Looks like the NHLPA stopped them at 3 fingers

[Zeus]

They still lost a lot but not nearly as much as the owners were trying to get. I was a little bit surprised the owners bent so much at the end (where's that "hill they would die on"?) but really, with all the PA even offered, it just didn't make any sense to cancel the season

Finally, we can get back to arguing whether the Leafs are good enough to make the playoffs with Luongo :-)

[kali o.]

I am always right, as usual. As for Luongo, I just wish a trade wasn't already a foregone conclusion. He's a championship team goalie. He's proven it. The team in front let Vancouver down, not the netminder. Cory has never had to deal with real pressue...plus, never trust a ginger.

[Zeus]

You were right? How?

Yes, gingers are, after all, soulless and can never be trusted :-) (j/k to any ginger out there; just havin' fun with the stereotype). It is kinda sad everyone over there is ready to run Luongo out of town. As you mentioned, he simply put has been one of the best goalies since the last lockout and the numbers prove it. But, as a Leafs fan, we're circling like vultures waiting for the franchise to finish making their big mistake (started with the signing of Cory) hoping we can benefit from it. Amazing thing is, they're basically gonna just dump his salary due to his contract and it won't cost too much in return. Cap hit ain't too bad at $5.33M and he'll likely retire with at least 3 years left (of the 10) as he's 33 now. The amount that he can help for the next 4-5 years will be worth the risk of that additional cap hit, especially since their don't have to give up much in return.

Considering how much of a black hole goaltending has been over here, he'll be VERY welcomed. As long as he leads them to the playoffs he'll be instantly loved even if they don't make it out of the first round (as long as he doesn't choke completely). Question is: does have both the desire and personality of facing such insane scrutiny? If he thinks Vancouver is bad.....

[kali o.]

You were right? How?

- That the deal got worse the longer it went.
- That 50/50 would be the end point (minus year 1/2 issues, which ended up the make whole provision)

The only thing I could be wrong on was the variance issue, but not really since I was just working off your numbers. But here is the thing, with 6/7 yr contract maxes and >35% year-to-year variance, they effectively still removed those salary cap cheating contracts anyway -- and I suspect that was there only goal there anyway.

Players will vote it through, season will start soon enough. They had nothing to bargain with and the owners had them against a wall.

[Zeus]

Offer got worse? Maybe you should compare the final offer to the one the NHL put on their own website back in October which was better than the 43% initial offering that cost the NHL millions. If anything, if you look at the numbers,I believe the NHL kept giving more with each successive offer. And I and everyone else knew it was gonna be 50/50,that was a given

Like I said, the players were always gonna lose from the old CBA. Their win was stooping them at 3 fingers and not taking the full fist

[kali o.]

Offer got worse? Maybe you should compare the final offer to the one the NHL put on their own website back in October which was better than the 43% initial offering that cost the NHL millions. If anything, if you look at the numbers,I believe the NHL kept giving more with each successive offer. And I and everyone else knew it was gonna be 50/50,that was a given

Like I said, the players were always gonna lose from the old CBA. Their win was stooping them at 3 fingers and not taking the full fist

You and everyone else knows that was just a negotiation tactic, not a number anyone expected would be accepted. The offer got progressively worse moving forward.

[Zeus]

Offer got worse? Maybe you should compare the final offer to the one the NHL put on their own website back in October which was better than the 43% initial offering that cost the NHL millions. If anything, if you look at the numbers,I believe the NHL kept giving more with each successive offer. And I and everyone else knew it was gonna be 50/50,that was a given

Like I said, the players were always gonna lose from the old CBA. Their win was stooping them at 3 fingers and not taking the full fist

You and everyone else knows that was just a negotiation tactic, not a number anyone expected would be accepted. The offer got progressively worse moving forward.

Explain how the NHL's offers got worse. I saw them start at an INSANELY illogical point which just kept getting better with each "take it or leave it final offer" they put on the table.

