Value of: Lucic with Edmonton's First Round Pick

[WJCJ]

Actually no, either the Owners or players can opt out of the CBA in 2019 so there isn't a long way to go.

A precedent has been set with the last CBA and now a lot of teams have their very own Lucic contract they'd like to make vanish. Compliance buyouts aren't the worst thing for the NHLPA either - players who get bought out receive 66% of their remaining contract, and are free to sign another contract which brings even more money. Meanwhile teams save money by getting these awful contracts "off the books" and are more inclined to reinvest that money into more players. Essentially compliance buyouts = more $$$ for NHL players.

Since there are no real major issues in play, and we've seen what happens when stubbornness loses an entire season, I really don't think there will be much resistance if the owners insist on compliance buyouts next year. Then Edmonton can just buy out Lucic without having to give up a lottery pick.

I am not sure that the owners will all be on board for compliance buyouts. Maybe they will, maybe they won't. There were teams that didn't use compliance buyouts last time and some of those same teams wouldn't use them this time. Anaheim, Boston, Carolina, Colorado, Columbus, Edmonton, LA, Ottawa, Arizona, Pittsburgh, ST Louis, and Winnipeg did not use compliance buyouts for example, why would they agree to this? What they got out of it last time was a salary cap, this time it shouldn't even be needed since every team is operating under the salary cap right now. Every team would need to benefit in some way if there is going to be a round of compliance buyouts.

Unless the cap is reduced I have some doubts about compliance buyouts being allowed. There has to be a reason for there to be compliance buyouts and it looks to me like the league and the players should have an easier time coming to an agreement this time since everything is working so well for them. I am sure there will be some points that they have to work out but I just don't see a reduction in salaries.

Maybe there is some reason that I just can't see right now that they would do this but it is not going to happen just because there will be a new CBA in my opinion.

 

[THall4]

I get the point of the thread.

But that top 5-10 prospect is more valuable to the Oilers then the need to rid ourselves of Lucic at the moment.

 

[THall4]

Is this board not about realistic proposals? Why would we make up a trade that Chiarelli is unlikely to make?

Or do Oiler fans think he's competent enough to make a fair trade with a big piece? I don't see anything like that on the Chiarelli thread on the Oilers board, so don't pretend like Oiler fans are expecting that kind of thing to happen.

The only positive thing Chiarelli has done is trade Kessel for Seguin+Hamilton (brutal by Leafs)... then proceeded to trade both for trash.

He didn't trade Hamilton...but that besides the point lol

 

[ManofSteel55]

4.5 for a guy on the decline, 1 goal in the last forty something games, and FIVE more years on that contract? He's not worth that contract either

He's had one bad season. Tons of guys have a bad season and then bounce back. Let's not start suggesting that Lucic is a David Clarkson or something.

 

[THall4]

Yep. Vancouver, for example, suddenly finds themselves swimming in cap space and Benning loves gritensity. BC native Lucic would be an interesting target for them...

Looch has a NMC ...he'd have to accept a trade there and you'll recall that he fluffed them off pretty quick when he was a UFA.

 

[ManofSteel55]

Majority of teams in the league with a bit of cap would take on a contract like Lucic if it involved a top 10 pick. Don't kid yourself.

These proposals are horrible.

I think a lot of GM's would take Lucic without the pick needing to be involved. Edmonton would need to retain a bit (not 50%), but teams would take the risk on Lucic bouncing back. It's called buying low.

 

[CodeE]

I am not sure that the owners will all be on board for compliance buyouts. Maybe they will, maybe they won't. There were teams that didn't use compliance buyouts last time and some of those same teams wouldn't use them this time. Anaheim, Boston, Carolina, Colorado, Columbus, Edmonton, LA, Ottawa, Arizona, Pittsburgh, ST Louis, and Winnipeg did not use compliance buyouts for example, why would they agree to this? What they got out of it last time was a salary cap, this time it shouldn't even be needed since every team is operating under the salary cap right now. Every team would need to benefit in some way if there is going to be a round of compliance buyouts.

Unless the cap is reduced I have some doubts about compliance buyouts being allowed. There has to be a reason for there to be compliance buyouts and it looks to me like the league and the players should have an easier time coming to an agreement this time since everything is working so well for them. I am sure there will be some points that they have to work out but I just don't see a reduction in salaries.

Maybe there is some reason that I just can't see right now that they would do this but it is not going to happen just because there will be a new CBA in my opinion.

Why would teams like Edmonton and Los Angeles agree to this? Because they have Milan Lucic and Dustin Brown respectively.

Every team didn't benefit from compliance buyouts last time around, yet they still went through, so I'm not sure where your whole "if any NHL owner objects nobody gets buyouts" rationale is coming from. You don't seem to know your history all that well - the salary cap was installed after the 04-05 season was locked out. Compliance buyouts were given after the 12-13 lockout, not as a companion to the NHL installing a salary cap as you've said.

A precedent was set with the last CBA and too many teams would be in favor, and even those on the fence might have a $3M+ bottom pairing defenseman they wouldn't mind getting rid of even if they're not getting the cap relief a team like Chicago or Minnesota will get for Seabrook or Parise.

 

[Brett44]

how about Edmonton's first+Lucic for Colorado's first. We have the cap

I agree AVS need a tought winger for playing a game like yesterday and 2 days ago (duck, LA).

 

[Brett44]

AVS can add Andrighetto

 

[mashedpotato]

Where would Lucic even slot in on the Leafs Lineup?
(Before you answer - consider that their top 3 lines are basically solidified)
so he'd be forced into the 4th line or we'd have to send someone the other way...

 

[Flamesjustwin]

Yep. Vancouver, for example, suddenly finds themselves swimming in cap space and Benning loves gritensity. BC native Lucic would be an interesting target for them...

