Luongo

[BlueWhiteBlood]

And there's the counter posture...

 

[cw]

Dreger on TSN1050 said that the Leafs have no interest in Backstrom, and no interest in Luongo without money going other way.

Also:

Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun

Harding signing does NOT mean Backstrom is in play. Spoke with Wild GM Chuck Fletcher, who says he wants strong 1-2 punch for next season

That "strong 1-2 punch" may be what Vancouver ends up with though it's questionable that Gillis wants that.

Glad to hear the Leafs want to send money the other way. The problem is, their boat anchor deals tend to be much shorter in duration. A contender like Vancouver doesn't want to load up with those types of deals right now because there's no guarantee under the new CBA that they'll be able to shed them as easily.

 

[Corn Flake]

And there's the counter posture...

That posture was beefed up with Burke saying again today he will be fine going with Reimer and Scrivens next year if that's what it comes to.

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

And there's the counter posture...

That posture was beefed up with Burke saying again today he will be fine going with Reimer and Scrivens next year if that's what it comes to.

Yup. People have been saying for a while, Gillis isn't going to fool anybody in this deal.

 

[Redleaf]

And there's the counter posture...

That posture was beefed up with Burke saying again today he will be fine going with Reimer and Scrivens next year if that's what it comes to.

Agreed. Who's ears is that statement meant for? Certainly not the fans or the media.

 

[Kin]

And there's the counter posture...

I don't think it's a posture or, at least, I don't think it's one that is meant for leverage. I think some people here have, as people tend to do in the off-season, gotten so enamored with the idea of Luongo on the team that they're kind of glossing over or ignoring just how ugly a contract he has.

I've been arguing for a while that Luongo has negative value. That the only way I'd want the Leafs to add him is in a deal where the Canucks threw something in to get the Leafs to take him for nothing(be it other assets or taking back money).

But now people are kicking around 4-5 other interested teams and a real hockey deal being done and, personally, I think that's nuts. I think if Vancouver can find someone willing to take on that deal they should be buying them corndogs and rubbing their feet.

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

And there's the counter posture...

I don't think it's a posture or, at least, I don't think it's one that is meant for leverage. I think some people here have, as people tend to do in the off-season, gotten so enamored with the idea of Luongo on the team that they're kind of glossing over or ignoring just how ugly a contract he has.

I've been arguing for a while that Luongo has negative value. That the only way I'd want the Leafs to add him is in a deal where the Canucks threw something in to get the Leafs to take him for nothing(be it other assets or taking back money).

But now people are kicking around 4-5 other interested teams and a real hockey deal being done and, personally, I think that's nuts. I think if Vancouver can find someone willing to take on that deal they should be buying them corndogs and rubbing their feet.

Right, but that was Gillis' posturing about having all these offers on his table, which I believe to be bullocks. Burke coming out and saying that they also have no interest in Luongo at that price without taking back salary, is just Burke countering IMO.

I do think Burke will take him, but it's like you say, it has to be the right soft deal. I just don't think Gillis is really prepared to keep Luongo, without offering the type of deal Burke would want for him.

I suppose there is the chance that Burke really isn't interested and goes with Scrivens and Reimer, but I don't think that's the case.

And, didn't you come around and say that you might be for getting Luongo, after initially saying that you wanted to go with Scrivens and Reimer?

 

[Kin]

Right, but that was Gillis' posturing about having all these offers on his table, which I believe to be bullocks. Burke coming out and saying that they also have no interest in Luongo at that price without taking back salary, is just Burke countering IMO.

Like I said, I hope that's not the case. I hope that Burke is being honest there because, as I said, it jives with how I see things.

I do think Burke will take him, but it's like you say, it has to be the right soft deal. I just don't think Gillis is really prepared to keep Luongo, without offering the type of deal Burke would want for him.

And, didn't you come around and say that you might be for getting Luongo, after initially saying that you wanted to go with Scrivens and Reimer?

I don't think I've said anything like that. I think I've been pretty consistent about saying that I'd only take Luongo if the Leafs essentially got bribed to do so. The guy I'd been hoping the Leafs could land was Harding.

But I do post a lot so, I don't know, I may have said something poorly that translated as such.

 

[bustaheims]

I've been arguing for a while that Luongo has negative value. That the only way I'd want the Leafs to add him is in a deal where the Canucks threw something in to get the Leafs to take him for nothing(be it other assets or taking back money).

I wouldn't go as far as to say he has negative value, but, his value is certainly questionable. If he's traded, I fully expect the deal to be structurally similar to the Heatley deal. The situations are very comparable, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[maplesyrup]

I wouldn't go as far as to say he has negative value, but, his value is certainly questionable. If he's traded, I fully expect the deal to be structurally similar to the Heatley deal. The situations are very comparable, as far as I'm concerned.

Yup, a decent young player that a bunch of people probably won't like dealing away (ie Franson or Ashton) + a cap dump (ie Lombardi or Armstrong) + a tier two prospect or equivalent draft pick - 3rd(ish) rounder should do it.   

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

Well, I think we can all agree, that Burke isn't getting Luongo, without a whole lot of Vancouver fans being extremely upset at the return. Because if Gillis loses out on Schneider and keeps a disgruntled Luongo in Vancouver, wow! It could make those riots last year look like a frat party.

