| Author |
 Topic  |
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
 Posted - 08/13/2010 : 05:04:56
|
Wow, nuxfan . . . you really have lost some love for Luongo out there, eh? Just because of a few playoff games where he got beaten by the better team?
It may just be me, but I wouldn't jump off the Luongo bandwagon that fast, not after a season or two of non-mvp play. I mean, he still has the skills, and he is still a top goalie in my mind . . . and although some people may have overrated him in the past, there is no reason to go the other way and say that guys like Niemi are his equal!
They aren't. At least, not right now they aren't.
The Canucks would do well to keep him . . . otherwise he's likely to follow all the stars to San Jose! 
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
 |
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2010 : 07:58:50
|
Slozo, i'm not sure, maybe it's me, but i think it's you who's misread nuxfan's comments. It didn't sound at all to me like he was "losing love" for Luongo (that could be a song ).
He clearly stated that he loves him at the cap hit we have him at. While he did state he'd like a guy like Niemi at half the cap hit, he didn't say he no longer wanted or like Luongo. Maybe the last line of his post confused you..... "One thing I liked about the article - finally someone putting a bullet in the "you don't win cups with expensive goalies" theory... I agree with his reasoning 100%."??? This is saying he agrees with the writer of the article and is the opinion that you "CAN" or "DO" win cups with expensive goalies!
Unless i've misread it or misinterpretted something, i don't think he's at all worried about Luongo's "losing to a better team". I know i'm not..... |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2010 : 08:11:42
|
Nuxfan:
"If the contract is voided, the Canucks have other goaltending choices still out there - Luongo certainly, but as others have mentioned Niemi is still looking for a home, Nabokov could be lured back if the price was right, etc. They would almost certainly save money on that position for a not-Luongo player, and probably still get at least decent goaltending. I strongly like a deal where I could have Niemi as a starting goalie for a 3 yr/7.5M contract with a cap hit of 2.5."
What do I misunderstand, Alex?
He said he is more than happy to lose out on Luongo's somewhat burdensome contract, and would "strongly like" a deal with switching out Luongo for a much cheaper Niemi.
If being happy about letting your former star starting goalie leave isn't "losing love", what is?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2010 : 08:29:19
|
As you always say, it's sometimes hard to interpret words and such that are typed, so first off, i hope you weren't offended by what i said. Secondly, it's why i said, perhaps i misinterpretted what he said?
Either way, i still don't think he meant it as you interpret it, but again, i could be wrong. While saying he'd "strongly like" a deal for Niemi at 2.5, i didn't read it as saying he'd prefer that to Luongo at 5.33?
Regardless, from what i read, i interpreted it as that he would prefer Luongo, providing we get to keep him at the 5.3 cap hit, over Niemi but would have no problem with a guy like Niemi for less than half the price!
Again, i hope you took no offense to what i typed, by saying "maybe the last line confused you...." i in no way meant it in a negative way. I know that using "confused you" or terms like that can sound somewhat insulting but i was genuinely saying it in that i really is a bit of a tricky / confusing thing he wrote. I myself had to reread it to be sure i was interpretting the way i think he intended (and i still don't know for sure). |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2010 : 08:52:53
|
Slozo, Alex is right - don't worry, no love lost here, Lu is still the man, you are misinterpreting. I thought I was clear, but maybe not.
I love Luongo - at the right price. I'm assuming that if the contract is voided, we cannot get Lu back at a cap hit of 5.3M, and will have to explore other options. If we have to explore other options, there are options out there.
Luongo @ 5.3M is my first choice by far. But if it comes down to Luongo @ 6.5M or Niemi @ 2.5M... the Canucks have structured a team whereby 5.5M is really all we can afford to pay a goalie right now. So if your hand is forced, then it is forced.
