He might be dude. If you want your Stevens, he's a candidate. 6'2, hits like a truck, great in his own end, massive slap shot, ok passing skills. Kid is a monster. Imagine...he's eligible for the WJC again next year
- AdamFrench

not doubting his tools, but people are only saying that because of the tourney he had.. they prob never seen him play anywhere else.

People evaluate players so much on one tournament, including leafs scouts unfortunately.

See Pogge, Justin.

Let's look at it from the other angle: Is a guy who has played very well at age 38 likely to retire?

What is actually the best case scenario, anyway? I've outlined the worst case scenario, but what would be best (within the realms of reality)?

Is the best case scenario that he gives us 5 very good years, then retires? Well, that sucks because he sticks us with 5 years of penalties.

Is it that he stays 10 years, or close to it, to minimize the penalties? If so, what kind of production do we expect in the last 3-4 years?

Is it that he gives us 5 good years, one so-so year, one outright poopty year (convincing himself that it's time to retire), then sticks us with three years of penalties?
- Leeman4Gilmour

Lets be precise ....5.5 years ...6 seasons. So in 2019 he'd have 4 years left. The cap penalty would be 2 million per year for those 4 years ...bad but not the end of the world.

And as to your flipside ...if he doesn't retire because he's still very good ...well that's good because they still have a very good goalie with an affordable cap hit.

Again, if I'm Burke I'm looking for better options ...and if I am considering this my offer to the Nucks wouldn't include much if any value. I just believe the $$ and cap ramifications are being overblown.

If you think he can be good for the next 5.5 years ...and the price is right ....and you believe he can help attract the other key pieces ....then I'm open to paying a very reasonable price.

That is a scenario that can play out with any star players.
- faceto27

... which is why the NHL wanted the limit on contracts, and Lou's contract would not even be allowed under this CBA.

Probably late to the dance here ...but Mirtle's math is wrong. I think it'd be about a 6.5 milly hit though.
- The Law

To be clear, Mirtle has said that he is going to hold off doing any real analysis on this clause because the explanations of how it works don't make sense. The key problem seems to be what happens year over year closer to the end of the contract. The description that leads to the wonky numbers is that the penalty for retiring with fours years left on the contract is divided over those four years -- in the case of Parise and Weber just under $5M/year each but for leaving with just one year, you get the full hit which is $20M. I agree that this doesn't make sense.

The other thing to remember is that the NHL and PA lawyers are working out the details of a lot of these issues now. It is very possible that the explanations that have come from the League were unclear and will be ficed up by the lawyers.

Lets be precise ....5.5 years ...6 seasons. So in 2019 he'd have 4 years left. The cap penalty would be 2 million per year for those 4 years ...bad but not the end of the world.

And as to your flipside ...if he doesn't retire because he's still very good ...well that's good because they still have a very good goalie with an affordable cap hit.

Again, if I'm Burke I'm looking for better options ...and if I am considering this my offer to the Nucks wouldn't include much if any value. I just believe the $$ and cap ramifications are being overblown.

If you think he can be good for the next 5.5 years ...and the price is right ....and you believe he can help attract the other key pieces ....then I'm open to paying a very reasonable price.
- The Law

Here's the problem with that assumption: almost nobody goes from playing well to - BOOM! - retiring.

The only way Luongo works out for us is if he gives us elite level goaltending on par with his elite level salary for 5 years, then suddenly retires.

Good luck.

The more obvious scenario is that he hangs around for a couple years after his most productive ones are behind him and sticks us with a 5.2 million dollar cap hit while he tries to prove he's not a glorified back-up.

Then he retires and we deal with that can of worms.

The team needs to start winning now....not 4 years from now. Modelling ourselves after the above teams? Pens got high draft picks for years and then LUCKED out (or Bettman out) with Crosby. Only the Hawks were bottom feeders for years to get high end draft and even then they had to acquire or sign vet players to help them win a cup.

Get this through your head and anyone else who is reading this....the Leafs will never bottom feed on purpose to rebuild...that will never happen in this market....NEVER. They will never pull a pens, Isles, Oil, hawks, Thrashers.
Specially after being out of the playoffs for so long.
Never!
- Fakepartofme

Nobody said bottom feed. The key word was being patient. The other idea around is avoiding mid 30 year olds for future pieces.

If the Leafs dont draft and develop their own talent then they will NEVER win anything trying buy their way.