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

I wouldn't go as far as to say he has negative value, but, his value is certainly questionable. If he's traded, I fully expect the deal to be structurally similar to the Heatley deal. The situations are very comparable, as far as I'm concerned.

Yup, a decent young player that a bunch of people probably won't like dealing away (ie Franson or Ashton) + a cap dump (ie Lombardi or Armstrong) + a tier two prospect or equivalent draft pick - 3rd(ish) rounder should do it.   

I don't even think it'll be that good and the cap dump will most likely be Komisarek.

 

[Kin]

I wouldn't go as far as to say he has negative value, but, his value is certainly questionable. If he's traded, I fully expect the deal to be structurally similar to the Heatley deal. The situations are very comparable, as far as I'm concerned.

I don't mean that he'd have negative value in the sense of him not contributing. I meant that if I had the option of just signing him as a UFA to the 9 years/5.3 per or whatever it is he has left I'd pass. So if I wouldn't take a guy for free, you'd need to sweeten the deal.

And by the Heatley deal do you mean the Havlat one or the Michalek and spare parts one? Because if it's the former I'd be with you, I guess, but if it's the latter...I don't know. I think the Sens ended up doing better there than they had any right to.

edit: and now that I see you mean the Michalek deal I have to disagree. I'd have happily taken Heatley for free.

 

[bustaheims]

Yup, a decent young player that a bunch of people probably won't like dealing away (ie Franson or Ashton) + a cap dump (ie Lombardi or Armstrong) + a tier two prospect or equivalent draft pick - 3rd(ish) rounder should do it. 

Well, the comparison I proposed was MacArthur (not quite as good as Michalek, but, a young top 6 forward with some skill), Lombardi (a reclamation project/cap dump like Cheechoo, but more useful and less of a commitment and a smaller percentage of the cap - close to balancing out difference between Michalek and Cheechoo) and a 2nd (maybe a 3rd in 2013 instead, as it's supposed to be a deeper draft).

 

[maplesyrup]

Yup, a decent young player that a bunch of people probably won't like dealing away (ie Franson or Ashton) + a cap dump (ie Lombardi or Armstrong) + a tier two prospect or equivalent draft pick - 3rd(ish) rounder should do it. 

Well, the comparison I proposed was MacArthur (not quite as good as Michalek, but, a young top 6 forward with some skill), Lombardi (a reclamation project/cap dump like Cheechoo, but more useful and less of a commitment and a smaller percentage of the cap - close to balancing out difference between Michalek and Cheechoo) and a 2nd (maybe a 3rd in 2013 instead, as it's supposed to be a deeper draft).

We're pretty damn close. I wouldn't mind if it was Mac either. In fact, I might prefer that.

 

[bustaheims]

And by the Heatley deal do you mean the Havlat one or the Michalek and spare parts one? Because if it's the former I'd be with you, I guess, but if it's the latter...I don't know. I think the Sens ended up doing better there than they had any right to.

I meant the latter, and, really, while that deal looks alright for the sens now, at this point last year, it looked they received an injury prone, run of the mill 2nd line winger and a draft pick (that they had given away for Andy Sutton) in return. What the deal becomes for Vancouver in the future is less of a concern for me, because I imagine the parts involved from the Leafs' POV won't be a part of the future here, regardless.

 

[Kin]

I meant the latter, and, really, while that deal looks alright for the sens now, at this point last year, it looked they received an injury prone, run of the mill 2nd line winger and a draft pick (that they had given away for Andy Sutton) in return. What the deal becomes for Vancouver in the future is less of a concern for me, because I imagine the parts involved from the Leafs' POV won't be a part of the future here, regardless.

Ok but as I said above, the problem I have with reconciling the two situations is that Heatley isn't someone I'd have said to have negative value. There was a similar interest on his team's part to trade him, maybe, but again my point about Luongo is that I wouldn't sign him as a UFA. When Heatley got dealt from the Sens he had five years and 37.5 million remaining. I'd have signed that deal.

 

[bustaheims]

We're pretty damn close. I wouldn't mind if it was Mac either. In fact, I might prefer that.

Yeah. I mean, all things considered, I'd prefer to give up less than that, but, I know better and if MacArthur is the only real piece with real value involved, I'd be okay with that.

 

[bustaheims]

Ok but as I said above, the problem I have with reconciling the two situations is that Heatley isn't someone I'd have said to have negative value. There was a similar interest on his team's part to trade him, maybe, but again my point about Luongo is that I wouldn't sign him as a UFA. When Heatley got dealt from the Sens he had five years and 37.5 million remaining. I'd have signed that deal.

Maybe, but I think the difference in the significance of their respective on-ice performances and the more than $2M difference in cap value mitigate a significant portion of the differences between their respective contracts.

 

[Kin]

Maybe, but I think the difference in the significance of their respective on-ice performances and the more than $2M difference in cap value mitigate a significant portion of the differences between their respective contracts.

But it doesn't cross the threshold between a contract I'd want to sign and one I wouldn't. I mean, ignore that Heatley was 28 or that the upcoming CBA should at least give people a second thought about any long term contract, and just focus on the question. If you're the GM of the Leafs and Luongo is a UFA and he says he'll sign for 9 years/48 million, would you sign him?