Here's the initial offer: http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/sto ... tions.html

ESPN's reaction give a bit more detail: http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/81660 ... ning-talks

Here's the second (or third, can't remember) offer they gave the players from NHL.com: http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=643570

That's a good starting point to what they have now

[kali o.]

Explain how the NHL's offers got worse. I saw them start at an INSANELY illogical point which just kept getting better with each "take it or leave it final offer" they put on the table.

Here's the initial offer: http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/sto ... tions.html

ESPN's reaction give a bit more detail: http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/81660 ... ning-talks

Here's the second (or third, can't remember) offer they gave the players from NHL.com: http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=643570

That's a good starting point to what they have now

You just repeated the shit 1st offer no one expected would be accepted as is. Things that got worse are in the details:

- make whole
- CBA term
- The shortened season is reflected in the lower 2012/2013 revenue share and HRR.

[Zeus]

Well, let's see:

- make whole went up to $300M in the final offer from $211M in the initial. Math disagrees with you
- payroll cap went from $59.9M in the one on the NHL website to $70.2M in the agreed deal. Even with the drop to $64.3M in year 2, that's still higher since the NHL.com one says it stays flat year-to-year. Math, again, disagrees
- 5-year contract limit (NHL.com) with 5% variance year-to-year. CBA signed says 7 years or 8 for own free agents w/ 35% variance, 50% max over contract length. Math is really hating your argument right now
- proposal of limits on arbitration, entry-level contracts, and increase in time before gaining eligibility for free-agency (NHL.com), none of these limitations or changes are in the new CBA. Looks like Lady Logic is against you now too
- original offer had nothing but players changed from a Defined Contribution to Defined Benefit pension plan. Math and Lady Logic are teaming up on you here (this one is bigger than you think)

Yes, the owners "gained" in the term (6 to 10 years with opt-out after 8 years for either) but that's all they got over and above their initial offers. And that's even debatable because we're not sure yet if the owners are even gonna like the new CBA or not (they hated their hand-picked one from 7 years ago enough to lockout...again). And both parties lost with the shortened season, that ain't no win for either side. The owners moved towards the players on EVERYTHING else. They had do, their initial offers were so insane and heavy-handed we all knew they were going to.

Sorry, man, emperical evidence is destroying your arguments

[kali o.]

Well, let's see:

- make whole went up to $300M in the final offer from $211M in the initial. Math disagrees with you
- payroll cap went from $59.9M in the one on the NHL website to $70.2M in the agreed deal. Even with the drop to $64.3M in year 2, that's still higher since the NHL.com one says it stays flat year-to-year. Math, again, disagrees
- 5-year contract limit (NHL.com) with 5% variance year-to-year. CBA signed says 7 years or 8 for own free agents w/ 35% variance, 50% max over contract length. Math is really hating your argument right now
- proposal of limits on arbitration, entry-level contracts, and increase in time before gaining eligibility for free-agency (NHL.com), none of these limitations or changes are in the new CBA. Looks like Lady Logic is against you now too
- original offer had nothing but players changed from a Defined Contribution to Defined Benefit pension plan. Math and Lady Logic are teaming up on you here (this one is bigger than you think)

Yes, the owners "gained" in the term (6 to 10 years with opt-out after 8 years for either) but that's all they got over and above their initial offers. And that's even debatable because we're not sure yet if the owners are even gonna like the new CBA or not (they hated their hand-picked one from 7 years ago enough to lockout...again). And both parties lost with the shortened season, that ain't no win for either side. The owners moved towards the players on EVERYTHING else. They had do, their initial offers were so insane and heavy-handed we all knew they were going to.

Sorry, man, emperical evidence is destroying your arguments

*sigh*

You still keep going back to earlier deals to show the NHLPA somehow benefited from holding out... That's stupid. Painfully so.
- Make Whole was a provision that came later, and how nice you seem to credit that as win. Personally, I find that funny and indicative of just how little the NHLPA had to bargain with here.
- Year 1 stays the same, that's all, and that's made up in the other provisions. Again, you are counting a win from measuring against the initial offer no one took seriously...
- You have to be kidding me here. The league got exactly what they wanted here, saving greedy owners from themselves. The leagues STARTING nonsense offer included 5 year max with equal cap hits...but what you need to realize is what existed to this PRIOR. I find it hilarious you are seeing another "pew, NHLPA did OK here"....lol.

