Luongo deal could be a big one
According to a report on Montreal radio station CKAC, the Canucks and Luongo have settled on a front-end loaded 12-year contract worth $64 million with only minor details to be finalized. If correct, the cap hit would be $5.33 million.
The 30-year-old netminder has one year remaining on his current contract. He will be paid $7.5 million although his cap hit is only $6.75 million, the average of the four-year deal he signed in 2006.
I suppose we should be surprised that a player six months from his 31st birthday is potentially getting a 12-year extension, but how can we be at this point? We've seen these all before, from Marian Hossa to Johan Franzen, Henrik Zetterberg and Vinny Lecavalier.
Why not a goalie? And why not Luongo? And why not until he's 52?
I'm already on record as saying that this is a loophole that should and will be closed in negotiations on the next collective bargaining agreement, but until that point, it likely makes sense for GMs to continue getting while the getting's good. My friends and family members back home in B.C. (almost all Canucks fans) bellyache once in a while about Luongo's play, but the fact is he's been one of the most consistent netminders in the NHL the past decade (I always send them this link), and on a franchise that's had as many issues in the crease as Vancouver, there are some decent reasons for inking him to this deal.
After all, any success Luongo's going to have in his career would then, likely, have to come in a Canucks uniform, and given it appears the best is yet to come, a $5.33-million cap hit is going to look incredibly reasonable well into the future.
I'd be surprised if at some point Luongo doesn't start winning Vezinas and having some postseason success, if only because his regular season feats have been so impressive for someone who has been, for the most part, stuck without much of a lineup in front of him. His dollar value will only rise as the accolades pile up. (It's worth noting that Martin Brodeur didn't win his first Vezina until age 31.)
Besides, if you're going to gamble on a goaltender, shouldn't he be the one?
(Everything I've said in the past about long-term contracts still stands of course. The risk of injury is considerable, especially at 35 and beyond, but this is likely going to be a gamble we see more and more teams continue to take. The benefit in terms of such a low cap hit over a sustained period is just too enticing for many to turn down, risks be damned.)
UPDATE The team confirmed Luongo was signing a 12-year extension on Sept. 2.
0 recs |
27 comments
| Add comment
|
Comments
Wasn’t Hossa’s similar contract being investigated for intent of early retirement being discussed when it was created? If these are the real terms of the contract, Luongo could come under fire for that too possibly… unless the Hossa issue was already resolved (I’m not aware whether or not it was).
by two headed monster on Sep 1, 2009 2:19 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
True
But that most likely won’t negate any of the contracts signed before the investigation finishes
by Tommelot on Sep 1, 2009 3:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I figure if Luongo comes out and publicly states he’s going to play as long as he can, the NHL won’t deem the contract to be illegal. Thanks to Zombie Chelios, players have at least one ready-made defence for long-term contracts.
Supporter of the Sergei Berezin "Give and Go" - You give me puck, then you go to hell
by bkblades on Sep 1, 2009 4:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
NHLers in general are in much better shape than they were 10, 20, or 30 years ago, and we’re seeing a lot more players continue to produce decent numbers into their late thirties. Zombie Chelios is an exception even amongst the greybeard set, but I think we’re going to see a lot more guys make it past 40 in the coming years. Maybe 42 won’t be such an unreasonable number for retirement ten years from now, when most of these deals expire.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there)
by Doogie2K on Sep 1, 2009 5:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The question is also whether or not the player is good enough to be a backup on a team with bad cash flow and a need to generate a higher cap number than actual payroll.
by J. Michael Neal on Sep 2, 2009 12:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not necessarily. He can still retire and make the whole contract go away. Even if the NHL decides that it is a circumvention and makes it stay on the cap after he retires, the Canucks can still deal him before he retires, and then Cash Strapped Franchise #7 will have $5M+ on the cap free of charge.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there)
by Doogie2K on Sep 2, 2009 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
it has
both a NMC and a NTC.
Good luck with trading him.