If the contract were voided, and we could get Luongo back @ 5.3M on some contract, then I'd keep him for sure, no brainer.
quote:
Maybe the last line of his post confused you..... "One thing I liked about the article - finally someone putting a bullet in the "you don't win cups with expensive goalies" theory... I agree with his reasoning 100%."??? This is saying he agrees with the writer of the article and is the opinion that you "CAN" or "DO" win cups with expensive goalies!
I hear a lot of "you can't win the cup with too much money dedicated to goaltending", or "Luongo is too expensive, the team can't build around him and won't win". The article implies that although teams with inexpensive goalies have won cups in the recent past, those teams have also benefitted from a pile of cheap entry-level forwards and defencemen as well - thus raising the question, is cheap goaltending the reason for success, or is it cheap teams? Did CHI win the cup last year because they had inexpensive goaltending and could pay their forwards more, or did they also massively benefit from Toews/Kane/Keith/Hjalmarsson all in the last years of their EL deals? |
Edited by - nuxfan on 08/13/2010 08:53:45 |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2010 : 09:58:58
|
Fair enough, nuxfan . . . but you lose me a bit when you say you haven't lost the love for Luongo, but are only willing to pay a star goalie 5.3 mil or less.
But then again, the market really has crashed for goalies, when they are getting signed for the same price as career third-line forwards. Maybe it is just a result of the flooded goalie market.
For me, it's sad to see position players of that quality making the same as a player skating for 12 minutes a game . . . the impact is like comparing apples to oranges!
Any word out there yet on the current investigation into Luongo's contract?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2010 : 10:22:38
|
quote:
Fair enough, nuxfan . . . but you lose me a bit when you say you haven't lost the love for Luongo, but are only willing to pay a star goalie 5.3 mil or less.
But then again, the market really has crashed for goalies, when they are getting signed for the same price as career third-line forwards. Maybe it is just a result of the flooded goalie market.
It really comes down to 2 different things - paycheque vs cap hit, and they *are* different. I'm happy and willing to PAY Luongo 10M this year, and 7.6M for the next 7 years after that - Orca Bay has that money to spend, and they have decided to make a long term investment in a franchise player. However, if he takes up 6-7 in cap space, I'm not sure that it makes sense anymore, or allows the team to build the necessary core around him.
I don't think you can build an effective team, in a cap world, when your goatending takes too much of your cap. If you're using 10-15% of your cap for a single player (only 4% of your team), that player had better be scoring goals, not saving them. Goaltenders might steal you a few games, but the guys putting the puck in the net will win them for you far more often. For me, 6M-ish on your goaltending tandem is about as high as I'd want to commit. Thats just my opinion though.
quote:
For me, it's sad to see position players of that quality making the same as a player skating for 12 minutes a game . . . the impact is like comparing apples to oranges!
Any word out there yet on the current investigation into Luongo's contract?
I agree with you, there is a glut of goalies out there - but I think that was bound to happen eventually, as the global popularity of hockey took off. The world keeps cranking out quality goaltending, but the NHL only employs 60 each year. They are also generally more durable, so you see goalies playing longer than other players - thus freeing up less spaces for new blood to come in. We'll probably continue to see more goalies fight for the same positions as time goes on.
There has been no word on Luongo's deal, other than a lot of articles claiming that the whole thing is just smoke (for Luongo and Savard, and Pronger). At this point, I don't anticipate a voiding, and once it actually starts getting paid out, I think the issue will die. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 08/31/2010 : 22:11:04
|
So, Sportsnet is reporting that Kypreos has the inside scoop on the IK deal part II. The new deal breaks out as follows:
15yr/100M, yearly breakdown:
1,2: 6M
3: 11M
4,5: 11.3M
6: 11.6M
7: 11.8M
8: 10M
9: 7M
10: 4M
11,12,13: 1M
14: 3M
15: 4M
I swear, this deal makes even less sense that the previous one - so many salary shifts over the life of the deal, and instead of a bell curve, they now have a tail at the end where the salary actually goes UP again in the final 2 years.
