Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Roster Building Thread LIII: Free Agent Frenzy

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't understand the outrage about Florida/Luongo.

Florida didn't campaign for him to retire. Luongo was done playing, Florida was bringing in another goalie and Luongo had no interest in living anywhere else. Many thought he would go on LTIR to help the Panthers out (which would be shady) but they'd rather he didn't.

They are carrying a cap charge to bring their total cap hit for Luongo equal to the total salary they paid him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheDirtyH, Crease, Greg02 and 2 others
GAGLine said:
It makes sense when it's other teams that would be penalized, but as soon as it happens to us, it would be bull****.
Click to expand...

Not just that, it's now turned into a damned if you do damned if you don't situation. Teams that have retiring players end up on LTIR are in the wrong. Teams that have retiring players actually retire are in the wrong. What's right?
 
Tawnos said:
Not just that, it's now turned into a damned if you do damned if you don't situation. Teams that have retiring players end up on LTIR are in the wrong. Teams that have retiring players actually retire are in the wrong. What's right?
Click to expand...
The line is very clear.

Having fake injuries and putting them on IR - wrong.

Having a player retire when they are ready to stop playing - not wrong.

The cap recapture isn't saying that Florida did anything wrong here. It's just restoring the cap hit to the salary paid over the time Luongo played with them.
 
Thirty One said:
The line is very clear.

Having fake injuries and putting them on IR - wrong.

Having a player retire when they are ready to stop playing - not wrong.

The cap recapture isn't saying that Florida did anything wrong here. It's just restoring the cap hit to the salary paid over the time Luongo played with them.
Click to expand...

I agree with fake injuries being wrong, but that's also not a situation we've seen in the league.
 
what luongo did is the complete opposite of cap circumvention...luongo retired and now florida & vancouver get hit with the recapture penalty cause that is the rules. the issue is when the player doesn't retire like when hossa suddenly became allergic to his equipment so he could spend 3 years on LTIR so the hawks could avoid that penalty
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boris Zubov, Inferno and egelband
Leetch3 said:
what luongo did is the complete opposite of cap circumvention...luongo retired and now florida & vancouver get hit with the recapture penalty cause that is the rules. the issue is when the player doesn't retire like when hossa suddenly became allergic to his equipment so he could spend 3 years on LTIR so the hawks could avoid that penalty
Click to expand...

It wasn't sudden with Hossa, it was just an issue he decided he didn't want to put up with anymore.

Luongo could've gone on LTIR for chronic medical issues too. The team strategically decided they didn't want that.
 
Tawnos said:
It wasn't sudden with Hossa, it was just an issue he decided he didn't want to put up with anymore.

Luongo could've gone on LTIR for chronic medical issues too. The team strategically decided they didn't want that.
Click to expand...

pretty convenient how he decided he didn't want to put up with it anymore as his actually salary dropped to $1 mil per year
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boris Zubov
Leetch3 said:
pretty convenient how he decided he didn't want to put up with it anymore as his actually salary dropped to $1 mil per year
Click to expand...

No one, including Hossa, is claiming otherwise. That he put up with it while he was making more money doesn't make it less of a medical issue. As I've said, there are a lot of things I'd be willing to put up with for 5x my salary that I'm not willing to put up with now. And there are things I put up with now that I wouldn't be willing to put up with for half my current salary.

When a player has a chronic medical problem, he is the one who gets to decide when he doesn't want to deal with it... and since that's entirely up to him, the team shouldn't be punished for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: emodwarf, alkurtz, Greg02 and 2 others
Nothing wrong with what Lu did. He had enough and went out on his own terms, good on him. Seems like anyone who is upset with this also happens to be all aboard the Panarin train...

This won't effect the Panthers pursuit of Panarin, they would sign him with or without Luongo. All this does it make it easier to keep their roster together and if they can move Reimer, they will actually be in really, really good shape even if they land both of their targets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: egelband


also that day - good bye Marc Savard, hello Brendl and Lundmark
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ola
ZuccsFluffierFluffer said:
Nothing wrong with what Lu did. He had enough and went out on his own terms, good on him. Seems like anyone who is upset with this also happens to be all aboard the Panarin train...

This won't effect the Panthers pursuit of Panarin, they would sign him with or without Luongo. All this does it make it easier to keep their roster together and if they can move Reimer, they will actually be in really, really good shape even if they land both of their targets.
Click to expand...

Poetic post.
 
Luongo, good on him for a great career, but this is precisely the reason you don't sign anyone on the wrong side of 35 to multi year deals and EXACTLY why I just said no (among other reasons) to a multi-year Kovalchuk contract.

Want a 1 year deal? Sure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brooklyn Rangers Fan
haohmaru said:
Luongo, good on him for a great career, but this is precisely the reason you don't sign anyone on the wrong side of 35 to multi year deals and EXACTLY why I just said no (among other reasons) to a multi-year Kovalchuk contract.

Want a 1 year deal? Sure.
Click to expand...

Well, the problem with Luongo was that his contract was 12 years
 
If the league is okay with players retiring, and allowing the team to pay them to make up for the lost money, then I do not see how that does not benefit the Rangers. Lundqvist as special goalie coach, Staal as defensive equivalent, I'm fine with that, yet if this is a thing now, it should continue to be a thing. Cap circumvention for all or no one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brooklyn Rangers Fan
Off Sides said:
If the league is okay with players retiring, and allowing the team to pay them to make up for the lost money, then I do not see how that does not benefit the Rangers. Lundqvist as special goalie coach, Staal as defensive equivalent, I'm fine with that, yet if this is a thing now, it should continue to be a thing. Cap circumvention for all or no one.
Click to expand...

Cap recapture penalties are a thing with front-loaded contracts. Luongo's contract was front-loaded. By doing so, with the last few years being a lower salary than the cap hit, they essentially "circumvent" the cap by lowering the AAV despite not finishing the contract.
 
Amazing Kreiderman said:
Cap recapture penalties are a thing with front-loaded contracts. Luongo's contract was front-loaded. By doing so, with the last few years being a lower salary than the cap hit, they essentially "circumvent" the cap by lowering the AAV despite not finishing the contract.
Click to expand...
Are Lundqvist and Staal not on front loaded contracts? Not to the extreme Luongo is, yet where is the line?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom