Speculation: Luongo Trade Discussions Thread - All

[Parkdale]

I would pass on any Luongo trade, but if discussions must go ahead, then any trade with Toronto should start with what is Vancouver willing to give to Toronto to absorb Luongo's toxic contract. Given that Florida seems willing to be suckered in, then Toronto should just back away...slowly.

 

[Leaf_Crazy]

Id add Hiller to another goalie who could potentially be available after UFA.

If Anaheim loses Getzlaf and Perry then surely Teemu retires and they are in a full on rebuild.

 

[Dwight K Schrute]

Vancouver Canucks ‏@VanCanucks
AV: Booth had an MRI done yesterday. He will be out approximately 4-6 weeks.
Retweeted by Bob McKenzie

This really enhances their need for forwards now. They know that their window could be closing with the Sedins contracts expiring soon. This might be one of their few chances to win and they are now without Kesler and Booth- 2/3 of their second line for 1/4-1/2 of the season. They need to move luongo for forwards more than ever.

 

[Dwight K Schrute]

Garry Valk ‏@gvalksportsnet
David Booth is out 4-6 weeks with a strained groin according to A.V. I expect Luongo to get traded a lot quicker now.

Not that he Knows much but he does cover the canucks...

 

[New Liskeard]

Vancouver Canucks ‏@VanCanucks
AV: Booth had an MRI done yesterday. He will be out approximately 4-6 weeks.
Retweeted by Bob McKenzie

This really enhances their need for forwards now. They know that their window could be closing with the Sedins contracts expiring soon. This might be one of their few chances to win and they are now without Kesler and Booth- 2/3 of their second line for 1/4-1/2 of the season. They need to move luongo for forwards more than ever.

Unless Vancouver eats a good chunk of the salary and term, I hope Lou stays and Vancouver can enjoy that excellent contract on their books for 10 years. The ammount of chirping going on here by Leaf fans, when Lou likely, will be a back up and playing less effectively at 38-43 making 5.3 in a cap hit, will be an absolute gong show. Or better yet, retires at 38 or so, and the Leafs have dead cap space for the term of Lou's contract. Sounds awesome!!

 

[anderson3133]

Garry Valk ‏@gvalksportsnet
David Booth is out 4-6 weeks with a strained groin according to A.V. I expect Luongo to get traded a lot quicker now.

Not that he Knows much but he does cover the canucks...

Send them Connolly, he's the shortened season master.

 

[Parkdale]

Unless Vancouver eats a good chunk of the salary and term, I hope Lou stays and Vancouver can enjoy that excellent contract on their books for 10 years. The ammount of chirping going on here by Leaf fans, when Lou likely, will be a back up and playing less effectively at 38-43 making 5.3 in a cap hit, will be an absolute gong show. Or better yet, retires at 38 or so, and the Leafs have dead cap space for the term of Lou's contract. Sounds awesome!!

I'm with you on this. Let's have nothing to do with Luongo's toxic contract....please.

 

[Dwight K Schrute]

Unless Vancouver eats a good chunk of the salary and term, I hope Lou stays and Vancouver can enjoy that excellent contract on their books for 10 years. The ammount of chirping going on here by Leaf fans, when Lou likely, will be a back up and playing less effectively at 38-43 making 5.3 in a cap hit, will be an absolute gong show. Or better yet, retires at 38 or so, and the Leafs have dead cap space for the term of Lou's contract. Sounds awesome!!

Yeah... and the cap will be 90million. Why are people so petrified of the cap implications 7 years down the road? You could get run over by a mack truck tomorrow. I understand preaching patience but don't be afraid of something that could be entirely insignificant 6-10 years from now.

 

[Parkdale]

Yeah... and the cap will be 90million. Why are people so petrified of the cap implications 7 years down the road? You could get run over by a mack truck tomorrow. I understand preaching patience but don't be afraid of something that could be entirely insignificant 6-10 years from now.

You play with fire when you make assumptions about the future. No one knows what the future holds. The cap could be 90 million, but it could be 60 million.

 

[New Liskeard]

Yeah... and the cap will be 90million. Why are people so petrified of the cap implications 7 years down the road? You could get run over by a mack truck tomorrow. I understand preaching patients, but don't be afraid of something that could be entirely insignificant 6-10 years from now.

Because it is proper and appropriate business sense. Personally, I want no part of a manager who has no interest in the long term success of a hockey team, it's selfish and personally unethical as a manager and a business professional, to only look short term. The cap may or may not go up, that is a big question mark. what is fact, is the contract that Lou comes with, and that in it's own can really hamper a hockey team long term. It's quite funny, Nucks fans want a premium for a middle aged goalie, get away from paying that horrific contract that is not insured by the way, and give them cap space to move forward with? I guess if Lou is a back up goalie or retires early, Leaf fans won't mid a 5.3 cap hit moving forward?