.....
Get this through your head and anyone else who is reading this....the Leafs will never bottom feed on purpose to rebuild...that will never happen in this market....NEVER. They will never pull a pens, Isles, Oil, hawks, Thrashers.
Specially after being out of the playoffs for so long.
Never!
- Fakepartofme

Not sure if you've been watching the Leafs for the last 6 years or not but they don't need to bottom feed on purpose - they are quite capable of bottom feeding seemingly without even trying. It's a gift.

Sign me up for either one of these two over Luongo.

Like him or hate him, Burke looks like a FKing genius right now. This could be the most active off-season we've seen in decades, and several teams are simply screwed.

Leaf fans should send Donald Fehr a thank you card. No roll-backs of existing salaries is the most advantageous thing to come out of this lockout for us.
- Leeman4Gilmour

The picture looks a whole lot nicer if you don't have 5+ of cap space tied up in Luongo.

This is what I dream of happening:

To Toronto
Roberto Luongo
1st Round Pick

To Vancouver
Tyler Bozak
Nazem Kadri

---

To Edmonton
Nikolai KuleminCody Franson's RFA Rights

To Toronto
Sam Gangner

---

Kessel - Gagner - Lupul
JVR - Grabovski - MacArthur
Frattin - McClemment - Connolly
Brown - Steckel - Komarov

Lombardi

Phanuef - Gunnarsson
Liles - Komisarek
Gardiner - Holzer

Fraser

Luongo
Reimer
- Grabovski

You should be banned just for suggesting this in a hockeybuzz post.

Hmmm, fries guy, or a measly million per?
...
Fries guy, or a measly million per?
...
Fries guy, or a measly million per?

Tough decision there.
- Aetherial

Scooby told me that after tax his million dollar income is only 500k ....that's one good poker tourny for big Lou. Front office people make more than that ...just offer him a job.

Not sure if you've been watching the Leafs for the last 6 years or not but they don't need to bottom feed on purpose - they are quite capable of bottom feeding seemingly without even trying. It's a gift.
- BlowMonkey

To be clear, Mirtle has said that he is going to hold off doing any real analysis on this clause because the explanations of how it works don't make sense. The key problem seems to be what happens year over year closer to the end of the contract. The description that leads to the wonky numbers is that the penalty for retiring with fours years left on the contract is divided over those four years -- in the case of Parise and Weber just under $5M/year each but for leaving with just one year, you get the full hit which is $20M. I agree that this doesn't make sense.

The other thing to remember is that the NHL and PA lawyers are working out the details of a lot of these issues now. It is very possible that the explanations that have come from the League were unclear and will be ficed up by the lawyers.
- Canada Cup

I think Mirtle simply did his math wrong. The formula reported doesn't add up to what he's saying.

To be clear, Mirtle has said that he is going to hold off doing any real analysis on this clause because the explanations of how it works don't make sense. The key problem seems to be what happens year over year closer to the end of the contract. The description that leads to the wonky numbers is that the penalty for retiring with fours years left on the contract is divided over those four years -- in the case of Parise and Weber just under $5M/year each but for leaving with just one year, you get the full hit which is $20M. I agree that this doesn't make sense.

The other thing to remember is that the NHL and PA lawyers are working out the details of a lot of these issues now. It is very possible that the explanations that have come from the League were unclear and will be ficed up by the lawyers.
- Canada Cup

It’s quite simple. You take the amount of salary paid over the term of the contract, subtract the cap hit over the term of the contract (or, in the case of a player traded midway, the term of the tenure with that team under that contract). Parise carries a $7.538 cap hit per year. He has a 13 year contract totaling $98M. $97M of that is paid out over the first 12 years. The total cap hit over those years is About $90.5M. If he retired with one year left on his contract, his hit would be $97M - $90.5M = $6.5M.

- systemtool

It is very possible that the explanations that have come from the League were unclear and will be ficed up by the lawyers.
- Canada Cup

Did you mean fixed up, or fcuked up?

Nobody said bottom feed. The key word was being patient. The other idea around is avoiding mid 30 year olds for future pieces.

If the Leafs dont draft and develop their own talent then they will NEVER win anything trying buy their way.
- systemtool

again, no way in hell does Burke give away future pieces for a mid 30 year old.
it simply isn't going to happen.

again, no way in hell does Burke give away future pieces for a mid 30 year old.
it simply isn't going to happen.
- Barx

If it does I change my avatar immediately.

