Should Leafs retain 50% of Lupul's Salary?
- Thread starter Cor
- Start date
Honestly, this is one of the brighter ideas I've heard lately. Retaining on 3 years (likely 2.5 if he goes at the TDD) of Lupul isn't so bad and I bet it'd be the difference between a Lucic-type return (if Lupes stays healthy) and scraps.
Lupul at 50% retained wouldn't be bad for the next 3 years as the Leafs will be rebuilding during that time frame.
I would expect something like 2 1sts in return for Lupul at 50% retained however.
I would expect something like 2 1sts in return for Lupul at 50% retained however.
WilliamNylander
Papi's home
- Jul 26, 2012
- 12,896
- 2,608
For the right deal we definitely should.
If it's a bad return then we might as well keep him. We won't need the cap space for three years anyways.
If it's a bad return then we might as well keep him. We won't need the cap space for three years anyways.
Nithoniniel
Registered User
I think I value Lupul much lower than people in this thread do. He's an injury-prone winger with big deficiencies in his overall game and declining production with a big contract. Retaining 50% makes him tradeable, not a wet dream for GMs everywhere.
I'd rather be careful with the retention spots either way. Not all that interested in locking one of them up for 3 years just to get rid of Lupul.
I'd rather be careful with the retention spots either way. Not all that interested in locking one of them up for 3 years just to get rid of Lupul.
His value is piss poor right now and it is not because of a lack of skill or impact when he plays it is entirely due to injury. Personally I would keep Lupul around for another season and see if he can stay healthy...if he can and we still don't want him around we can trade him then hopefully for a better return.
Finnish your Czech
J'aime Les offres hostiles
I don't really want to trade Lupul right now, as I think he can redeem himself this season if he doesn't get injured. I'm open to retaining on JVR or Bozak, though.
Phaneuf and Kessel: I would do it, but I don't think teams would pay the added price for retained salary.
Phaneuf and Kessel: I would do it, but I don't think teams would pay the added price for retained salary.
SeaOfBlue
The Passion That Unites Us All
- Aug 1, 2013
- 35,591
- 16,773
Sure, if we get an increased return. However, it's got to be worth it. I don't agree with the notion that he's worth piss just because he had a bad 2nd half under Horachek. That happened to most players, not just him. GM's are going to look at his first half (19 points in 29 games) as hard as they did the second half (2 points in 26 games). Also remember coming off of that 2nd injury, which was 100% Lucic's fault, was hard. Komarov was hot like Lupul was but slowed down after getting head shot by Ovechkin.
But we'll see.
But we'll see.
Leafidelity
Best Sport/Worst League
That's tough. Yeah we'd be able to move him, but still not for a lot. And we'd be paying it till 2017/2018. If we go the salary retention route, I'd rather use it on a player who's value jumps a lot more like Dion or to a lesser extent Bozak.
Not a bad idea. It's not even that much money so it's unlikely to be a difference maker in terms of signing someone like Stamkos.
However, I think the best thing to do is keep him on the Leafs this year and trade him either at the deadline or next offseason. From what I understand of his contract, it's much better in the last two years (and we can still retain if needed). If we put him on the top line and number 1 PP, he could score a lot of goals and his value would rise a lot. The risk is that he gets injured and lowers his value even more. At least right now, he's healthy.
But we also have to look at the opportunity cost of his $2.6.
Our goal come July 1st is to make our trades, then try to hit the cap by signing 1 year deals. Then we can deal everyone as rentals at the deadline and load up on picks. Basically we need to do what we did with Winnik, Santorelli, Booth, etc. (Booth didn't net a pick, but the other two did so that's still pretty good).
So maybe after our trades, we'll have $9 mil in cap space (retaining on Lupul)... and we use that to sign 3 players to 1 year deals at $3 mil. If we don't retain on Lupul, one of those players could earn $5.6 mil which should get you a better player than only spending $3 mil. So the return from retaining on a Lupul trade would have to be greater than the return we could get from that cap space signing 1 year deals and trading them at the deadline.