 

[Dwight K Schrute]

Because it is proper and appropriate business sense. Personally, I want no part of a manager who has no interest in the long term success of a hockey team, it's selfish and personally unethical as a manager and a business professional, to only look short term. The cap may or may not go up, that is a big question mark. what is fact, is the contract that Lou comes with, and that in it's own can really hamper a hockey team long term. It's quite funny, Nucks fans want a premium for a middle aged goalie, get away from paying that horrific contract that is not insured by the way, and give them cap space to move forward with? I guess if Lou is a back up goalie or retires early, Leaf fans won't mid a 5.3 cap hit moving forward?

Not proper and appropriate business sense? There is a reason that business' use 5 year business projections- because projecting anything beyond five years is a time consuming and entirely unpredictable venture. The cap raised consistently on a yearly basis over the life of the last CBA so it is reasonable to assume that will continue. Also, since when has a cap hit of 5.3 million been so debilitating? I will take the chance all day of grabbing one of the best 5 goalies the NHL has produced in the last decade all because he has a slightly unpalatable contract. At what cost? is the only real question here.

 

[Woodman19]

Not proper and appropriate business sense? There is a reason that business' use 5 year business projections- because projecting anything beyond five years is a time consuming and entirely unpredictable venture. The cap raised consistently on a yearly basis over the life of the last CBA so it is reasonable to assume that will continue. Also, since when has a cap hit of 5.3 million been so debilitating? I will take the chance all day of grabbing one of the best 5 goalies the NHL has produced in the last decade all because he has a slightly unpalatable contract. It what cost? is the only real question here.

5.3 on its own is not debilitating, however when you have a team iced and you have 5.3 Million in dead salary suddenly you are missing out on players and opportunities that your competition is able to pursue. How would you feel if the Leafs missed out on acquiring a rental player like a 5 year older Datsyuk for a cup run but Ottawa was able to get him and then knock you out of the playoffs? I bet you would find it quite frustrating to have that handicap.

 

[Stats01]

Not proper and appropriate business sense? There is a reason that business' use 5 year business projections- because projecting anything beyond five years is a time consuming and entirely unpredictable venture. The cap raised consistently on a yearly basis over the life of the last CBA so it is reasonable to assume that will continue. Also, since when has a cap hit of 5.3 million been so debilitating? I will take the chance all day of grabbing one of the best 5 goalies the NHL has produced in the last decade all because he has a slightly unpalatable contract. At what cost? is the only real question here.

It's not the AAV it's the length of the contract. If Luongo retires before the contract is done (which he probably will do) we will have to take a cap hit for that..that affects the value of the player in a trade. 5.3 for Luongo is fine, but the 10 years remaining is a big problem. He probably has 3-4 years of great goaltending left after it's all up in the air.

 

[Stats01]

Also the injury to Booth although newsworthy probably doesn't do much for trade negotiations. They could just go out and sign Arnott.

 

[New Liskeard]

Not proper and appropriate business sense? There is a reason that business' use 5 year business projections- because projecting anything beyond five years is a time consuming and entirely unpredictable venture. The cap raised consistently on a yearly basis over the life of the last CBA so it is reasonable to assume that will continue. Also, since when has a cap hit of 5.3 million been so debilitating? I will take the chance all day of grabbing one of the best 5 goalies the NHL has produced in the last decade all because he has a slightly unpalatable contract. At what cost? is the only real question here.

Okay so projecting anything beyond 5 years is unpredictable as you say, yet you assume the cap will be huge? You are contradicting yourself here. The one good thing about Lou's contract is; it is what it is. It is for 10 years, and it's a cap hit of 5.3, and the team aquiring him takes that hit for the durration depending on when he is aquired. There is no guess work here; it is what it is and you can't dispute that. what is so debilitating about a 5.3 cap hit? How about a back up goalie, or a goalie on the decline taking a 5.3 cap hit, or better yet, taking a 5.3 cap hit for a player who has retired and is not on your roster? if those dont raise red flags I dont know what does. Plenty and plenty of goalies at 39-43 playing at an elite level at the NHL to compare with, especially with the miles Lou has on him. Thanks but I want to have a team that is competitve for years, and not get stuck with a cap hit on a declining player because I needed instant gratification.

 

[Dwight K Schrute]

It's not the AAV it's the length of the contract. If Luongo retires before the contract is done (which he probably will do) we will have to take a cap hit for that..that affects the value of the player in a trade. 5.3 for Luongo is fine, but the 10 years remaining is a big problem. He probably has 3-4 years of great goaltending left after it's all up in the air.