IMO this one is more glaringly cap-subverting than the previous one - the last 2 years at a higher pay grade after 3 straight years @ 1M are very suspicious, and I think NJ is actually trying to get more actual $ dropped off this deal.
With the last deal, we saw it tail down to 2.5M over the last 5 years, or something like that. This one has 10M over the last 5 years, but is constructed in such a way that Kovy has to endure 3 years @ 1M each in order to get to the final 2 "bonus" years. If you assume that Kovy will retire as soon as the deal hits 1M per year, then NJ actually saves 10M over those 5 years, instead of 2.5M
I don't think the NHL will accept this one either.
|
Edited by - nuxfan on 08/31/2010 22:12:48 |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 09/01/2010 : 09:01:02
|
Honestly, how is this circumventing the CAP?? A nearly $7 million cap hit for 15 years. That's a pretty large impact. In fact, for deals lasting longer than 5 years only Lecavalier, Ovechkin, and Backstrom's cap hits are higher.
Considering he is under 35 at the time of signing the deal, if he retired the cap hit still applies.
If you look at a buy out, there is $10 million on the last 5 years of the deal meaning the cap hit on a buy out would be over $3 million.
This deal, also very odd looking, is a lot more in line with deals that are considered completely acceptable today. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 09/01/2010 : 09:13:20
|
you may be right beans, looking at the overall deal it does seem to be more in line with the cap than that last one. One would also have to think that NJD worked very closely with the NHL on this version of the deal to avoid another rejection... we shall see by 5pm I guess.
those last 2 years stick out. For the deal that got nixed, NJD argued that he should be paid less at the end of the deal as he will not be as effective a player - which is the way all the other suspect deals are structured, and in fact sounds like a reasonable argument. However, they seem to have reversed their thinking, and have a deal that suggests he will get better in the last 2 years of the deal?
Either they are doing as I suggest, and attempting to save money on the whole deal, or they are attempting to provide additional incentive for Kovy to play out the full deal by backloading some money.
I wonder if the league will argue that the 4M and 3M should be in years 11 and 12, with 1M for 13-15. Then I think it would be in line with other deals. |
|
|
|
Leafs81
PickupHockey Pro
735 Posts |
Posted - 09/01/2010 : 13:07:15
|
This deal makes a lot of sense to me. If they don't want the NHL to reject it this is the way to go. With this deal they are saying look we are ready to pay Kovalchuk a lot of money even when his career is coming to a close, if he wants to retire that's his decision.
The last deal the average was brought so low because of the last 7 years of the deal were getting lower and lower and lower. Plus the deal is 15 years compare to 17 the last one. This way here Kovalchuk is happy because he gets the money he wants. The team is happy because they get a reasonable cap hit and the league is happy because the last few years of the contract doesn't affect the average that much (especially because of the last two seasons of his contract)
I would be really surprise if they reject this one.
Sure it looks weird because of all the changes through the years and it's the first time we see a contract like that. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2010 : 08:35:35
|
it looks like the NHL have once again brought Luongo's deal into the debate (and may formally investigate Hossa's).
According to a story in the Vancouver Sun (http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/Report Ultimatum Kovalchuk Luongo deals/3471430/story.html), the NHL are possibly using the IK and Lu contract approvals as leverage to get the NHLPA to sit down and hammer out agreed rules regarding long term deals going forward |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2010 : 09:21:37
|
I love it!!
The NHL has a gun held to the NHLPA's head right now. They are basically saying(unconfirmed, as posted on TSN who are normally pretty accurate) that the PA has to agree to:
1. "That the cap hit on future multi-year contracts will not count any seasons that end with the player over 40 years of age. The cap hit would be calculated on the average of the salary up through age 40 only."
2. "That the cap hit on future contracts longer than five years will be calculated under a formula granting additional weight to the five years with the highest salary."
The report goes on to say that if the NHLPA does not agree to this than Kovalchuk's deal is denied, Luongo's is void, and Hossa's will be investigated immediately.
