Ongoing thread for Neal/Lucic discussion

[Moneyhands23]

For some reason I just hope Lucic is able to smash Petterson at some point this coming season. I have an unreasonable hate for that stinky jackweed!

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

Agreed, I think we had better options than trade Neal for Lucic. Waving Neal for his lack of effort would have been a better option than taking on another bad contract. This almost looks like a trade for the sake of making a trade. BT maybe tried too hard to make everyone happy including Neal at the expense of making Edmonton better. If Neal's nose was out of joint while he was with the Flames I wouldn't be surprised if he rebounds.

Waiving Neal doesn’t make him go away. No team would take on that contract voluntarily. The only option was trading it for one of the worst contracts in the league. Would you rather have Seabrook?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Rhettzky

Obviously neither team is going to buy either player out this year. So let’s say at the end of the year both teams bought out both players. Given that some of Lucic’s cap hit is owed to Edmonton, this is what the total would look like.

Lucic ($4.81, $3.5, $4.81, $0.44, $0.44, $0.44)
Total Cap Hit over 6 years to Calgary = $14.44

Neal ($1.92, $1.92, $1.92, $1.92, $1.92, $1.92)
Lucic ($0.69, $0.50, $0.69, $0.06, $0.06, $0.06)
Total Cap Hit over 6 years to Edmonton = $13.56

Right...but look at the first 3 years.

One guy costs you 7.6 in cap space.

The other? 13.1 million.

That is literally 2 really good players at 6.5 each. Thats a team crippling kind of number.

You can spin this however you like, and it appears many are trying to do just that. I dont blame them and also HOPE things dont go as they clearly look like they will. But in the back and white world and without any sample size of each guy on each team...this has all the making of a complete debacle.

[CalgaryFan1988]

Originally Posted by keenan87

And the buyout would be spread out for longer years while Lucic's contract will be over in 3 years if it is only retained.

and honestly if Calgary retained 2.25 over 3 years, Lucic @ 3 million a season wouldn't be all that bad.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by mikephoen

Waiving Neal doesn’t make him go away. No team would take on that contract voluntarily. The only option was trading it for one of the worst contracts in the league. Would you rather have Seabrook?

I'd rather have Neal.

Though if things between Neal and Peters made that impossible, a buy out would have been way more preferable.

[BsFaninCGY]

Lucic was done in Boston. Fans couldn't wait to show him the door. I felt bad when LA picked him up. When he signed in Edmonton, I told one of my Oiler fan buddies that was a horrible contract and they would regret it. I can't believe anyone truly thinks Lucic will rebound. He won't. But I get it - he's here now, might as well hope. That's what sports is. But get ready - he'll be the new Smith. Getting called out by most, defended by the parrots on 960, and generally being useless on the ice. I hope for you diehards that BT has some sort of plan beyond hope...

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by mikephoen

Waiving Neal doesn’t make him go away. No team would take on that contract voluntarily. The only option was trading it for one of the worst contracts in the league. Would you rather have Seabrook?

Couldn't he be sent to the farm. I think waving Neal puts the ball in Neal's court that he is the one with the attitude issues. We also could have played him on the forth line until some team wanted to take a chance on him a year or 2 down the road. I would have sat him again if we made the playoffs.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

and honestly if Calgary retained 2.25 over 3 years, Lucic @ 3 million a season wouldn't be all that bad.

Doesn't he have to agree to a trade?

[CalgaryFan1988]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

Doesn't he have to agree to a trade?

Logic dictates if it doesn't work out, he would waive again. He waived to come to Calgary.

[Gundo]

*shakes dice*

Come on 2017 Milan Lucic......

Honestly if ‘17 Lucic shows up and we get 45+ Pts and someone who can chuck some serious knuckles at the guys who are hacking our top tier players what’s not to like and don’t say the cap hit because it is what it is. I don’t like my mortgage payment but I don’t keep using that as an excuse to hate my house.