"Under the previously outlined scenario, the Maple Leafs would pay Luongo a total salary of $43,666,000 for his seven years of service. But their cap hit for those seven years would only be $37,333,331. The Leafs' cap benefit when Luongo retires in 2019 would be $6,332,669. They'd divide that by three and would face a cap hit of $2,110,890 in the 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 seasons."

 

[New Liskeard]

It's not the AAV it's the length of the contract. If Luongo retires before the contract is done (which he probably will do) we will have to take a cap hit for that..that affects the value of the player in a trade. 5.3 for Luongo is fine, but the 10 years remaining is a big problem. He probably has 3-4 years of great goaltending left after it's all up in the air.

Why so many cant seem to see or understand this is amazing to me. Not to mention the risk, I guess giving the Nucks prospects and valuable players in the process, and give them cap space to improve their team on top of that, is a great idea as well.

 

[New Liskeard]

"Under the previously outlined scenario, the Maple Leafs would pay Luongo a total salary of $43,666,000 for his seven years of service. But their cap hit for those seven years would only be $37,333,331. The Leafs' cap benefit when Luongo retires in 2019 would be $6,332,669. They'd divide that by three and would face a cap hit of $2,110,890 in the 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 seasons."[/QUOTE]

And that is a good thing; dead cap space for a retired player? What if Lou, the competitor he is, doesnt want to retire and continues to play, but his play doesnt warrant a 5.3 hit which is very likely? I know, trade him away or send him to the minors to hide the cap hit.

 

[Bomber0104]

If Luongo is coming this dirt cheap (a few prospects), he will be absolutely untradeable when he begins his inevitable decline.

 

[Dwight K Schrute]

"Under the previously outlined scenario, the Maple Leafs would pay Luongo a total salary of $43,666,000 for his seven years of service. But their cap hit for those seven years would only be $37,333,331. The Leafs' cap benefit when Luongo retires in 2019 would be $6,332,669. They'd divide that by three and would face a cap hit of $2,110,890 in the 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 seasons."[/QUOTE]

And that is a good thing; dead cap space for a retired player? What if Lou, the competitor he is, doesnt want to retire and continues to play, but his play doesnt warrant a 5.3 hit which is very likely? I know, trade him away or send him to the minors to hide the cap hit.

2.1 million dollar cap hit if he retires? big deal. Are you people under the impression that he maintains a cap hit of 5.3 if he retires? Because if a player who was signed before 35 retires the team does not get hit cap wise. So--- no it is not good that we get a 2.1 hit but I was responding to someone who claimed his hit was 5.3.

 

[Stats01]

"Under the previously outlined scenario, the Maple Leafs would pay Luongo a total salary of $43,666,000 for his seven years of service. But their cap hit for those seven years would only be $37,333,331. The Leafs' cap benefit when Luongo retires in 2019 would be $6,332,669. They'd divide that by three and would face a cap hit of $2,110,890 in the 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 seasons."

And your point is? Having to pay a guy 2.1 million not to play is terrible

 

[Stats01]

2.1 million dollar cap hit if he retires? big deal. Are you people under the impression that he maintains a cap hit of 5.3 if he retires? Because if a player who was signed before 35 retires the team does not get hit cap wise. So--- no it is not good that we get a 2.1 hit but I was responding to someone who claimed his hit was 5.3.

Big deal? 2.1 million could be the difference in signing one of our own players or signing a big time free agent. It's not just something you stick your nose up at.

 

[New Liskeard]

2.1 million dollar cap hit if he retires? big deal. Are you people under the impression that he maintains a cap hit of 5.3 if he retires? Because if a player who was signed before 35 retires the team does not get hit cap wise. So--- no it is not good that we get a 2.1 hit but I was responding to someone who claimed his hit was 5.3.

Pick your poison. A player on the decline and possibly a back up taking a 5.3 cap hit, or taking a 2.1 cap hit in dead cap space because he retired early? How is it again he is on such a great contract, and why is it the Nucks want good players in exchange for his disgusting contract? As said before, once aquired he will be nearly impossible to move; and no cap floor team is going to spend money/cap space "just cause" on a player that can't help them win.

 

[HOTD]

Who was the kid on twitter who predicted the Kassian Hodgson trade and a couple other minor trades before anyone else, and also said at the end of the summer, Luongo was for sure coming to Toronto?

Anyone remember?

 

[Dwight K Schrute]

Big deal? 2.1 million could be the difference in signing one of our own players or signing a big time free agent. It's not just something you stick your nose up at.

Ok... well ironically the leafs have exactly 2.1 million currently in buyouts and burying Orr. Is this such a debilitating circumstance? I don't recall anyone on here ever complaining about how those moves have hindered this team.