Meh, I will stop there and not even go into how the shortened season completely rails the HRR. You are confusing yourself again for an easy reason: Don't compare it to the leagues previous offer, look at where and how the counters changed. The Players would not have had to move nearly as far as they did if Fehr wasn't in the picture. The fact that you are applauding previous "OMG THIS IS BULLSHIT!!?" points as a win supports my stance.

PS - Burke is gone but I don't see that making it any more likely for Toronto to get Luongo (I don't think Toronto even has what Gillis wants).

[Zeus]

You completely missed the subject header of this entire thread, didn't you? I in no way said the NHLPA did well. They were always gonna lose, it was just a matter of how much. I honestly was surprised how much the owners gave in, especially at the end. With each successive "final" offer from the NHL, the owner gave more and more each time. The only thing they got "extra" from their initial offer(s) was an increase of the term of the CBA. Everything else, as I pointed out, got "better" for the players.

"Better" is in quotes because it's in no way good. The only real "win" that I see is the pension, it's much better now. And for the rank and file that make up a good 10% or so of the NHL (the ones making under $1M a year on a 6-year career) that's a very big deal even if most don't see it. But the players still lost big time from the last CBA that was shoved down their throats. But by waiting out they certainly got a much better deal than I thought they would. That's why I've been referring to it as 3 fingers instead of the full dry-fist. Either way, they were always gonna get fucked in the ass and they basically accepted that from the beginning.

Back to more important things: Burke getting fired does appear to give the Leafs a better chance as Kadri is someone the 'Nucks seem interested in but Burke didn't wanna give up. You're forgetting, this is for all intents and purposes a salary dump for them. Yes, they can keep Luongo even into next year and have a small amount of cap flexibility, but it still severely hinders them (http://www.capgeek.com has a good breakdown). And to get Bozak (a good fill-in for Kesler 'til he comes back then down to the third-line as a solid faceoff centre and second-unit penalty kill) and Kadri (some upside there, better with a better team) for less than the salary cap hit of Luongo even with their RFA comin' up in the summer helps them out. Don't for a second listen to Gillis' "this ain't a salary dump" and "we can keep them together here, it's no big deal" PR moves, he's just trying to see if he can suck more outta the teams (Toronto is high on the list) that are interested. Can you imagine if Corey struggles and Luongo's back there? Undermines EVERYTHING they've done. Not a good situation at all

[kali o.]

You completely missed the subject header of this entire thread, didn't you?

Nope, not really. I think *you* missed the point by blandly interpreting my comments to suggest the players deal was worse in comparison to the tabled offers as opposed to saying they were simply getting less by letting the lock out drag on.

I think you are doing some wishful thinking here -- Vancouver needs the same thing Toronto needs - more offense. I don't see the Leafs giving that up for some certainty in goal. I don't know what the new trade deadline will be, but I do expect Luongo will be traded by then. Still, if push came to shove, the Canucks could keep them both and that wouldn't be the worst thing with a shortened season.

I suppose if we are doing some wishful thinking, I'd love to see Dubinsky or E. Kane come the Canucks. Probably a zero percent chance of that occuring.

[Zeus]

Vancouver is simply not going to get a lot for Luongo. If they were, they woulda traded him by now and you'd have more than just the Leafs with real interest (if Florida wanted him he'd be gone already; Edmonton and Philly are noise at best). We're talking about a $5.33M cap hit over the next 10 years, that's not a joke for someone who's gonna be 33 in a couple of months, even if you expect him to retire after 7 or 8.

