News: Luongo retires, Vancouver hit with cap recapture penalty

[justafan22]

The Canucks’ biggest concern might be Roberto Luongo. I don’t profess to know Luongo’s final decision, but outright retirement — instead of going on the long-term injury list — is a legit possibility. Should that happen, they are looking at a cap recapture penalty of approximately $3 million per year for the next three years, with Florida at just over $1 million a year. That number would be annoying to the Canucks.

31 Thoughts: Could short-term deals break RFA stalemates? - Sportsnet.ca:

Update:

Click to read more...

 

[kanucks25]

Luongo will probably just LTIR. And even if he actually does retire, the Canucks will fight the penalty.

Can't see it being a problem.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Luongo will probably just LTIR. And even if he actually does retire, the Canucks will fight the penalty.

Can't see it being a problem.

I don't see how they can fight it. They'll get tagged with that no matter what they do but I doubt Luongo retires instead of just doing LTIR.

 

[Canadian Canuck]

I don't see how they can fight it. They'll get tagged with that no matter what they do but I doubt Luongo retires instead of just doing LTIR.

Because why should they be penalized for something that wasn’t a rule in the CBA until after the contract was signed? Stupid rule honestly.

 

[Seanaconda]

I don't see how they can fight it. They'll get tagged with that no matter what they do but I doubt Luongo retires instead of just doing LTIR.

I could see him retiring just cuz it would be better for Florida. If he retires this year it's better for the Canucks vs him retiring with a year or two left

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Because why should they be penalized for something that wasn’t a rule in the CBA until after the contract was signed? Stupid rule honestly.

That's not going to get you far when the determining factor are the people who made the rule to begin with. lol

 

[Canadian Canuck]

That's not going to get you far when the determining factor are the people who made the rule to begin with. lol

I don’t know, either way I think Luongo just goes on LTIR. Can the Canucks aquire him then let him retire? Will that make a difference to the cap hit?

 

[Jimmi McJenkins]

Because why should they be penalized for something that wasn’t a rule in the CBA until after the contract was signed? Stupid rule honestly.

It was a stupid contract, so they get penalized for that.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I could see him retiring just cuz it would be better for Florida. If he retires this year it's better for the Canucks vs him retiring with a year or two left

We'll see but getting money for nothing is hard to turn down.

 

[Liferleafer]

Because why should they be penalized for something that wasn’t a rule in the CBA until after the contract was signed? Stupid rule honestly.

Because it's a rule now? That both the NHL and NHLPA agreed upon?

 

[BHD]

It was a stupid contract, so they get penalized for that.

That seems pretty arbitrary to me.

 

[Szechwan]

That's not going to get you far when the determining factor are the people who made the rule to begin with. lol

The fact that there was no grandfather clause in that rule is one of the most unprofessional things I've seen from this league.

The NHL rubber stamped all of the backdiving contracts, then at a later date decided they were illegal and penalized them retroactively. If they had a problem, they should have just outright declined the contract in the first place - that's just awful business ethics.

I would be surprised if the Canucks are tagging with the full penalty at the end of the day.

 

[DeltaSwede]

I still don't understand why this is even a thing. The rule came after the contract was signed. Meaning the contract was signed within the rulebook at the time of signing it. How can you punish a team for following the rules after the fact?

3 million a year is more than annoying - it's handicapping a team.

Weren't there other player contracts subjected to the same thing as well that they somehow managed to get out of? Was it Kovalchuk and Mike Richards?

 

[njdevil26]

The Devils have been hit with a cap recapture penalty every year because of the Kovalchuk contract which was also before the CBA... so if the Canucks get out of hit somehow, the Devils have a legitimate gripe.

 

[PG Canuck]

It was a stupid contract, so they get penalized for that.

Except they really shouldn't get penalized for it.

 

[Szechwan]

It was a stupid contract, so they get penalized for that.

Agreed, the NHL never should have allowed it.

But they did. So you don't get to decide later that it was bad.

The Devils have been hit with a cap recapture penalty every year because of the Kovalchuk contract which was also before the CBA... so if the Canucks get out of hit somehow, the Devils have a legitimate gripe.

