• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

NHL February 2013 |OT| A Black History Month "Miracle in the Making"

C

CCF23

Member
Socreges said:
Hi, Tabris. Good to see you again. I believe that you are perhaps asking for an unreasonable return for Luongo considering his contract. You see, it is unreasonably long and makes teams hesitant to take it on. If this was not the case, a top 6 forward that you need would likely be granted.

I appreciate your contribution to this forum.

Always,
Socreges
Click to expand...

The contract thing is bullshit. When Luongo retires, it's off the books. He's only going to play while he has a chance at being a starter. He's not going to spend 2 or 3 years at the end of his deal sitting on the bench getting paid under a million dollars.

Everyone knows Luongo will retire before it's up, including Luongo. That's why they fucking fought for the "Luongo rule". Come on, Soc. You know that.
 
S

Socreges

Banned
CCF23 said:
The contract thing is bullshit. When Luongo retires, it's off the books. He's only going to play while he has a chance at being a starter. He's not going to spend 2 or 3 years at the end of his deal sitting on the bench getting paid under a million dollars.

Everyone knows Luongo will retire before it's up, including Luongo. That's why they fucking fought for the "Luongo rule". Come on, Soc. You know that.
Click to expand...
What? I'm almost certain this isn't true and is in fact the opposite.
 
M

Merguson

Banned
CCF23 said:
The contract thing is bullshit. When Luongo retires, it's off the books. He's only going to play while he has a chance at being a starter. He's not going to spend 2 or 3 years at the end of his deal sitting on the bench getting paid under a million dollars.
Click to expand...

Not true.

From the looks of the new CBA, there will be some form of cap hit that remains on the Canucks salary system if Luongo retires before his contract expires.

And here's the kicker, if Luongo gets traded, the team acquiring him also gets punished if he retires before the contract expires.
 
M

Marvie_3

Banned
CCF23 said:
The contract thing is bullshit. When Luongo retires, it's off the books. He's only going to play while he has a chance at being a starter. He's not going to spend 2 or 3 years at the end of his deal sitting on the bench getting paid under a million dollars.

Everyone knows Luongo will retire before it's up, including Luongo. That's why they fucking fought for the "Luongo rule". Come on, Soc. You know that.
Click to expand...

Not entirely.

Kuro Madoushi said:
The turtle is the BEST fucking kart rider in the original.
Click to expand...
This.
 
A

Acid08

Banned
Got to listen to the end of the game on radio while driving home, fucking lol.

We'll lose the next game just so the losing streak is as long as our winning streak was.
 
M

Marvie_3

Banned
Heretic said:
Hawks are too good and too sexy :(
Click to expand...

Not Moe Howard Jr.

i
 
C

Curufinwe

Member
http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/id/21219/trades-cheat-deals-and-more-cba-details

THE LUONGO RULE
This is another rule from the league aimed at hammering current back-diving deals (front-loaded, "cheat deals"). However, this has changed from its original form when the NHL first proposed it in October.

In the original formula, if a player like Roberto Luongo was traded and retired before the end of his deal, the Canucks (the team who signed him to the contract) would assume his remaining $5.33-million cap early hit in retirement. The new rule in this tentative agreement is different. Now, for any contract in excess of six years, both teams involved in a trade on a contract like Luongo’s would be penalized if he retired before the end of his deal.

To wit: let’s say the Canucks trade Luongo soon. Luongo has played two years of his 12-year contract, the Canucks paying him $16.716 million in salary but only absorbing a $5.33 million cap hit each year. That’s a cap savings of $6.056 million over two years so far for Vancouver. Under this new rule, should the Canucks trade him now and he retires with three years left on his contract, Vancouver would be charged that $6.056 million in cap savings over the final three years left on his deal from 2019 to 2022. However, let’s say for argument’s sake Luongo gets traded to Toronto, the Maple Leafs also would be subject to cap penalties if Luongo retires before the end of his deal.

To wit, part 2: If Luongo were to play the next seven years of his deal in Toronto before retiring, the Leafs would be paying him $43.666 million in salary but only counting $37.31 million against the cap over those seven years, a cap savings of $6.356 million. So if Luongo retires with three years left on his deal (because his salary falls to $1.618 million in the 10th year and then $1 million in the last two years of the deal), the Leafs would get charged that $6.356 million on their cap spread evenly over the remaining three years of his deal.