If the offer Toronto is giving them is true, Bozak and Kadri is likely much more than any other team is gonna give up. Bozak ain't a stiff, he's just not the #1 centre he's being forced to be in Toronto. He's a very good #3 centre, that's his perfect role with his ability to defend and win 55% or so of faceoffs, and can fill in as a #2 for a month or so until Kesler gets back. Can even fill in on the second-unit penalty kill and be out there with your best faceoff man in important, late-game defensive zone situations. He's actually a pretty good fit for you guys. The biggest issue with him is that he's an RFA after this season and will likely command a 3 year deal in the $3M per year or so range. But then again, maybe not with the new CBA, who knows? It'll be interesting to see what happens to mid-level 27 year-olds now.

When you're talking about Kadri, he's never been given a solid chance at all here (look up what Cherry's said about him and Wilson) and may never really get that chance which is kinda sad. On a team like Vancouver, where he can be buried on the 3rd line, he may actually do well. He is a 7th overall pick who's shown he has some skills in the AHL (been doin' well with the Marlies the last couple of years) and even flashes in the NHL as well, with the minimal minutes he's been getting.

So let's say you get those two and a 4th round pick, which is what they might be trying to add now. That's not bad depth for what is a poorly-vieled salary dump. Seriously, don't listen to Gillis, that's all this is, he's just trying to dress it up to gain more value. If he can trick teams into thinking there's more than a minimal market for Luongo, I'd be impressed. Sure, he may hold out 'til April 3rd and hedge his bets with Corey taking over full-time and hope other teams get more desperate, but I think it would be disastrous if they hung on longer than that.

And honestly, as a Canucks fan living in Vancouver (hold on, you moved recently, no?), do you really want Luongo's shadow hanging over Corey? Your media ain't much better than ours in that way, they'd be stirrin' the hornet's nest every chance they got. Imagine Corey gets off to a slow start with Lou sitting there? And I don't care how well the two goalies get along, the lack of cap space you have next year ($55M commited to 13 players; that leaves only $9M for the next 10) by committing $9M to your goaltenders means you can't do jack to help your roster out. Your team is good but they're not good enough to stand pat and add nothing as was proven last year. By getting some depth players and decreasing your payroll in the meantime (you'd trade two forwards and a backup goalie for less cap hit than Luongo) you all of a sudden can take on some salary to add depth for a playoff run since you'd have $10M or so for 8 players. For a team that's OK in its top 6 forwards and top 4 defensemen, that's not bad.

Your dream of getting anyone close to Jake Gardiner's calibre is more than wishful thinking. That contract makes that a hugely unlikely scenario unless you find a super-desperate GM. Considering Nonis was Burke's right-hand man, Gardiner is probably over-valued by the Leafs and no chance you'd get him unless that balloons into a much bigger deal a la Jays-Marlins deal. If you are able to get someone like him, go to a casino and bet it all on black 'cause you'd be unstoppable with that luck :-)

[kali o.]

The canucks can't hold 9 million for netminders into 2014 but on a shortened season that simply isn't out of the realm of a possibilty. Neither of the players you are suggesting really fill the gap the Canucks need, nor do I think the Leafs can afford to give up Bozak (who are you suggesting they replace him with?). I'm not totally writing off the possibility, afterall, rumours this strong exist for a reason, I just don't see it working out. But as far as Luongo goes, the only people that don't think he is worth the 5 mil are morons who aren't looking at his actual performance. 5 mil for putting a championship goalie in your team for at least four years? There are teams that want and need that, if only to groom a future prospect.

Last time I talked to Evander, all he cared about was playing for a Canadian team. More than anything, it was his girlfriend that wanted to live in Vancouver I think. I am sure he would make the move, and it doesn't seem to be working out in winnipeg -- but I doubt Luongo would sign off on that trade nor do I think Gillis wants a Kane in the locker room....still, I can dream, can't I?

