Confirmed with Link: Lupul extended - 5 years x 5.25m

[4evaBlue]

Unlike, say, the 'Kessel trade' which is inarguably the worst atrocity in human history. I literally would not be surprised if the international court of justice went after Burke.

Thank you for that.

 

[Disgruntled Observer*]

I'll never understand this 'richness' argument. It's completely irrelevant.

Spending $16 million more in players than a substantial amount of the competition is 'irrelevent'?

Spending dramatically more than any other team on scouting is 'irrelevent'?

Having a ridiculously more expensive front office of elite execs is 'irrelevant'?

I'm goin to give you the benefit of the doubt an assume that you don't know what the word 'irrelevent' means.

 

[Yosho]

Spending $16 million more in players than a substantial amount of the competition is 'irrelevent'?

Spending dramatically more than any other team on scouting is 'irrelevent'?

Having a ridiculously more expensive front office of elite execs is 'irrelevant'?

I'm goin to give you the benefit of the doubt an assume that you don't know what the word 'irrelevent' means.

1) They spend $16 million more than no one.
2) Would you rather them spend less on scouting?
3) Would you rather them spend less on office execs?

I'm 'goin' to assume that it's past your bed time.

 

[Disgruntled Observer*]

I'm 'goin' to assume that it's past your bed time.

Some GM's are given a budget of near the cap basement.
The leafs gm is given a budget of the cap ceiling.

So I reiterate (and I'm SHOCKED that I need to do this because it's such common sense) that the leads have a 16 million advantage over a substantial amount of the competition.

And I'm GLAD that mlse lets the leafs spend more on scouting.
And I'm GLAD that mlse let's the leads spend more on their front office.

It's not mlse that I'm mad at.

IT'S THE ****ING G ****ING M'S!!!!!

They have SOOO MANY MORE ADVANTAGES than many other gms.

WHY CAN'T THEY CAPITALIZE ON THEM???

 

[Joey Hoser]

 

[Disgruntled Observer*]

1) They spend $16 million more than no one.
2) Would you rather them spend less on scouting?
3) Would you rather them spend less on office execs?

I'm 'goin' to assume that it's past your bed time.

You switched your argument from 'the leafs don't have a financial advantage'
to
'would you rather the leads not have a financial advantage?'

Do you believe that tha is a mature way to argue a point?

 

[Yosho]

Some GM's are given a budget of near the cap basement.
The leafs gm is given a budget of the cap ceiling.

So I reiterate (and I'm SHOCKED that I need to do this because it's such common sense) that the leads have a 16 million advantage over a substantial amount of the competition.

And I'm GLAD that mlse lets the leafs spend more on scouting.
And I'm GLAD that mlse let's the leads spend more on their front office.

It's not mlse that I'm mad at.

IT'S THE ****ING G ****ING M'S!!!!!

They have SOOO MANY MORE ADVANTAGES than many other gms.

WHY CAN'T THEY CAPITALIZE ON THEM???

Again, they spend $16 million more than no one. I get your point about the GM's though, and I'm not disputing the horrendous failures over the past 7-8 years.

You switched your argument from 'the leafs don't have a financial advantage'
to
'would you rather the leads not have a financial advantage?'

Do you believe that tha is a mature way to argue a point?

I didn't change my argument at all. The only financial advantage the Leafs have is the non-cap related spending. Every team has to play by the cap rules. It's parity, and it's why we don't see dynasties anymore. There are no advantages on the financial side of the game. This isn't baseball - we aren't the Yankees.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

Factually incorrect.
The leafs won the cup the year PREVIOUS to the blues joining the league. So they both share the same humiliating drought of 44 years.

Nope. The Leafs were Stanley Cup champs until March 31, 1968. Look it up if you want.

 

[Disgruntled Observer*]

Nope. The Leafs were Stanley Cup champs until March 31, 1968. Look it up if you want.

The last time the leafs win the cuP was in 1967.

The Blues joined the league the following season.

So they share the same drought.

I mean... I'm used to hearing leaf fan spin and all... But this is a whole new low...

 

[rojac]

The last time the leafs win the cuP was in 1967.

The Blues joined the league the following season.

So they share the same drought.

I mean... I'm used to hearing leaf fan spin and all... But this is a whole new low...

Wow, DO, for a change, I actually agree with you completely.

