Mackcanuck Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 The Kings are gifted a settlement, the only hit they get is for this year and they have lots of room to cover it. Is this not Cap Recapture circumvention? Meanwhile we are in a world of hurt if Luongo retires in a few years! Compared to Luongo's Recapture Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MayRayDown Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 No way we get stuck with a 8.5 million dollar cap hit in 2021. That's just unreasonable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpt Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 No way we get stuck with a 8.5 million dollar cap hit in 2021. That's just unreasonable That's only if he retires in the 2021 season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathew Barzal Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 No way we get stuck with a 8.5 million dollar cap hit in 2021. That's just unreasonable I'd rather have one big down year than have to cut corners for several. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tre Mac Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Hopefully the Canucks fight that Luongo recapture penalty as that is some utter bs. Maybe they are waiting until he actually retires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeefcakeBo Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 What a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 There is no way that 8.5 would ever happen. The NHL approved the contract and there was no rules against it; the nhl didn't even review the Hossa contract, which was laughable. The nhl saying oh the new cba will have rules against this and we are going to penalize you blah blah doesn't mean anything. There were no rules against it, nhl approved, settlement worst case scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.Am.Ironman Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 There is no way that 8.5 would ever happen. The NHL approved the contract and there was no rules against it; the nhl didn't even review the Hossa contract, which was laughable. The nhl saying oh the new cba will have rules against this and we are going to penalize you blah blah doesn't mean anything. There were no rules against it, nhl approved, settlement worst case scenario. When that time comes it will become a legal battle between the league and the Canucks. Although after all that has happened since we signed Luongo. I don't imagine the league will fight the Canucks too hard on it. As you mentioned it was legally signed and approved by the league in the first place. The NJD got away with murder essentially after kovalchuk walked. I don't see the Canucks getting hit too hard when the time comes. It would be too unreasonable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baer. Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 If Luongo plays out his contract instead of retiring, we don't pay him anything more than the 800k of salary we retained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackcanuck Posted October 16, 2015 Author Share Posted October 16, 2015 If Luongo plays out his contract instead of retiring, we don't pay him anything more than the 800k of salary we retained. Luongo will be 43 years old in 2022! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.S.Strowbridge Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 As soon as I saw that $8.5 million penalty, I checked his stats. He's off to an amazing start. Let's hope he keeps this up for the next several years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baer. Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Luongo will be 43 years old in 2022! True that. Hopefully he retires in the next 2 years so we aren't spending too much on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edlerberry Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 True that. Hopefully he retires in the next 2 years so we aren't spending too much on him. those are ANNUAL recapture penalties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HC20.0 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 When that time comes it will become a legal battle between the league and the Canucks. Although after all that has happened since we signed Luongo. I don't imagine the league will fight the Canucks too hard on it. As you mentioned it was legally signed and approved by the league in the first place. The NJD got away with murder essentially after kovalchuk walked. I don't see the Canucks getting hit too hard when the time comes. It would be too unreasonable Bettman hates Vancouver. He'll turn a blind eye, as per usual. Like NJ, LA basically just got away with murder here... What a joke. That's cap circumvention right there folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackcanuck Posted October 16, 2015 Author Share Posted October 16, 2015 True that. Hopefully he retires in the next 2 years so we aren't spending too much on him. those are ANNUAL recapture penalties. True, but we are already paying Luongo $800K/yr to play for FLA so we double his payment for 5 or 6 years. Luongo retiring in 2017 is the best for us, $1.7M for 5 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HC20.0 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 those are ANNUAL recapture penalties. Yeah, but 1.7 for 5 years vs 8m for 1. I'll take the 1.7 any day, cause that 8m caphit is really going to screw us over beyond belief if he retires then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langdon Algur Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Bettman hates Vancouver. He'll turn a blind eye, as per usual. Like NJ, LA basically just got away with murder here... What a joke. That's cap circumvention right there folks. Didn't NJ have to give up a first round pick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 NJ got that back iirc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baka Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Didn't NJ have to give up a first round pick? That was for the original contract they gave Kovalchuk. They were basically the example team when the NHL stopped letting teams front load contracts to lower the cap hit so technically the NHL doesn't give NJ favorable treatment xD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HC20.0 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Didn't NJ have to give up a first round pick? They were supposed to, but Bettman gave it back to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.