Dipietro's 100 year contract. In fact the value isn't much considering we are bailing them out financially while giving them a future franchise goalie.
  • 0

Posted Image


#95 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 23 February 2013 - 10:46 AM

Well...let's see...it's a long term contract given to a goaltender, which is just ****ing foolish to start with considering the higher risk of injury...Luongo is a goaltender...hmm...who the frack am I supposed to compare it to, Kovalchuk's? Zetterberg's? Last I checked,. those two are actually doing their part to earn their contracts. And they're forwards. I was not comparing the players or what they've done in their careers at all...not by a long shot...are you sure your name shouldn't be PLAGUE...because you're certainly PLAGUING me right now, even before I've had my coffee, ass.


So giving forwards a longer contract is OK since they have a lower risk of injury than goaltenders?

Posted Image
  • 0

Posted Image


#96 Provost

Provost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,887 posts
  • Joined: 05-September 03

Posted 23 February 2013 - 10:48 AM

I really do think that Dipietro will be able to be traded once the NYI agree to absorb 50% of his cap hit/salary.

Yes, they will pay in assets to achieve this. They do, however, have a very strong young base and quality prospects in their system. If they can manage it correctly, the timing of the move to Brooklyn with this movement could be paramount.

If the purse strings can be loosened, and the the monies spent wisely, they could be a big splash player for FAs as soon as this offseason.


That sounds like a much worse plan for them than buying him out in the summer.

They can buy him out for 2/3rds of his salary and not give up any assets.... so keeping 50% of his salary AND giving up some good assets doesn't seem to be better in my opinion.
  • 0
Protons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic!

#97 Losing With Pride

Losing With Pride

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,725 posts
  • Joined: 21-November 06

Posted 23 February 2013 - 10:56 AM

He's great for a team that has trouble getting to the cap floor every year.
  • 0

#98 Provost

Provost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,887 posts
  • Joined: 05-September 03

Posted 23 February 2013 - 11:03 AM

He's great for a team that has trouble getting to the cap floor every year.


Not sure how that jives...

Unlike Thomas, they have to pay his salary in real dollars but aren't getting a useful player out of it. They are getting bad value for their scarce dollars.
  • 0
Protons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic!

#99 Edlerberry

Edlerberry

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,245 posts
  • Joined: 01-February 12

Posted 23 February 2013 - 11:05 AM

This is the ridiculous contract that MG should have taken note of before signing Luongo to his absurdly large contract, IMO. This is an example of what happens when a player signs a massive deal and quite frankly busts, injuries notwithstanding.


yeah because signing a rookie sensation to a 15 year static contract is the same as signing a proven #1 elite goalie to a structured front loaded 12 year contract.

Edited by gushybear, 23 February 2013 - 11:06 AM.

  • 0
July 7-2013

Toronto will take a step back next year.
Feel free to quote me.


July 8-2013

Wow I can't believe peoples replies...
Im done here. You people are disgusting..


#100 Edlerberry

Edlerberry

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,245 posts
  • Joined: 01-February 12

Posted 23 February 2013 - 11:06 AM

He's great for a team that has trouble getting to the cap floor every year.


also LTIR = not counting to cap, but paying salary
  • 0
July 7-2013

Toronto will take a step back next year.
Feel free to quote me.


July 8-2013

Wow I can't believe peoples replies...
Im done here. You people are disgusting..


#101 Edlerberry

Edlerberry

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,245 posts
  • Joined: 01-February 12

Posted 23 February 2013 - 11:11 AM

Probably one of the worst 1st overall picks of all time + worst contract of all time.


Not really fair, injuries killed him. He used to be a legitimate talent.

Stefan, Daigle had their opportunities but just failed.
  • 0
July 7-2013

Toronto will take a step back next year.
Feel free to quote me.


July 8-2013

Wow I can't believe peoples replies...
Im done here. You people are disgusting..


#102 Kyosama

Kyosama

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 602 posts
  • Joined: 26-June 09

Posted 23 February 2013 - 11:58 AM

So giving forwards a longer contract is OK since they have a lower risk of injury than goaltenders?

