[Trade] Luongo (15% retained salary) traded to Panthers for Jacob Markstrom & Shawn Matthias - Page 23 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

bubbsy · 03-04-2014, 06:08 PM

i just read on the canuck forum that their is a very severe hit the canucks would take with regards to salary cap should he retire mid contract.

Any truth to this (sorry haven't read through the 20+ pages of this thread).

the2bears · 03-04-2014, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Swedish Flame

Strombone ‏@strombone11 min Thank you Vancouver for a great 8 years! Really appreciative of all the support especially the last little while. I will miss the LOOO'ing!!

Can you tweet in green text?

moon · 03-04-2014, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quincy Egg

You guys realize trading an aging, disgruntled goalie -who would have likely cleared waivers - for anything is actually not that bad right?

You mean the goalie that was chosen as the back-up for Team Canada?

That is the goalie that would have cleared waivers and makes his team better by leaving it?

dino7c · 03-04-2014, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quincy Egg

You mean the older goalie who has marginally better stats than Lack, despite playing for a team that shuts things right down?

obvious Canucks fanboy is obvious

good luck with the Lack and ??? tandem

Quincy Egg · 03-04-2014, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moon

You mean the goalie that was chosen as the back-up for Team Canada?

That is the goalie that would have cleared waivers and makes his team better by leaving it?

MAF once was a back-up for Team Canada.

moon · 03-04-2014, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quincy Egg

Check his stats this year.

15th in GAA and 15th in SV%?

And that includes guys like Scrivens, Khoboudin, Lack, Harding who likely drop their numbers if they had played more than back-up roles.

What exactly is wrong with those numbers?

moon · 03-04-2014, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quincy Egg

MAF once was a back-up for Team Canada.

MAF also won a Stanley Cup for his team so if that is the comparable for Luongo pretty sure that the Panthers would be happy.

19Yzerman19 · 03-04-2014, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bubbsy

i just read on the canuck forum that their is a very severe hit the canucks would take with regards to salary cap should he retire mid contract. Any truth to this (sorry haven't read through the 20+ pages of this thread).

Basically, the Canucks' cap benefit on this contract is $8.5M. Consequently, if Luongo retires before the contract expires (the 2021 season), the Canucks will have a cap penalty of $8.5M total. That $8.5M will be spread out over the remaining years that Luongo WOULD have played if he had played out the end of his deal. So, the sooner he retires, the smaller the cap penalty, but the more years they have to deal with it. If he retires later, the penalty isn't around for as long, but it's a higher amount.

So, if he retires with 2 years left, they have a 4.25M cap anchor on them for 2 years. If with 1 year left, they have 8.5M in space locked up on them for that year. Those are the two worst scenarios. More likely, he'll retire a bit before that and it'll be something like 2.8M for three years or 2.1M for four.

morgin · 03-04-2014, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moon

MAF also won a Stanley Cup for his team so if that is the comparable for Luongo pretty sure that the Panthers would be happy.

As an aside, I'm sure the Panthers are happy any time they are mentioned in the news, so this must be amazing for them. Their season ticket holder must be pretty excited too!

Wood · 03-04-2014, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quincy Egg

MAF once was a back-up for Team Canada.

To add to moon calling out your ridiculous post, he also leads the league in wins

What's your point?

Quincy Egg · 03-04-2014, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moon

15th in GAA and 15th in SV%?

And that includes guys like Scrivens, Khoboudin, Lack, Harding who likely drop their numbers if they had played more than back-up roles.

What exactly is wrong with those numbers?

You appear to not understand what the expectations are with having a contract like Luongo's.

dino7c · 03-04-2014, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quincy Egg

You appear to not understand what the expectations are with having a contract like Luongo's.

just stop, you are making yourself look stupid. When 99% of fans and media think your team made a bad deal (or series of deals) take a step back and realize they might be on to something

morgin · 03-04-2014, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quincy Egg

You appear to not understand what the expectations are with having a contract like Luongo's.

Consistantly better than average goaltending for a lengthy period of time? Like he's given them over the last 8 years with some blips that can be blamed just as much on his team folding up in front of him? He's not the highest paid goalie in the league, so if we are equating salary with performance, he's probably right where he should be.

moon · 03-04-2014, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quincy Egg

You appear to not understand what the expectations are with having a contract like Luongo's.

You appear to not understand that the contract doesn't matter at all in terms of on ice performance.

So better for the Panthers to go with a goalie that is cheap and provides them with a sub .900 sv percentage? I am sure that will be great for them.

Also great to see you keep changing the argument to try and find some new BS to criticize Luongo after your pathetic earlier attempts are so easily shot down.

19Yzerman19 · 03-04-2014, 06:22 PM

It's hilarious to suggest that Lack is as good as Schneider. When Canucks fans were pointing at Schneider's stats based on 3 years of ~30GP, THAT was too small a sample size. Lack's sample size is like 1/4 of even that. The justification for this is downright silly. Not keeping Schneider was a ludicrous mistake.

EDIT: Also, how would he have cleared waivers? Hahaha, isn't it pretty much a certainty that at the very least FLORIDA would have put in a claim? Jesus, think before you say things.

Quincy Egg · 03-04-2014, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moon

You appear to not understand that the contract doesn't matter at all in terms of on ice performance.

So better for the Panthers to go with a goalie that is cheap and provides them with a sub .900 sv percentage? I am sure that will be great for them.

Also great to see you keep changing the argument to try and find some new BS to criticize Luongo after your pathetic earlier attempts are so easily shot down.

You seemed to have missed my point. Having completely average stats like Luongo has over the past few seasons is not worthy of a 12 year contract at 5+ million.

Quincy Egg · 03-04-2014, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 19Yzerman19

EDIT: Also, how would he have cleared waivers? Hahaha, isn't it pretty much a certainty that at the very least FLORIDA would have put in a claim? Jesus, think before you say things.

You have evidently missed the part where the Canucks are retaining salary.

SebC · 03-04-2014, 06:30 PM

Winner of this trade: Gina.

moon · 03-04-2014, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quincy Egg

You seemed to have missed my point. Having completely average stats like Luongo has over the past few seasons is not worthy of a 12 year contract at 5+ million.

You seemed to have missed the point that those "average stats" are light years better than what the Panthers have got over the past few years and were looking at getting from their goalies going forward. It is also likely much better than anything the Canucks will get from the two goalies they have on their roster currently.

The Panthers are not ever going to be a cap team so Luongo's salary does not hurt them and the chance to get a top 10 goalie in the league is worth taking on a big deal especially with the Canucks kicking in 15%.

Those average stats were also good enough to get him on Team Canada this past year ahead of top goalies in the league. So it isn't like he isn't valued by elite level talent evaluators.

sun · 03-04-2014, 06:36 PM

gillis was on the radio mumbling about the trade. Wasn't as condescending as usual.

A question was asked about how the canucks were on a 100+pt pace half way through the season. They asked if he was thinking of "retooling" (gillis' word ha) back then, or was it only because they've been sucking since.

gillis responds by saying January was a tough month... Their coach got suspended, they weren't playing well without him, giving up leads, etc. Made it sound like a major contributing factor to their losing streak and hence the "retool" and hence the Luongo trade.

Basically, Lu has Hartley to thank for the trade! canucks fans can thank him for the "retool" too!