 

[pspot]

my concern is like the muskoka 5 the Leafs are locking up a core that hasn't accomplished anything.

the failure to add top end talent inflates these second tier players

 

[Disgruntled Observer*]

Again, they spend $16 million more than no one. I get your point about the GM's though, and I'm not disputing the horrendous failures over the past 7-8 years.



I didn't change my argument at all. The only financial advantage the Leafs have is the non-cap related spending. Every team has to play by the cap rules. It's parity, and it's why we don't see dynasties anymore. There are no advantages on the financial side of the game. This isn't baseball - we aren't the Yankees.

I don't fully understand wha you're trying to say...

Is your argument that there isn't a $16 million difference between the cap ceiling and floor?

Or are you arguing that $16 million (which is more than most teams entire 1st line) isn't a substantial advantage?

I think both arguments are utterly asinine... but I'm still curious which asinine argument you are making.
Just for ***** and giggles.

 

[Yosho]

I don't fully understand wha you're trying to say...

Is your argument that there isn't a $16 million difference between the cap ceiling and floor?

Or are you arguing that $16 million (which is more than most teams entire 1st line) isn't a substantial advantage?

I think both arguments are utterly asinine... but I'm still curious which asinine argument you are making.
Just for ***** and giggles.

You're arguing that the Leafs spent $16 million more than a "substantial" amount of teams. I'm saying that they don't.

 

[Chandrashekhar Limit]

Can we even use the amnesty for players that were signed under the new CBA ?

Also even if we can i don't think the new owners would favourably with pissing away money .

I have not read anything that states the contract has to be done during the old CBA.

So you don't think the new owners would buy out a useless player and just pay him, instead of him taking up our cap space and being useless?

I don't think so.

 

[achtungbaby]

You're arguing that the Leafs spent $16 million more than a "substantial" amount of teams. I'm saying that they don't.

Who cares what you, or any joe blow on these boards, think? Go to Cap geek or NHLNumbers and look it up. Do some research and support your claim. Then go pick me up a philly cheese steak, I'm hungry.

 

[Yosho]

Who cares what you, or any joe blow on these boards, think? Go to Cap geek or NHLNumbers and look it up. Do some research and support your claim. Then go pick me up a philly cheese steak, I'm hungry.

... Capgeek is where I formed my argument. Thanks, though.

 

[achtungbaby]

... Capgeek is where I formed my argument. Thanks, though.

Anytime. Now where's my sandwich?

 

[tzinc]

typical Leafs is Burke still here?
overpaying for a guy who is 29 years old and has had 1 good season and the length 5 years

now they will be trying to dump him in a year or two

clueless

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

The last time the leafs win the cuP was in 1967.

The Blues joined the league the following season.

So they share the same drought.

I mean... I'm used to hearing leaf fan spin and all... But this is a whole new low...

The champ always remains the champ until someone knocks them off. Don't believe me? Ask anyone who the Stanley Cup champ is. Bet you'll get the same answer from everyone.

 

[bunjay]

typical Leafs is Burke still here?
overpaying for a guy who is 29 years old and has had 1 good season and the length 5 years

now they will be trying to dump him in a year or two

clueless

I think I could name an example of just about every team in the NHL taking comparable risks, just off the top of my head.

If you waited for a sure-thing every time you handed out a contract, you wouldn't have a roster.

 

[achtungbaby]

I think I could name an example of just about every team in the NHL taking comparable risks, just off the top of my head.

If you waited for a sure-thing every time you handed out a contract, you wouldn't have a roster.

Suddenly two years at $5 million a season for Hemsky doesn't look so bad. A lot people on this board were unmerciful when that contract was handed out. Once again, I'm fine with the money, just think we might be regretting the term.

 

[bunjay]

Suddenly two years at $5 million a season for Hemsky doesn't look so bad. A lot people on this board were unmerciful when that contract was handed out. Once again, I'm fine with the money, just think we might be regretting the term.

Leafs are just hedging their bets. If Lupul produces like he did last season, it becomes a long-term bargain. If he produces at a 60 point pace, he got about market value if not slightly less. It would take quite a dip in production for it to be a disaster.


If he continues to have injury issues, but not bad enough that he can be put on the LTIR, then it's a disaster. But you take that risk with anybody.

 

[Garfinkel1]

Lupul

What;s his deal?

 

[7even]

$5.25m

 

[CanadasTeam]