Absolutely, but the difference between the Devils 250k and 3m/year is pretty huge.

 

[Liferleafer]

I still don't understand why this is even a thing. The rule came after the contract was signed. Meaning the contract was signed within the rulebook at the time of signing it. How can you punish a team for following the rules after the fact?

3 million a year is more than annoying - it's handicapping a team.

Weren't there other player contracts subjected to the same thing as well that they somehow managed to get out of? Was it Kovalchuk and Mike Richards?

Because in the current CBA, it has been put in that any previous contracts that circumvented the cap will be punished.

Come on guys...the CBA is a legal agreed upon contract, there's no "getting out of it".

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Someone help me understand, what's the nuance (in terms of comfort for Luongo) to officially retiring vs LTIRetiring? He would only be walking away from 3.6M in total salary over the next 3 years if he did officially retire. But I mean i'd rather be 3.6M richer than not...

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I don’t know, either way I think Luongo just goes on LTIR. Can the Canucks aquire him then let him retire? Will that make a difference to the cap hit?

He probably does just go to LTIR. I don't think going back to Vancouver to retire will change much of the cap hit because it's still based on retiring during the low-paying years of his contract.

 

[The Pucks]

The fact that there was no grandfather clause in that rule is one of the most unprofessional things I've seen from this league.

The NHL rubber stamped all of the backdiving contracts, then at a later date decided they were illegal and penalized them retroactively. If they had a problem, they should have just outright declined the contract in the first place - that's just awful business ethics.

I would be surprised if the Canucks are tagging with the full penalty at the end of the day.

what people dont seem to realize is Luongo would have pretty good trade value for a cap basement team in a trade. With a cap hit of 5.33 and actual cash payout of 1.618 the first year and 1 million the last 2 years, there is some real value to certain teams to own that contract.

 

[Horse McHindu]

That's not going to get you far when the determining factor are the people who made the rule to begin with. lol

You can lol all you want, but the fact of the matter is that those guys will get their faces caved in if and when the Canucks take them to court.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

The fact that there was no grandfather clause in that rule is one of the most unprofessional things I've seen from this league.

The NHL rubber stamped all of the backdiving contracts, then at a later date decided they were illegal and penalized them retroactively. If they had a problem, they should have just outright declined the contract in the first place - that's just awful business ethics.

I would be surprised if the Canucks are tagging with the full penalty at the end of the day.

Teams knew the league didn't like those contracts and signed them anyway. It may be awful ethically but there isn't anything the Canucks can actually do about it. They just need to hope that Luongo and Florida agree to LTIR the duration of the contract if he decides not to play. They made those rules and penalties specifically to deter this practice because it was cap circumvention. I don't know why anyone believes that they wouldn't pay the full penalty when the league intended on this being penalized.

 

[Liferleafer]

You can lol all you want, but the fact of the matter is that those guys will get their faces caved in if and when the Canucks take them to court.

Both the league and the NHLPA agreed to that CBA. They have no leg to stand on in court. If owners of teams that had those contracts where against recapture...the time to fight it was during the negotiation of the CBA.

 

[uncleben]

Because why should they be penalized for something that wasn’t a rule in the CBA until after the contract was signed? Stupid rule honestly.

Teams knew the league didn't like those contracts and signed them anyway. It may be awful ethically but there isn't anything the Canucks can actually do about it. They just need to hope that Luongo and Florida agree to LTIR the duration of the contract if he decides not to play. They made those rules and penalties specifically to deter this practice because it was cap circumvention. I don't know why anyone believes that they wouldn't pay the full penalty when the league intended on this being penalized.

And the League approved them anyway, because they were within the rules of the CBA.

One of my biggest complaints about the NHL right now, tbh - the NHL retroactively punishing teams for signing deals that were within the laws of the CBA and that the League itself previously signed off on.

I get implementing the rule, for the most part, but already signed contracts 1000% should've been grandfathered in.

 

[SUBdrewgANS]

either way--I'll miss his masks.. one of the few net-minders who actually had good masks.