"Life is just a place where we spend time between games. Hockey is where we live, where we can best meet and overcome pain and wrong and death." - Fred Shero
by Karina on Sep 2, 2009 2:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If he’s retired, I imagine he won’t have a problem waiving them.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Sep 2, 2009 3:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
James is right
This doesn’t even upset me anymore, nor am I surprised.
by Afino on Sep 1, 2009 7:16 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I’m just upset Peters wasn’t signed to a 12 year deal. :p
The population of Pominville keeps rising!
by Blackcapricorn on Sep 1, 2009 9:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He’s only 29, which makes him too young for that.
by Afino on Sep 1, 2009 9:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Even if I don’t agree with these kinds of contracts for goalies – they are too interchangeable, there are too many good ones to overcommit to one and they often rise unexpectedly and fall unexpectedly – I definitely agree with this:
Besides, if you’re going to gamble on a goaltender, shouldn’t he be the one?
by Malurous on Sep 1, 2009 7:47 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Blatantly obvious cap circumvention if true, but since the league didn’t put a clamp on it at the start, it’s too late to close that door now.
by Resolute on Sep 1, 2009 8:51 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Doesn’t the word “Dipietro” belong somewhere in this post?
http://www.battleofcali.com/
by Earl Sleek on Sep 1, 2009 9:27 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Heh, I didn’t want to be the one …
… to point out DiPietro’s injury curse began after he signed the deal, just before his 25th birthday.
In all seriousness, I wouldn’t bet long-term on any goalie into his late 30s, but if they get a palatable cap hit that fits Sundin Sedins and such in the mean time, it may prove worth it. Or it may suck.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
by Dominik on Sep 1, 2009 10:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
At least Luongo’s a proven No. 1 and one of the best goalies in the league the past six or seven years.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Sep 1, 2009 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, but I wasn’t bringing up the name just as a talent comparison — just seems an obvious sort of answer to your question of “Why not a goalie?”
“Uh, Dipietro.”
http://www.battleofcali.com/
by Earl Sleek on Sep 1, 2009 2:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not sure his position is what makes the Dipeitro contract a bad one though.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Sep 1, 2009 2:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, year after year teams get surprised by who their #1 turns out to be. Jonas Hiller, Simeon Varlamov, either kid named Mason — these are some reasons why I might not commit a decade to one guy in the net, no matter the accomplishments-to-date.
Goalies are unique in a sense because playing one guy means not playing another (not like forwards or d-men), so I guess that’s why I think it’s a bigger risk. If it’s a bad bet, you can’t drop Luongo to the second line.
http://www.battleofcali.com/
by Earl Sleek on Sep 1, 2009 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Especially when the accomplishments are, well, lacking.
Though he will (hopefully?) begin to change that in February. And hopefully not in April. ;)
by Resolute on Sep 1, 2009 10:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well Luongo better not pull a Dipietro...
That’s the problem with giving goalies long-term deals. They’re more injury-prone and goalies are different than forwards and d-men; once they lose their magic, it’s pretty much gone.
Just look at Marty Turco.
by Brad_Richards_Rocks on Sep 1, 2009 9:58 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I dunno, I think DiPietro’s problem is some combination of poor mechanics, poor conditioning, or built-in defect. Most goalies don’t see that many injuries to their hips and knees that young.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there)
by Doogie2K on Sep 1, 2009 5:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Karma perhaps? I’ve heard more than once that DiPietro is a grade A d-bag.
I've seen enough to know that I've seen too much.
by Smoboy41 on Sep 1, 2009 9:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He wasn’t overwhelmingly popular in his one year at BU.
by J. Michael Neal on Sep 2, 2009 12:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
thing is
I’m pretty sure that Gillis has come out in the past and said he’s against these kinds of contracts.
It’d be interesting if he made an exception for Luongo.
"Life is just a place where we spend time between games. Hockey is where we live, where we can best meet and overcome pain and wrong and death." - Fred Shero
by Karina on Sep 1, 2009 2:41 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I had the same thought. I’d be happy if he signed some sort of ridiculous front loaded deal, but it is very much against what Gillis says he prefers.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Sep 1, 2009 9:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s a great point. I have heard that and should have brought it up here.
I could see them making an exception here though. Luongo’s cap hit is going to be very big if this is a short-term deal.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Sep 1, 2009 9:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.
On Facebook? Use Connect to join SB Nation. Share insights with fans and friends.- » Create a new SB Nation account
- » Already registered with SB Nation? Log in!

by 



