[dustygoon]

So IF this NMC is still in place will basically mean we included Bennett or Mangiapane in this trade (albeit we lose the player in two years). We all cool with that?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

The NMC doesn’t matter, really. It changes to a NTC, on June 1, 2021. This allows us to expose him to Seattle.

Has this been confirmed?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Right...but look at the first 3 years.

One guy costs you 7.6 in cap space.

The other? 13.1 million.

That is literally 2 really good players at 6.5 each. Thats a team crippling kind of number.

You can spin this however you like, and it appears many are trying to do just that. I dont blame them and also HOPE things dont go as they clearly look like they will. But in the back and white world and without any sample size of each guy on each team...this has all the making of a complete debacle.

You can't add three years totalling 13M and say it's two good players at 6.5 each, because it's three years, not one. You can say you are losing the actual amount per year, and look at what you could sign for that - all assuming you actually need that space to sign such a player.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by dustygoon

So IF this NMC is still in place will basically mean we included Bennett or Mangiapane in this trade (albeit we lose the player in two years). We all cool with that?

No it doesn’t.
It means we have 2 years before the expansion draft to determine what will happen, who will waive and who we’ll have to protect, so there’s absolutely no sense in making such a proclamation until then.

[dustygoon]

Originally Posted by Azure

Has this been confirmed?

He's wrong and will lose his $100 bet i think. Changes to limited NTC but still NMC which means we have to protect him.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

They aren't the same player, no. But they both being physicality from a 4th line winger, so the replacement tag fits.

I still don’t see it. Lucic is more of a replacement for whatever it was Neal brought last year than he is for Hathaway. I get the physical part but Hathaway played with energy, not an intimidator IMO.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Right...but look at the first 3 years.

One guy costs you 7.6 in cap space.

The other? 13.1 million.

That is literally 2 really good players at 6.5 each. Thats a team crippling kind of number.

You can spin this however you like, and it appears many are trying to do just that. I dont blame them and also HOPE things dont go as they clearly look like they will. But in the back and white world and without any sample size of each guy on each team...this has all the making of a complete debacle.

Use your brain. 13.1 million over three years is one player at 4.4, not two “really good” players at 6.5 each.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

Wouldn't it be cheaper for Calgary to trade Lucic again at 50 percent cap than it would be for Edmonton to buy out James Neal (in addition to the 750k retained on Lucic)?

Would cost Calgary 2.6 mil cap hit to trade Lucic @ 50 percent.

Buyout to Neal would cost Edmonton 1.916667 plus the 750k they are paying Lucic = 2.666667.

So buying out Neal would be more expensive than trading Lucic @ a 50 percent cap hit. Or am I wrong?

Comparing a Calgary buyout to an Edmonton buyout is not the correct comparison. The correct comparison is Calgary pre-trade liability to Calgary post trade liability.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by BsFaninCGY

Lucic was done in Boston. Fans couldn't wait to show him the door. I felt bad when LA picked him up. When he signed in Edmonton, I told one of my Oiler fan buddies that was a horrible contract and they would regret it. I can't believe anyone truly thinks Lucic will rebound. He won't. But I get it - he's here now, might as well hope. That's what sports is. But get ready - he'll be the new Smith. Getting called out by most, defended by the parrots on 960, and generally being useless on the ice. I hope for you diehards that BT has some sort of plan beyond hope...

Lucic had a great year in LA.

We traded for a bad contract but also gave up a bad contract. Neal didn’t work with Backlund/Tkachuk and Lindholm is so important to the top line he was never going to work with Monahan/Gaudreau. Neal in the bottom 6 is what he was last year.

The thing that makes me most upset is I do think Neal could find his game playing on the top 2 lines in Edmonton. Lucic at best is on the third line in Calgary so I don’t expect much from him.

Every article I have read outside of Alberta is calling this a big win for Edmonton because everyone knows that Neal has a better shot at rebounding than Lucic. The Flames are not a better or worse team today but I do think the Oilers are better.

[Erick Estrada]

I was hoping this trade was a bad dream when I woke up this morning.