However, I think the best thing to do is keep him on the Leafs this year and trade him either at the deadline or next offseason. From what I understand of his contract, it's much better in the last two years (and we can still retain if needed). If we put him on the top line and number 1 PP, he could score a lot of goals and his value would rise a lot. The risk is that he gets injured and lowers his value even more. At least right now, he's healthy.
But we also have to look at the opportunity cost of his $2.6.
Our goal come July 1st is to make our trades, then try to hit the cap by signing 1 year deals. Then we can deal everyone as rentals at the deadline and load up on picks. Basically we need to do what we did with Winnik, Santorelli, Booth, etc. (Booth didn't net a pick, but the other two did so that's still pretty good).
So maybe after our trades, we'll have $9 mil in cap space (retaining on Lupul)... and we use that to sign 3 players to 1 year deals at $3 mil. If we don't retain on Lupul, one of those players could earn $5.6 mil which should get you a better player than only spending $3 mil. So the return from retaining on a Lupul trade would have to be greater than the return we could get from that cap space signing 1 year deals and trading them at the deadline.
LeafsNation149
Registered User
- Feb 4, 2013
- 7,355
- 1,196
I'd wait till deadline, Lupul should be back to top 6 form and then he would get a 2nd + a good prospect for 50% retained
Wafflewhipper
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2014
- 14,114
- 5,694
I would rather take a contract back at that range or a little more and a pick or prospect of my choosing from a specified list.
I guess i don't like the idea. I like that it gives some perspective and gets discussion going though. I would just simply prefer warm bodies or body burning up that $2.6 million. I wouldn't even mind 2 or three players that took up the equal value of his contract back. Just would want younger players.
I guess i don't like the idea. I like that it gives some perspective and gets discussion going though. I would just simply prefer warm bodies or body burning up that $2.6 million. I wouldn't even mind 2 or three players that took up the equal value of his contract back. Just would want younger players.
Hotel Mario
Registered User
I wonder with the Richards news if the Leafs can terminate Lupul's contract.
Reason: For being made of glass
More realistically just call up Don Sweeny, pointed out a few posts back
Reason: For being made of glass
More realistically just call up Don Sweeny, pointed out a few posts back
William Hylander
There can be only 1
- Aug 17, 2009
- 2,611
- 343
HellasLEAF
'93 to Infinity
- Sep 14, 2006
- 15,327
- 1,754
Since Leafs aren't looking to be a true contender in the next couple years anyway they shouldn't really need to spend to the cap right?
If retaining salary moves these players/contracts out and bring max value in assets/picks/prospects back then do it imo.
If retaining salary moves these players/contracts out and bring max value in assets/picks/prospects back then do it imo.
Lupul just needs to stay healthy but this is something that would have to cross your mind if you're truly rebuilding.
trellaine201
Registered User
dougieg93
Pray for Parayko
I'd keep him. He would be a good mentor for the kids coming in if/when he is healthy. We can wait a couple years and flip him near the deadline and get a decent draft pick.
Stephen
Moderator
- Feb 28, 2002
- 78,906
- 53,742
I don't think of him as any real positive or negative influence.
I'd trade him with the salary retained just to get the extra draft picks.
Turk Broda
Registered User
- Jun 2, 2009
- 1,880
- 0
I hope Dubas has Sweeney on speed dial. I'd be throwing every dream scenario offer at him on a daily basis until he has another momentary lapse of judgement.
I'd rather keep him. We can only retain so many salaries and while we won't be up against the cap most likely through the process, retaining on everyone we need to move could make things unnecessarily uncomfortable.
What we want is flexibility and we don't want to toss it away for small returns. He has value playing for us too. We do need people to play and vets to hog the interviews to try and shelter some of these kids as best as can be.
What we want is flexibility and we don't want to toss it away for small returns. He has value playing for us too. We do need people to play and vets to hog the interviews to try and shelter some of these kids as best as can be.
Lupul, JVR, and Bozak are all guys that I would be happy to retain 50% on. We don't need the money for the years were retaining.
Phaneuf and Kessel is another story
Phaneuf and Kessel is another story
