Love to be there for that pitch.
- HipHopisDead

Well it wouldn't be as hard as you're making it sound if you like your chances of getting a goalie next summer and Gillis is asking for a pound of flesh in return for Luongo right now.

And "amesity?"
- Atomic Wedgie

Amnesty sorry

Amnesty sorry
- Bieksa#3

OK, well getting back to your original point:

You think Gillis would prefer to turn down Bozak, Ashton, Steckel and more pizza toppings, and put Luongo on waivers, and get nothing?

Why would he do that? To punish me and Dozzer?

OK, well getting back to your original point:

You think Gillis would prefer to turn down Bozak, Ashton, Steckel and more pizza toppings, and put Luongo on waivers, and get nothing?

Why would he do that? To punish me and Dozzer?
- Atomic Wedgie

No, an earlier poster suggested that if the cba allowed it the canucks amnesty Luongo. Which I said is one of the dumbest suggestions yet. They could easily waive him and let clb have him if it came to that. Same goes for the komi and a 3rd offers. My original offer is Bozak, Ashton and one out of Franson/Finn/Percy. I said Percy because I believe he is the most trade able.

No, an earlier poster suggested that if the cba allowed it the canucks amnesty Luongo. Which I said is one of the dumbest suggestions yet. They could easily waive him and let clb have him if it came to that. Same goes for the komi and a 3rd offers. My original offer is Bozak, Ashton and one out of Franson/Finn/Percy. I said Percy because I believe he is the most trade able.
- Bieksa#3

Amnesty meaning buy-out without salary cap implications? Yeah, don't see that happening.

If you are willing to do Bozak, Ashton and Franson, we can get this thing done today.

But I simply cannot let you take those guys without at least discussing rust-proofing...

Amnesty meaning buy-out without salary cap implications? Yeah, don't see that happening.

If you are willing to do Bozak, Ashton and Franson, we can get this thing done today.

But I simply cannot let you take those guys without at least discussing rust-proofing...
- Atomic Wedgie

I am a bit clumsy on the keyboard. Hand reconstructive surgery on my right hand in June. Physio 3 times a week. Just got back from St Joesphs in London from another meeting with the specialist.
Bozak, Ashton and Franson is a deal. I think its fare for both teams. Van gets a #6 d, and 2 3rd liners. Tor gets their 1st decent starter since the lockout

Wait you mean he was lying when he said he would have taken Reilly #1 overall?
- wolfos412

well, given his record, I doubt he would have taken Yakupov first overall... and it's not like Murray looked that much better for team Canada.

well, given his record, I doubt he would have taken Yakupov first overall... and it's not like Murray looked that much better for team Canada.
- Feeling Glucky?

Griffen Reinhart
Burke loves yanks. I would bet he would have taken Galynchuck(sp)

No, an earlier poster suggested that if the cba allowed it the canucks amnesty Luongo. Which I said is one of the dumbest suggestions yet. They could easily waive him and let clb have him if it came to that. Same goes for the komi and a 3rd offers. My original offer is Bozak, Ashton and one out of Franson/Finn/Percy. I said Percy because I believe he is the most trade able.
- Bieksa#3

That amnesty buyout cost 2/3's of the full value last time around I think ...that would mean that ownership would have to be willing to cut Big Lou a one time cheque payable in the amount of 35 milly ......you're right, it ain't happenin'.

The CBA is going to play into all of this as well. The players are willing to step back the % of revenue they get (meaning lower caps) but they don't want rollbacks. If that happens, the Nucks are well over the Cap right now, and need to move some $$.

first of all.. ten years

and spare me the argument...unlike us.. a GM cannot afford to assume luongo will retire.. he has to make the assumption that the full contract will have to be honored.

secondly.. luongo doesnt get the leafs into the playoffs.. cause frankly.. the leafs are no better than the florida teams of 8-9 years ago

thirdly.. why would you saddle a rebuilding team with MORE inflated veteran contracts? we already have too many plugging up spots that our kids should be taking.
- Dozzer

There is no risk what so ever betting on Lu retiring. After 6 yrs you waive him. There is a good chance a team needing to get to the cap floor(if it still exists) or Lu would retire as i doubt he willing willing to play in the ahl for 1 mill per

That amnesty buyout cost 2/3's of the full value last time around I think ...that would mean that ownership would have to be willing to cut Big Lou a one time cheque payable in the amount of 35 milly ......you're right, it ain't happenin'.

The CBA is going to play into all of this as well. The players are willing to step back the % of revenue they get (meaning lower caps) but they don't want rollbacks. If that happens, the Nucks are well over the Cap right now, and need to move some $$.
- The Law

I read somewhere today that each % point in revenues translates to $35 million in player salaries.

So doing simple math, say each % means $1 million reduction in the salary cap.

I can't see how this could possibly work without salary rollbacks. No way the owners accept anything above a 50/50 split.

Griffen Reinhart :love:
Burke loves yanks. I would bet he would have taken Galynchuck(sp)
- Bieksa#3

the guy's considered a risky player, again, easy reason for him to skip over him.