Posted Image


It's not just that. How many forwards do you have on a team? 12. How many goalies? 2. One barely plays. If your star forward falls off and isn't a legitimate 1st line player later in the contract, they can usually be a serviceable 2nd line guy. If your #1 goalie falls off you have a backup that isn't playing that is eating up 5.3 million dollars of cap, and nobody will take him in a trade. That's the added risk to signing a goalie to a long term contract. Not to mention the hot and cold nature of the position. You can be the best goalie in the league one year and then the worst the next (Elliott).

As for the Schneider/DiPietro value thing, the 31 million that they'll have to use to buy him out is not worth losing Hamonic and Niederreiter. They'll be able to give up less elsewhere.

Edited by Kyosama, 23 February 2013 - 03:17 PM.

  • 0

#103 Provost

Provost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,887 posts
  • Joined: 05-September 03

Posted 23 February 2013 - 12:48 PM

also LTIR = not counting to cap, but paying salary


They would never put anyone on LTIR no matter how long they are injured for. Teams have a choice to just have them on injured reserve where they do count against the cap OR put them on LTIR to get cap relief.

Obviously they would never apply for cap relief and even if they did, they wouldn't get any because you don't get relief unless you are up against the cap ceiling. In any scenario, they have to count his salary against the cap
  • 0
Protons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic!

#104 fourminute

fourminute

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 74 posts
  • Joined: 11-February 13

Posted 23 February 2013 - 01:41 PM

having two most lazy and overpaid goalies thomas and dipietro

garth snow o man
  • 0
Posted Image

#105 Bananas

Bananas

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,025 posts
  • Joined: 27-August 09

Posted 23 February 2013 - 04:31 PM

The Isles essentially took Dipietro for:

Luongo
Oli Jokinen
Dany Heatly

Where could they have been now?


A lot of choked play-off runs

EDIT: and a mediocre prospect pool

Edited by Joe_Shmo, 23 February 2013 - 04:31 PM.

  • 0
Hey CDC! Remember this!?

http://forum.canucks...in-this-change/

#106 allkill326

allkill326

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,270 posts
  • Joined: 30-May 12

Posted 23 February 2013 - 04:37 PM

A lot of choked play-off runs

EDIT: and a mediocre prospect pool


Lol. Choked. You realize Luongo brought us to Game 7?

Man, are you even a Canucks fan?
  • 0
Posted Image

#107 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 23 February 2013 - 04:58 PM

That's what happens when a desperate team desperately needs to get better and burns yet another rookie who was brought up too soon. Countless times have teams brought up players that should have been groomed in the minors first.


  • 0

#108 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 23 February 2013 - 07:16 PM

It's not just that. How many forwards do you have on a team? 12. How many goalies? 2. One barely plays. If your star forward falls off and isn't a legitimate 1st line player later in the contract, they can usually be a serviceable 2nd line guy. If your #1 goalie falls off you have a backup that isn't playing that is eating up 5.3 million dollars of cap, and nobody will take him in a trade. That's the added risk to signing a goalie to a long term contract. Not to mention the hot and cold nature of the position. You can be the best goalie in the league one year and then the worst the next (Elliott).

As for the Schneider/DiPietro value thing, the 31 million that they'll have to use to buy him out is not worth losing Hamonic and Niederreiter. They'll be able to give up less elsewhere.


And when has Luongo ever fallen off? I really don't get your point. The fact of the matter is that Gillis signed Luongo to such a long contract due to his consistency and durability and the fact that goalies can play into their 40's. Just look at Hasek, Brodeur and Belfour. Forwards are risky due to the fact that they are more exposed to injuries because of hits along with wear and tear. You rarely see forwards playing great into their 40's with the exception of Selanne. IF Luongo gets traded, he will still be playing in 6-7 years.
  • 0

Posted Image


#109 Hyzer

Hyzer

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,919 posts
  • Joined: 29-March 12

Posted 23 February 2013 - 07:35 PM

Mike Millbury was not a smart man AND he's an anchor for the sports section of NBC. Pretty sure I could be a better GM than him.
  • 0

#110 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,623 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 23 February 2013 - 07:40 PM

Lol. Choked. You realize Luongo brought us to Game 7?

