View Single Post
Old 07-26-2019, 02:29 PM   #2647
mrdonkey
Franchise Player
 
mrdonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Exp:
Default Flames trade Neal for Lucic (Oilers retain 12.5%) and conditional 2020 3rd

Quote:
Originally Posted by VilleN View Post
This is not an example of the team being 'Hamstrung' by ownership. It is very normal for owners to have limits on how much money they'll spend on buyouts. Swapping Neal for Lucic does not hinder the team in the least, it's a wash at worst. If ownership would have allowed Tre to buyout Neal, I'm sure he would have... but then again, how much dead cap do you want?



This trade gives us more cap space, that is really the net from this trade. Stop thinking about a buyout, it wasn't going to happen. It was Neal for 4 more years at 5.75m per or Lucic for 4 more years at 5.25 per. And after the season Neal had and the healthy scratch in the playoffs, my guess is Neal asked to be moved. So if you're the GM you have a player who grossly underperformed, and likely wants a change of scenery. You know you have to move the asset and you know his contract is near unmovable. So yeah, it makes a lot of sense to make a deal like this.



Had he not made this deal we'd be going into the season with a useless fwd who can only play top 6 minutes to be effective, and doesn't want to be here. He'd be taking a spot from our younger guys, preventing their development. Or the coach could sit him, play a rookie instead - now it's costing us around 6.65m to have Neal on the roster.



I understand not liking this trade but what was Tre really supposed to do? Hope for a rebound season? We saw Neal play last year... I kept believing he would turn it around, but there was never a sign that that would happen. I'm sure management saw that too, and didn't want to risk having Neal drag the team down, again. Then you have a much worse situation, Neal would literally be unmovable at that point - if he isn't scoring he is not an NHL player. Lucic still is.

I agree this is a deal that had to happen. Where I take umbrage is with your last statement. Lucic is barely an NHL player in very much the same way Neal is. That much will become apparent to some folks around here very soon. He is not “better suited to a bottom 6 role” because neither should be anywhere in your lineup, unless I missed the memo that it’s 2011 again and “bottom 6 ability” is measured in how many hits and fights you lay on similarly useless players.

Again, what I don’t like is: a) A conditional 3rd is nothing, in the event the conditions are met. The Oilers get a benefit far greater than the value of a 3rd if such a scenario plays out. And b) there was nothing included to make up for the very real problems Lucic’s contract structure carries with it. The owner being unwilling to eat a buyout and wanting to save money has tangibly affected the dimensions of a hockey trade. This is a problem.

Last edited by mrdonkey; 07-26-2019 at 02:31 PM.
mrdonkey is offline   Reply With Quote