Wow, can anyone else smell another work stoppage coming?? This is some serious hardball.
|
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2010 : 11:28:05
|
yep this is some hardball indeed, I honestly do not have a good feel for how this will turn out.
We know how the NHL feels about these contracts, but no one really talks about how the NHLPA feels - do they like them, or approve of these tactics? If they don't like these contracts, or the direction that it takes their membership, they might agree to the demands. According to the same article, it sounds like a do or die for the NHLPA:
- accept the changes, and the NHL will grandfather the Luongo and Hossa deals and adopt the new rules for any future contracts
- reject the changes, and the NHL will void Luongo's deal and formally investigate Hossa's.
There is no mention of Savard's deal or Pronger's deal, likely due to the length of the contract being less than 10 years.
This could get very messy very fast.. I would think that the Luongo deal is the easiest to void, given that it was never fully approved (or at least we have been told that), and it has not started yet - however I don't think his agent will let it go without a fight. With Hossa, the deal was approved and has started - voiding now would likely go against all kinds of existing US contract law, and a lawsuit would almost be a certainty. Savard's agent has already stated that he will sue if his client's deal is voided.
|
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2010 : 11:35:04
|
You may love it Beans, but I don't . . . I can't take another strike! (I know you were saying it in jest)
This is like a Scott Stevens check at the blueline with your head down . . . I seriously doubt that anyone, especially the NHLPA, saw this all coming as a result of one long deal.
I truly wonder though how Hossa's deal could be revisited . . . he has already started fulfilling it. Will any player movement result because of this? Strange, but possible . . . and the reason why I suppose they moved the deadline ahead for Kovalchuk's deal announcement.
If Bettman nixes this second deal, it'll be like the first shot across the bow before a battle.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2010 : 14:02:00
|
Slozo, don't get me wrong. I love the fight, but not the chance for a strike/lockout.
Another perspective on this is what kind of message the NHL is sending to whom ever the NHLPA head is going to be.
Bottom line, from this as well as the recent hockey summitt, the NHL is the biggest, baddest, and best in the world and the the owners and administration of the league is ready to fight as such. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2010 : 14:12:29
|
well, its being reported that the NHL will approve the Kovy deal, and will also allow the other 4 deals in question - and these 5 deals will likely be the last of their kind in the NHL.
TSN is reporting that as part of the approval, the NHLPA has agreed to changes to the CBA governing the length and cap hit of long term deals. No details yet on what that agreement is, but you can be sure that it will ensure that its very crippling to teams to sign players to this sort of deal. |
|
|
|
irvine
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1315 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2010 : 21:53:00
|
Ken Cambell of THN is reporting that league (NHL) has approved Ilya Kovalchuk's new 15-year deal on Friday.
I'm unsure how accurate this is, though.
If true, it appears that the NHLPA had to agree to changing the CBA. Apparently, it will be that no more deals of this nature can be made. We'll see!
Irvine/prez. |
|
|
|
Leafs81
PickupHockey Pro
735 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2010 : 07:56:09
|
yep official. nhl.com has the whole story.
I'm glad they finally came to an agreement and that they will drop any further investigation on the other deals. And plus they were able to add rules to the CBA in order that deals like that don't get out of hands.
1. The cap hit will only be the average of what the player makes when he signs the contract up to 40 years of age. When the player hit 41 those year doesn't get in the average.
2. If a player signs a contract over 5.75 million cap hit, the cap hit when he's 36-39 can't be less then a million. The player can still sign for less but the salary for those seasons that would be awarded in the cap hit would stay at one million.
anyway this is a quick review but check nhl.com for the whole story. |
Edited by - Leafs81 on 09/04/2010 07:59:42 |
|
|
|
Deaner
Rookie
Canada
107 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2010 : 09:46:37
|
| thank god its over and done with |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Ilya Kovalchuk - Signs with Devils 