And obviously, if players under these back-diving deals are never traded, but retire before the end of their deals (Marian Hossa in Chicago), their current teams get charged the cap savings spread evenly over the remaining years of the deal.
Click to expand...
 
C

CCF23

Member
Curufinwe said:
http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/id/21219/trades-cheat-deals-and-more-cba-details
Click to expand...

$2 million per year in those last years is likely to be a super small drop in the bucket, and for GM's who need to win now to save their job, it likely won't make much of a difference.

But yeah, I forgot about that part of the rule. Still don't think it impacts things much at all. If GM's willingly hand out some of the ridiculous July 1st deals they do for players who aren't as good as Luongo at their positions, a GM in a pinch will pay for Luongo.
 
B

bardia

Member
Canucks would be dumb to trade Luongo while he's playing this well, unless some team decides they want to over pay. It's clear that his contract is a huge detriment to his value, therefore there's probably not a real good chance that the Canucks will get anything in return that will make them a much better team during the season. I'd rather keep him for the playoffs and get rid of him in the off season.
 
C

Curufinwe

Member
CCF23 said:
$2 million per year in those last years is likely to be a super small drop in the bucket, and for GM's who need to win now to save their job, it likely won't make much of a difference.

But yeah, I forgot about that part of the rule. Still don't think it impacts things much at all.
Click to expand...

Kovalchuk's deal is the one that should bite. Only $10 million in salary from 20-21 thru 24-25, but a $33.3m cap hit.
 
S

Socreges

Banned
CCF23 said:
$2 million per year in those last years is likely to be a super small drop in the bucket, and for GM's who need to win now to save their job, it likely won't make much of a difference.

But yeah, I forgot about that part of the rule. Still don't think it impacts things much at all.
Click to expand...
You're being too generous. The penalties could be pretty minor, or they could be pretty heavy, all depending on when Luongo retires. GMs might be willing to take on such potential penalties, but they apparently believe that as a result the value that they'd be giving back should be much lower. We've already seen this in practice. We're not hypothesizing here.
 
C

CCF23

Member
Socreges said:
You're being too generous. The penalties could be pretty minor, or they could be pretty heavy, all depending on when Luongo retires. GMs might be willing to take on such potential penalties, but they apparently believe that as a result the value that they'd be giving back should be much lower. We've already seen this in practice. We're not hypothesizing here.
Click to expand...

You don't know what Gillis is asking for, so you can't really say we've seen it in practice. He could be being very specific/picky with what he's after. We just don't know.

The whole "contract is a huge issue" thing is media babble. Whether or not it really will get in the way of the Canucks getting a good deal still remains to be seen. I don't believe it will. GM's are paid to win games. I doubt a $2 million per year cap hit at the end of the deal is going to get in the way of a deal if a GM feels they can get the extra wins they need to make the playoffs or do some damage with Luongo in their lineup.
 
S

Socreges

Banned
bardia said:
Canucks would be dumb to trade Luongo while he's playing this well, unless some team decides they want to over pay. It's clear that his contract is a huge detriment to his value, therefore there's probably not a real good chance that the Canucks will get anything in return that will make them a much better team during the season. I'd rather keep him for the playoffs and get rid of him in the off season.
Click to expand...
The idea, I'm pretty sure, is to keep the status quo until the right deal comes along. Schneider will probably not have much of a problem splitting duty for this season and it suits the Canucks just fine unless there's an impact player being offered. But Luongo will need to be traded during the offseason. Schneider signed a short-term deal and will use that time to prove himself and earn a bigger contract when it's done. If he's playing 40ish games per season, and possibly sitting on the bench during the playoffs, he'll rightfully believe that he's being wasted and that his career is being compromised.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Black Myth: Wukong Sold 20 Million Units in its First Month
News Business Sales-Age 2
52
2K
Fahdis replied
Black Myth: Wukong | OT | IGNorant Ape
|OT| Community 32 33 34 35 36
2K
73K
Kurotri replied
Pentiment coming to Nintendo Switch, PS4 & PS5 on February 22
News 2
84
6K
tommib replied
UK Monthly Charts February 2023: PS5 #1, Switch #2 and Xbox Series #3, Helldivers 2 Digital+Physical(Sold 57% on PS5)
2
94
9K
mckmas8808 replied
  • Locked
Xbox launches "Black History Month" promotional campaign for the month of February.
2 3 4 5
228
17K
MidGenRefresh replied
Top Bottom