Man, are you even a Canucks fan?


Spin it any way you like. Luongo brought us to game 7 or Luongo won 3 and lost 4 games all on his own.
This doesn't even account for the 3 series against Chicago which could easily be considered a choke.
You seem like more of a Luongo fan than Canucks fan.
  • 0

#111 Scott Hartnell's Mane

Scott Hartnell's Mane

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,211 posts
  • Joined: 14-December 12

Posted 23 February 2013 - 09:42 PM

yeah because signing a rookie sensation to a 15 year static contract is the same as signing a proven #1 elite goalie to a structured front loaded 12 year contract.


Oh for the love of god...I never said it was the same...you people need some god damned reading and comprehension classes, seriously. Jesus christ. Long term deals, both of them...regardless of ****ing structure. That's what I was saying, you mental midgets.

Edited by Scott Hartnell's Mane, 23 February 2013 - 09:43 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

Well I tell you what Heretic..if Tim Tebow becomes Terry Bradshaw I will shave off all my hair, convert to Christianity, go into the ministry and become a preacher.


#112 Scott Hartnell's Mane

Scott Hartnell's Mane

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,211 posts
  • Joined: 14-December 12

Posted 23 February 2013 - 09:44 PM

So giving forwards a longer contract is OK since they have a lower risk of injury than goaltenders?

Posted Image


When the frack did I say that??? What do you people just read what you WANT to read? Screw it...I'm in far too good a mood to deal with all this nonsense tonight. Cram it.
  • 0
Posted Image

Well I tell you what Heretic..if Tim Tebow becomes Terry Bradshaw I will shave off all my hair, convert to Christianity, go into the ministry and become a preacher.


#113 Papayas

Papayas

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,603 posts
  • Joined: 17-May 09

Posted 23 February 2013 - 10:42 PM

Spin it any way you like. Luongo brought us to game 7 or Luongo won 3 and lost 4 games all on his own.
This doesn't even account for the 3 series against Chicago which could easily be considered a choke.
You seem like more of a Luongo fan than Canucks fan.


lol. you are probably one of those guys who would bitch at someone who gives you 10 bucks for free because another guy is giving others 11 dollars.

luongo stole 3 games for us in the final, but apparently it wasn't enough for you and he's the sole reason why we didn't have a cup 2 years ago.

to simplify your mentality, choked = lose in playoff.

bravo bro, bravo
  • 0

#114 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 23 February 2013 - 11:14 PM

lol. you are probably one of those guys who would bitch at someone who gives you 10 bucks for free because another guy is giving others 11 dollars.

luongo stole 3 games for us in the final, but apparently it wasn't enough for you and he's the sole reason why we didn't have a cup 2 years ago.

to simplify your mentality, choked = lose in playoff.

bravo bro, bravo


This.
  • 0

#115 Kyosama

Kyosama

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 602 posts
  • Joined: 26-June 09

Posted 23 February 2013 - 11:44 PM

And when has Luongo ever fallen off? I really don't get your point. The fact of the matter is that Gillis signed Luongo to such a long contract due to his consistency and durability and the fact that goalies can play into their 40's. Just look at Hasek, Brodeur and Belfour. Forwards are risky due to the fact that they are more exposed to injuries because of hits along with wear and tear. You rarely see forwards playing great into their 40's with the exception of Selanne. IF Luongo gets traded, he will still be playing in 6-7 years.


I never said he has. I'm saying there's added risk to signing a goalie long-term, and I gave my reasoning behind it.
  • 0

#116 Scott Hartnell's Mane

Scott Hartnell's Mane

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,211 posts
  • Joined: 14-December 12

Posted 24 February 2013 - 06:51 AM

I never said he has. I'm saying there's added risk to signing a goalie long-term, and I gave my reasoning behind it.


