Proposal: Lucic($1M retention) for Quick, who says no?

Who says no?


  • Total voters
    371

YP44

Registered User
Jan 30, 2012
27,003
7,371
Calgary, AB
5.8, and less in actual salary from next year on out (3.5, 3, etc).

Which really doesn't matter because we don't need cap space and his isn't preventing us from making any moves.

"disaster" isn't the word at all. At worst he's a good influence, leader, and legacy that isn't harming us from doing anything else.

the OP has retention of $1M to lucic
 

BatVader

"nothing is true; everything is permitted"
May 16, 2015
12,838
11,972
Imperial Gotham
Lucic says no
F170A691-92D5-46AD-ABE8-13BEE2AECEDA.jpeg
 
Last edited:

Nemesis Prime

Registered User
Jun 29, 2010
6,879
5,355
London, ON
The Flames organization, their fans and the media, they are quite happy with Lucic so I don’t see why they would do this.

If his contract was hard to move on the Oilers it's definitely not going any places now, especially after seeing how the original trade has been working out.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

blankall

Registered User
Jul 4, 2007
14,935
5,263
5.8, and less in actual salary from next year on out (3.5, 3, etc).

Which really doesn't matter because we don't need cap space and his isn't preventing us from making any moves.

"disaster" isn't the word at all. At worst he's a good influence, leader, and legacy that isn't harming us from doing anything else.

The trade proposal calls for an additional 1 million in cap in retention on Lucic. 6.8 million in dead cap is a disaster for a competing team.

Lucic contributes something, so his current cap his is not entirely dead space.

I don't really care if the Kings want to keep Quick. He's not a player the Flames are pursuing in any way.
 

kilowatt

the vibes are not immaculate
Jan 1, 2009
18,357
20,894
If you are paying 6.8 million for that, it's a disaster.

Lucic although horribly overpaid is still making strong contributions through his physical game. A bad goalie, on the other hand, has a negative effect on the team.

Rittich looks amazing so far. No need to trade for Quick.

$5.8, and the Kings aren’t close to the cap nor are they contending, so who cares? Why would we do that to the greatest goalie in our franchise history?
 

krutovsdonut

eeyore
Sep 25, 2016
16,772
9,427
i hope that this thread starts a trend of other fanbases desperately trying to dump their goalies at any cost right after they play the canucks.
 

DFF

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
22,275
6,525
Can someone help explain to me why the flames want another old overpaid goalie that can't play anymore?
 

Choralone

Registered User
Oct 16, 2010
4,998
3,932
Burbank, CA
i hope that this thread starts a trend of other fanbases desperately trying to dump their goalies at any cost right after they play the canucks.

It wasn't a Kings fan who started this thread, genius. I distinctly remember the Kings dropping an 8 on Roberto Luon8o, on a much better Vancouver squad. No one has any pretensions that this is a good Kings team this year.
 

Mr Tadakichi

Never Reads OP Before Posting
Nov 23, 2014
4,515
5,145
Despite the ribbing the Flames get for the Lucic thing, he probably doesn't cost them games like a bad goalie would. Not worth it imo
 

kilowatt

the vibes are not immaculate
Jan 1, 2009
18,357
20,894
If people think Quick is the biggest issue on this Kings roster, then it is obvious they don’t watch or follow the Kings. We have more than enough cap space to eat Quick’s contract. We could bring up Cal Petersen, have him and Campbell split games the rest of the season, and leave Quick in the press box, and still have plenty of cap space to spare.

Quick is a competitor, a mentor, and a great locker room presence. Zero need to trade him for Lucic.
 

Stimpythecat

Registered User
Jul 1, 2015
3,167
2,316
Kings say no for the reasons other kings fans have stated.


On a side note, Lucic's NMC is not a bar. Last I checked, Lucic loves LA and lives here during the offseason. He trains with local players. For his 30th birthday, it was mostly kings players in attendance.
 

FameFlame069

Registered User
Oct 2, 2017
2,992
546
Flames - Looch + Brodie + Talbot + Two 1st's in the following three years

Kings - Carter(5M) + Quick(4.5M) + Martinez


I'd personally want Carter for the C depth

so carter for lucic + two first round picks? sure

Have you watched any of the games this year? I've been quite happy with Looch's contributions so far. He also looks like he's found a previously lost edge of his game again and is more motivated to play. Carter on the other hand will do absolutely nothing for us at this point. He's not a big physical presence and isn't good enough for our top 6 anymore He's also 3 years older for only 1 less year of cap hit. IMO if we are choosing between the 2 to play bottom 6 minutes I'm keeping Lucic and my 2 firsts 15/10 times.

Also, idk why you think Carter would fetch more when Brown is the significantly better player.
 

Johnnybegood13

Registered User
Jul 11, 2003
8,711
968
Not so much his attitude. I think it's fair to predict that the Kings are going to be rebuilding somewhat for the foreseeable future, whereas the Flames will challenge for their division. So, why would Lucic waive his NMC to go to a rebuilding team?
Why would Seattle take him? I'm sure in 2 years there will be lots of better options to waste $5.25m on.
 

Ivan13

Not posting anymore
May 3, 2011
26,141
7,095
Zagreb, Croatia
With Quick there is hope we are looking at a goalie who is beyond frustrated with the team defense in front of him, in turn making him just go through the motions (see Craig Anderson in Colorado), and that he could bounce back on a team that can contend. With Lučić there is hope he can punch someone in the face every 20 or so games.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->