The team needs to start winning now....not 4 years from now.
- Fakepartofme

Define "winning". Go ahead. Give it a try.

Surely by "winning" you don't mean winning a Stanley Cup because you couldn't possibly be that stupid right? If Luongo couldn't get the job done with Vancouver, he has no hope of winning a Cup in Toronto.

So that leaves one other definition of "winning" which is making the playoffs and getting their ass kicked in the 1st or 2nd round for a few years. If that's your definition of winning, the idea that winning now is absolutely imperative is a fantasy that you created in your mind because you don't have the patience to see things done properly.

Modelling ourselves after the above teams? Pens got high draft picks for years and then LUCKED out (or Bettman out) with Crosby. Only the Hawks were bottom feeders for years to get high end draft and even then they had to acquire or sign vet players to help them win a cup.

Call it luck but it worked. After 45 years, the Leafs need to stop thinking about what looks pretty and just do what works. Period.

Get this through your head and anyone else who is reading this....the Leafs will never bottom feed on purpose to rebuild...that will never happen in this market....NEVER. They will never pull a pens, Isles, Oil, hawks, Thrashers.
Specially after being out of the playoffs for so long.
Never!

Get this through your head. The Leafs need to do things properly. Short term fixes to make 8th place and get a 1st round ass kicking might be enough to keep you entertained but it's not remotely good enough.

The first one, Vancouver isn't throwing in a 1st, LOL.

The second one, I wouldn't trade Kulemin for Gagner ever. Take away Gagner's one monster week and his stats are pretty below average.
- Aetherial

Below average?
For a 23 year who's played on one of the worse teams in the past 4 years he's average 42 - 49 points.

It’s quite simple. You take the amount of salary paid over the term of the contract, subtract the cap hit over the term of the contract (or, in the case of a player traded midway, the term of the tenure with that team under that contract). Parise carries a $7.538 cap hit per year. He has a 13 year contract totaling $98M. $97M of that is paid out over the first 12 years. The total cap hit over those years is About $90.5M. If he retired with one year left on his contract, his hit would be $97M - $90.5M = $6.5M.
- prock

That's pretty simple.

How would you determine how much each team would pay - assuming the player plays for multiple teams over the term of their contract?

Below average?
For a 23 year who's played on one of the worse teams in the past 4 years he's average 42 - 49 points.
- Fakepartofme

Kulemin >>>>>>>>>> Gagner

Stop this before it gets out of hand.

again, no way in hell does Burke give away future pieces for a mid 30 year old.
it simply isn't going to happen.
- Barx

Im just going by the reports from some fairly credible sources. I also dont think its beyong him to do it either. He has to save his job and pride.

Here's the problem with that assumption: almost nobody goes from playing well to - BOOM! - retiring.

The only way Luongo works out for us is if he gives us elite level goaltending on par with his elite level salary for 5 years, then suddenly retires.

Good luck.

The more obvious scenario is that he hangs around for a couple years after his most productive ones are behind him and sticks us with a 5.2 million dollar cap hit while he tries to prove he's not a glorified back-up.

Then he retires and we deal with that can of worms.
- Leeman4Gilmour

I disagree. If his decline happens when he's still earning big dollars ...of course he sticks it out and collects his pay. That'll suck but that assumes he turns to poop in the next 5 years. By age 39 that becomes debatable ....If he faulters and becomes a back up I believe he hangs them up. That transition may take a year at most.

His contract ...and all others like it ....was negotiated with the idea of retirement at age 39 or 40 in mind. They negotiate a real salary to age whatever ...then tack on 3 or 4 extra years knowing he'd retire and to circumvent/lower the annual cap hit. Hence the new provisions.

IMHO, Lou will walk by 40 ....Kovy will walk with 5 years left on his deal ....take it to the bank.

Kulemin >>>>>>>>>> Gagner

Stop this before it gets out of hand.
- Pen15

It’s quite simple. You take the amount of salary paid over the term of the contract, subtract the cap hit over the term of the contract (or, in the case of a player traded midway, the term of the tenure with that team under that contract). Parise carries a $7.538 cap hit per year. He has a 13 year contract totaling $98M. $97M of that is paid out over the first 12 years. The total cap hit over those years is About $90.5M. If he retired with one year left on his contract, his hit would be $97M - $90.5M = $6.5M.
- prock

I agree that that would be the logical way to do it. Have you read the rule or are assuming that the NHL did things the logical way?