You wish. Nobody is letting the Oilers out of that cap hell they have put themselves in.

 

[McShogun99]

I'd give Lucic another year to see if he can lean down during the off season. During the first half of the season he was on his usual pace. Hopefully the last 41 games were an anomaly. They an also keep him until the CBA expires and pray for new buyout rules.

 

[haveandare]

I think a lot of GM's would take Lucic without the pick needing to be involved. Edmonton would need to retain a bit (not 50%), but teams would take the risk on Lucic bouncing back. It's called buying low.

Not so sure about that. He's almost 30, is and always was slow while the league is getting faster and faster, and is signed for a really long time still. I personally wouldn't touch him for 50% unless doing so brought back a real asset.

 

[Jared Dunn]

Would Toronto even be on Lucic's list of 8 or 10 teams he can be traded to? The guy is in the driver's seat, not Edmonton.

Anyways, if you quickly see someone's shooting percentage cut in half, the problem is often not that player's fault.
Goalies don't have to 'cheat' when the player has the puck, or teammates are setting up poor plays. He's probably the
same player he's always been. There are players any idiot can draft and play in any circumstance. Oilers have one of
the best. But for the rest of the minions, many of them have holes in their game. And they're like pieces of a jig-saw
puzzle. That one hole is where you're suppose to fulfill with a different piece. Do this enough times, you get the
full picture. The management of the Oilers in my mind not only can't seem to figure out what piece goes with what
piece, but have pieces of different puzzles mixed together.

Spent some serious time searching for a hidden message or something in this and now I'm just confused

 

[Marlo Stanfield]

Honestly, (and I'm probably being really naive), but if Dustin Brown can bounce back after 5 horrid seasons where he looked washed, I think Lucic can bounce back after 1 subpar season.

 

[ManofSteel55]

Not so sure about that. He's almost 30, is and always was slow while the league is getting faster and faster, and is signed for a really long time still. I personally wouldn't touch him for 50% unless doing so brought back a real asset.

You also aren't a GM. GM's trade for guys that us experts think are untradeable all the time. One bad year doesn't make a guy useless.

 

[haveandare]

You also aren't a GM. GM's trade for guys that us experts think are untradeable all the time. One bad year doesn't make a guy useless.

Never claimed to be, just saying I’d be surprised if someone took him at 50% without a sweetener. Berghevin stil has a job though so you never know.

 

[ManofSteel55]

Never claimed to be, just saying I’d be surprised if someone took him at 50% without a sweetener. Berghevin stil has a job though so you never know.

GM's don't tend to write players off based on one bad season.

 

[haveandare]

GM's don't tend to write players off based on one bad season.

They tend to weight one bad season more when the player is about to be on the wrong side of 30 and is signed to a huge deal for half a decade more. Even more when that player has never had good foot speed

 

[elitepete]

no one asked you to

Maybe next time read all the posts before making yourself look like a fool.

 

[rent free]

Maybe next time read all the posts before making yourself look like a fool.

I was kidding when I said that boi

 

[WJCJ]

Why would teams like Edmonton and Los Angeles agree to this? Because they have Milan Lucic and Dustin Brown respectively.

Every team didn't benefit from compliance buyouts last time around, yet they still went through, so I'm not sure where your whole "if any NHL owner objects nobody gets buyouts" rationale is coming from. You don't seem to know your history all that well - the salary cap was installed after the 04-05 season was locked out. Compliance buyouts were given after the 12-13 lockout, not as a companion to the NHL installing a salary cap as you've said.

A precedent was set with the last CBA and too many teams would be in favor, and even those on the fence might have a $3M+ bottom pairing defenseman they wouldn't mind getting rid of even if they're not getting the cap relief a team like Chicago or Minnesota will get for Seabrook or Parise.

There is no drastic movement expected in the salary cap as far as what I have read, no big drop in the cap, for the most part they want the setup they have now. What reason would there be for a compliance buyout? Just for the hell of it? Just to bail out 10 teams? What exactly is the benefit to everyone? If they let teams buyout player they would then be able to take players from those other teams in some cases. Just in a hypothetical situation let's say Toronto makes enough room by buying out contracts to then sign Eric Karlsson to a $10 million per year contract. Is that a good reason to allow compliance buyouts? It is for Toronto fans I guess but what about Ottawa?

I am not pretending I know what is going to happen, I am saying is this really something that the owners would want? How about the players? It only seems to benefit some teams. Why not wipe out all the cap space used by contracts that were already bought out? I don't know the answers but I have a lot of doubt that there will be compliance buyouts just because there will be a new CBA, there doesn't seem to be a reason for it and I will question it until someone shows me a valid reason why they would do it and how it benefits the league as a whole.

 

[yababy]

They tend to weight one bad season more when the player is about to be on the wrong side of 30 and is signed to a huge deal for half a decade more. Even more when that player has never had good foot speed

Lucic is 29

 

[DudeWhereIsMakar]

This is tricky, the Oilers having a high pick and trading Lucic away with it in order to get rid of him. But the Oilers will have to find grit quickly.

Let's just say I would consider this:

Edmonton:
Carolina 1st 2018
Jeff Skinner

Carolina:
Edmonton 1st 2018
Edmonton 3rd 2018
Milan Lucic

 

[bukwas]

This is tricky, the Oilers having a high pick and trading Lucic away with it in order to get rid of him. But the Oilers will have to find grit quickly.

Let's just say I would consider this:

Edmonton:
Carolina 1st 2018
Jeff Skinner

Carolina:
Edmonton 1st 2018
Edmonton 3rd 2018
Milan Lucic

I don't know about that one.

Canes give up Skinner to move up 4 spots(currently), a 3rd rd and take on Lucic's contract?