I think in Burke's mind, Galy and Rielly were the top-2 guys, he also said pre-draft that he would consider drafting based on need(Galy?) over BPA(Rielly?).

Not saying Rielly is the best player in the draft, just that it's not too hard to see why Burke would want him 1st overall(doesn't like the Euros-Galy and Yakupov, Murray is safe and all-round but not a game breaker, Rienhart is risky guy).

Personally, I'd take Galy and Yakupov any day over Rielly.

That amnesty buyout cost 2/3's of the full value last time around I think ...that would mean that ownership would have to be willing to cut Big Lou a one time cheque payable in the amount of 35 milly ......you're right, it ain't happenin'.

The CBA is going to play into all of this as well. The players are willing to step back the % of revenue they get (meaning lower caps) but they don't want rollbacks. If that happens, the Nucks are well over the Cap right now, and need to move some $$.
- The Law

Simply put that won't happen. Either there has to be rollbacks with a reduction in cap or neither. It will put far to many teams over the cap.

There is no risk what so ever betting on Lu retiring. After 6 yrs you waive him. There is a good chance a team needing to get to the cap floor(if it still exists) or Lu would retire as i doubt he willing willing to play in the ahl for 1 mill per
- Bieksa#3

You'd have to question how long Lou would even entertain life as a back up. He strikes me as the type to walk away when the time is right ...lots of pride. The contract was set up specifically this way ...6 years left, at most.

I read somewhere today that each % point in revenues translates to $35 million in player salaries.

So doing simple math, say each % means $1 million reduction in the salary cap.

I can't see how this could possibly work without salary rollbacks. No way the owners accept anything above a 50/50 split.
- Atomic Wedgie

Exactly, the 2 go hand and hand.

There is no risk what so ever betting on Lu retiring. After 6 yrs you waive him. There is a good chance a team needing to get to the cap floor(if it still exists) or Lu would retire as i doubt he willing willing to play in the ahl for 1 mill per
- Bieksa#3

That, by definition, is a risk.

Any team has to be willing to risk eating a lot of salary.

Not a lot of teams willing to do that.

Even fewer who are currently shopping for goalies.

If it wasn't a risk, he would have been traded by now.

You'd have to question how long Lou would even entertain life as a back up. He strikes me as the type to walk away when the time is right ...lots of pride. The contract was set up specifically this way ...6 years left, at most.
- The Law

Exactly,

You'd have to question how long Lou would even entertain life as a back up. He strikes me as the type to walk away when the time is right ...lots of pride. The contract was set up specifically this way ...6 years left, at most.
- The Law

There's also a tremendous upside - the possibility that the guy stays good into his late 30s, and you are paying him peanuts.

But hey, I'm an optimist...

That, by definition, is a risk.

Any team has to be willing to risk eating a lot of salary.

Not a lot of teams willing to do that.

Even fewer who are currently shopping for goalies.

If it wasn't a risk, he would have been traded by now.
- Atomic Wedgie

? He is due I believe an average of 1 mill over the last 4 yrs. That's very small risk. Lu is far to proud to be in the minors for that.

Simply put that won't happen. Either there has to be rollbacks with a reduction in cap or neither. It will put far to many teams over the cap.
- Bieksa#3

Ya, I tend to agree, although the rollback issue will be big for some of the players ...especially those superstars who locked in for 10+ years.

the guy's considered a risky player, again, easy reason for him to skip over him.


I think in Burke's mind, Galy and Rielly were the top-2 guys, he also said pre-draft that he would consider drafting based on need(Galy?) over BPA(Rielly?).

Not saying Rielly is the best player in the draft, just that it's not too hard to see why Burke would want him 1st overall(doesn't like the Euros-Galy and Yakupov, Murray is safe and all-round but not a game breaker, Rienhart is risky guy).

Personally, I'd take Galy and Yakupov any day over Rielly.
- Feeling Glucky?

Galchenyuk isn't euro.

Ya, I tend to agree, although the rollback issue will be big for some of the players ...especially those superstars who locked in for 10+ years.
- The Law

I'm one of the few who believes that they may do a slight change, like 55-45 and grandfather the rest till its 50-50. But to use wedgie's words. I'm a optimist

? He is due I believe an average of 1 mill over the last 4 yrs. That's very small risk. Lu is far to proud to be in the minors for that.
- Bieksa#3

$7 million over the final 4 years.

2018-19 $3,382,000
2019-20 $1,618,000
2020-21 $1,000,000
2021-22 $1,000,000

There's also a tremendous upside - the possibility that the guy stays good into his late 30s, and you are paying him peanuts.

But hey, I'm an optimist...
- Atomic Wedgie

I think technically he starts earning peanuts in his 40's.

He's a renowned workout guy so you gotta like his chances of playing well for another 4 or 5 years.

What's the price and than measure that up against the other options.

I'm one of the few who believes that they may do a slight change, like 55-45 and grandfather the rest till its 50-50. But to use wedgie's words. I'm a optimist
- Bieksa#3

Yeah, under those circumstances, you're going to have to move my name over to the pessimist column.

Like, nuclear winter kinda pessimism.

Owners won't look at anything less than 50/50. Won't even let their dogs sniff it.