And this is the gist of what I was saying. There is indeed added risk to signing a goaltender long term...however...some people in this thread translated that to read "it's ok then to give a forward long term contracts because of there not being as high risk of injury" when that is simply not the case. there is risk in signing ANY player to an enormous contract...DiPietro was hampered by injuries throughout most of his career following this contract...and even though I like the guy...he's a bust...injuries notwithstanding. Luongo's contract is a very large contract. That was the ONLY comparison I drew between the two contracts...but once again, some people in this thread need comprehension lessons..because they read it as me comparing Luongo to DiPietro...which I didn't do..and would never do. I personally despise ALL long-term deals, especially those with guaranteed money in them.
  • 0
Posted Image

Well I tell you what Heretic..if Tim Tebow becomes Terry Bradshaw I will shave off all my hair, convert to Christianity, go into the ministry and become a preacher.


#117 uber_pwnzor

uber_pwnzor

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,451 posts
  • Joined: 07-December 11

Posted 24 February 2013 - 07:15 AM

I giggle every time I hear about this <3
  • 0

#118 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,623 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:13 AM

lol. you are probably one of those guys who would bitch at someone who gives you 10 bucks for free because another guy is giving others 11 dollars.

luongo stole 3 games for us in the final, but apparently it wasn't enough for you and he's the sole reason why we didn't have a cup 2 years ago.

to simplify your mentality, choked = lose in playoff.

bravo bro, bravo


That's where your'e mistaken. In my honest opinion, choking is playing great and then playing terribly and losing games by lopsided scores resulting in playoff elimination. We have all seen that in 3 (very nearly 4) series starting in 2009.
Luongo is branded an elite goaltender, sometimes he's plays like it, sometimes the very opposite. The same recycled excuses (we didn't score enough, our defense sucks, we were injured, etc.) for his poor performances cant be used every year, can they? In reality they cant. In reality he has choked in some very big games and that's all there is to it. He's not the only goaltender to lose his composure, but it seems he's done it the most in recent memory.
  • 0

#119 Scott Hartnell's Mane

Scott Hartnell's Mane

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,211 posts
  • Joined: 14-December 12

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:21 AM

That's where your'e mistaken. In my honest opinion, choking is playing great and then playing terribly and losing games by lopsided scores resulting in playoff elimination. We have all seen that in 3 (very nearly 4) series starting in 2009.
Luongo is branded an elite goaltender, sometimes he's plays like it, sometimes the very opposite. The same recycled excuses (we didn't score enough, our defense sucks, we were injured, etc.) for his poor performances cant be used every year, can they? In reality they cant. In reality he has choked in some very big games and that's all there is to it. He's not the only goaltender to lose his composure, but it seems he's done it the most in recent memory.


Sound and rational thoughts. I don't know which Luongo some of these folks have been watching in recent years...but he craps the bed in big situations so often he oughta be sponsored by Depends Adult Diapers (with the exception of the Olympics). I for one am sick of the flimsy excuses when Luongo has a bad game..(injuries, defense sucks, offensively challenged) I am a Luongo fan...but he is among the easiest goaltenders to rattle...to get under the skin of...that I have seen in quite a while....and on the occasions he loses his composure and lets in a soft goal...that's usually the start of a bad night for us.
  • 1
Posted Image

Well I tell you what Heretic..if Tim Tebow becomes Terry Bradshaw I will shave off all my hair, convert to Christianity, go into the ministry and become a preacher.


#120 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,623 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:34 AM

Sound and rational thoughts. I don't know which Luongo some of these folks have been watching in recent years...but he craps the bed in big situations so often he oughta be sponsored by Depends Adult Diapers (with the exception of the Olympics). I for one am sick of the flimsy excuses when Luongo has a bad game..(injuries, defense sucks, offensively challenged) I am a Luongo fan...but he is among the easiest goaltenders to rattle...to get under the skin of...that I have seen in quite a while....and on the occasions he loses his composure and lets in a soft goal...that's usually the start of a bad night for us.


Agreed.
  • 0





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Rumour

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.