[Zeus]

Bozak is really a third-line centre, second on a poor team. Leafs already have Grabovski on their second line (1A, really). What they need is someone to fit in between the big-time wingers they have with Kessel and Lupul. They tried it with Connelly but he didn't work out too well. Bozak sorta works but it's more the other two carrying him as he drops off HUGE when he's not with them. They already have two centres for their third- and fourth-lines in McClement and Steckle. Bozak just doesn't fit anywhere, especially if Colbourne is almost ready.

What they Leafs will do is use their plethora of cap space next year ($23M or so for 10 players since 13 are already signed) to go after someone. They don't have anyone who's comin' up as a #1, and Kadri's not gonna be that, but they will certainly have the ability to buy one.

If you're lucky enough to get Kane (6 year contract at around $6M per season, no?) outta the equation you take him and run. If Luongo's deal was for another 6 years maybe they'd get him but those extra 4 years of cap hit are a big deal (no guarantee he retires and at least 2 years after 38....). That's gonna severly hinder the return no matter what Gillis says. He clearly thinks there's a chance he can get more than Bozak and Kadri and may be willing to wait until April 3rd to see if anyone gets real desperate. But that's a decent return and with no rumours anywhere of anything else, it seems to be more wishful thinking than anything.

[Zeus]

Heh, Gillis is starting to get pissed at the nagging of the Toronto media

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=413886

[kali o.]

Heh, Gillis is starting to get pissed at the nagging of the Toronto media

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=413886

Pissed? Sounds like he just acknowledged Toronto media won't dictate a trade. Sorry Toronto, you are not getting a championship goalie and a ride to post season for free.

[Zeus]

Heh, Gillis is starting to get pissed at the nagging of the Toronto media

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=413886

Pissed? Sounds like he just acknowledged Toronto media won't dictate a trade. Sorry Toronto, you are not getting a championship goalie and a ride to post season for free.

That's kinda what I meant. He's had to answer the Toronto media so damned much recently regarding this he's basically sayin' "no, it'll happen the way I want it to".

I really am interested in seeing what they end up doin' with Lou. It'll be interesting to see if any other mid-level teams step up to the plate and offer him something before April 3rd. Just doesn't seem to be a lot of interest in giving up much right now, even from Toronto.

[kali o.]

That's kinda what I meant. He's had to answer the Toronto media so damned much recently regarding this he's basically sayin' "no, it'll happen the way I want it to".

I really am interested in seeing what they end up doin' with Lou. It'll be interesting to see if any other mid-level teams step up to the plate and offer him something before April 3rd. Just doesn't seem to be a lot of interest in giving up much right now, even from Toronto.

With an optional buyout in 3 years, CBA in 8 years, when Lou decides to retire and reviewing the cap potential (even under the new CBA), I think it's the couch GMs making a bigger issue out of the contract than it really is. I think the interest is there, just not the motivation. As this shortened season progresses, I imagine a number of teams will step up, when it becomes an issue of saving a potential post season appearance.

[Zeus]

And that very well may be. If we assume he retires in the next 7 or 8 years, the cap hit ain't too prohibitive and become less so over time, and you get some more desperation from the GMs who are kind of in a holding patterns.....yeah, things could heat up. I still don't think they're gonna get more than 2 prospects and a 3rd or 4th rounder at best, though. You ain't gonna get a Kane or anything out of him, that's for sure

[Zeus]

Guess they can't get rid of Lou now, can they........

[kali o.]

Guess they can't get rid of Lou now, can they........

Never trust a ginger...

[Zeus]

Guess they can't get rid of Lou now, can they........

Never trust a ginger...

Freakin' soulless ghost people.....

There was an article in the Star today about how Gillis has "something in place" for Luongo and it's "not what you think" and they're just waiting for the other team to do something with a specific player. And he even said something like "people are trying to make us take a salary in return, we don't want to". I truly believe that's the reason he hasn't been traded yet, people are trying to make a salary dump trade not a "get an all-star goalie" trade whereas he sees it as the latter.

I figured the only real (slim) chance the Leafs had was before the season started. Pretty much no chance now. I'm curious what he's able to get for him with the way the new CBA is set up.