Forums/NHL Trades

(EDM/CGY) - Lucic (12.5% retained) & conditional 2020 3rd for Neal

Who won the trade?
Le graphique a été masqué

Options de sondage

 

19 jui à 23 h 21
#26
Rejoint: mai 2015
Messages: 1,617
Mentions "j'aime": 128
Quoting: toque
Edmonton moves the worst contract in the league. For me it's a win for them


Source? That's a pretty fair condition.

Good luck to Lucic in Calgary, great guy but unfortunately not a good contract.
19 jui à 23 h 23
#27
OldNYIfan
Rejoint: jun 2018
Messages: 6,791
Mentions "j'aime": 2,761
Quoting: oneX
Yeah I don't know what Treliving was thinking here.
Maybe protection for Gaudreau? But how much did he protect McDavid? Not much...as I remember it.


Ten million bucks is ten million bucks. See my reply to Trickster.
oneX a aimé ceci.
19 jui à 23 h 29
#28
best poster
Rejoint: jui 2019
Messages: 1,076
Mentions "j'aime": 663
Quoting: AH96
great guy


uhh
20 jui à 0 h 11
#29
Rejoint: déc 2017
Messages: 1,576
Mentions "j'aime": 645
Quoting: SpaghettiPasta
When someone talks like that it's sarcasm


Wasn't that the whole point of bringing in Lucic to EDM in the first place, providing a physical presence on McDavid's wing?
20 jui à 0 h 16
#30
rangersandislesfan
Rejoint: mar 2017
Messages: 26,843
Mentions "j'aime": 2,893
So, what do those "never trade with your biggest rival" people think of this trade?
BlueSeeker a aimé ceci.
20 jui à 0 h 18
#31
HonestHockeyNYI
Rejoint: jui 2019
Messages: 32
Mentions "j'aime": 28
Edmonton and Calgary swapping players that fell off the cliff production-wise...both got suckered into taking on horrible contracts.
20 jui à 0 h 19
#32
Rejoint: déc 2017
Messages: 1,576
Mentions "j'aime": 645
Quoting: OldNYIfan
This trade isn't nearly as bad for Calgary as everyone thinks/says it is. Everybody has to step back and look at the math.

Calgary and Edmonton are not New York or Los Angeles, or Toronto. Neal's contract was/is all salary, equally spread. Thus the Flames owed Neal $23 million over the next four years. In contrast, Lucic's contract was front-loaded and there was a $3 million signing bonus that Edmonton just paid, so Lucic is owed a total of $16 million by Calgary for the same period. Now subtract the retention ($3 million), and Calgary saves $10 million in real cash by this trade. Now $10 million to us sitting in the comfort of our armchairs at home may not seem important, but to the Calgary GM it means that he can offer a free agent next summer a $2.5 million signing bonus in every year on a four-year contract -- money he didn't have before, but which may mean the difference between being able to sign Matt Duchene or Artemi Panarin and being able to sign Ryan Dzingel. So although Edmonton may be the winner on the ice, Calgary is the winner at the bank.


Bottom line: CGY had no choice but to trade Neal. So the trade was a Win for the Flames on the ice and at the bank. If Neal can't revive his career playing w/ the best player in the league then he's finished.
OldNYIfan a aimé ceci.
20 jui à 0 h 21
#33
Rejoint: déc 2017
Messages: 1,576
Mentions "j'aime": 645
Quoting: rangersandislesfan
So, what do those "never trade with your biggest rival" people think of this trade?


Grabner to the Devils was like the first ever trade between the 2 teams. And the trade was a flop.
20 jui à 0 h 21
#34
best poster
Rejoint: jui 2019
Messages: 1,076
Mentions "j'aime": 663
someone made a comment about the flames possibly trading lucic again:





would be funny to see like 3 or 4 teams have his contract on their books.
20 jui à 0 h 28
#35
Rejoint: jun 2019
Messages: 2
Mentions "j'aime": 3
Quoting: OldNYIfan
This trade isn't nearly as bad for Calgary as everyone thinks/says it is. Everybody has to step back and look at the math.

Calgary and Edmonton are not New York or Los Angeles, or Toronto. Neal's contract was/is all salary, equally spread. Thus the Flames owed Neal $23 million over the next four years. In contrast, Lucic's contract was front-loaded and there was a $3 million signing bonus that Edmonton just paid, so Lucic is owed a total of $16 million by Calgary for the same period. Now subtract the retention ($3 million), and Calgary saves $10 million in real cash by this trade. Now $10 million to us sitting in the comfort of our armchairs at home may not seem important, but to the Calgary GM it means that he can offer a free agent next summer a $2.5 million signing bonus in every year on a four-year contract -- money he didn't have before, but which may mean the difference between being able to sign Matt Duchene or Artemi Panarin and being able to sign Ryan Dzingel. So although Edmonton may be the winner on the ice, Calgary is the winner at the bank.


You an Islanders fan? lol 'being on a budget'. Maybe Calgary cares about that? (I don't think so but I'm not sure) Edmonton makes money hand over fist. The budget is larger than the cap in Edmonton. Make it $12 million if the team is better for it. That said, although I think this is a mistake for Calgary, Lucic is the type of player they need to back up Tkachuk 'the rat' and have the toughness they need come playoff time; they already have a good regular season team (and losing Neal won't detract from that). Edmonton on the other hand needs a scoring winger badly and have plenty of more-fiesty tough guys.
Should help provide a secondary scoring line with RNH and the Flavour of the Week.

Really surprised by the condition of the pick reported in the first post. That's a steal for Edmonton. Was worried it would be more like 'guaranteed 3rd round pick, upgrade to 1st if (conditions of 1st post)'
OldNYIfan a aimé ceci.
20 jui à 1 h 19
#36
Rejoint: avr 2019
Messages: 548
Mentions "j'aime": 104
Quoting: OldNYIfan
This trade isn't nearly as bad for Calgary as everyone thinks/says it is. Everybody has to step back and look at the math.

Calgary and Edmonton are not New York or Los Angeles, or Toronto. Neal's contract was/is all salary, equally spread. Thus the Flames owed Neal $23 million over the next four years. In contrast, Lucic's contract was front-loaded and there was a $3 million signing bonus that Edmonton just paid, so Lucic is owed a total of $16 million by Calgary for the same period. Now subtract the retention ($3 million), and Calgary saves $10 million in real cash by this trade. Now $10 million to us sitting in the comfort of our armchairs at home may not seem important, but to the Calgary GM it means that he can offer a free agent next summer a $2.5 million signing bonus in every year on a four-year contract -- money he didn't have before, but which may mean the difference between being able to sign Matt Duchene or Artemi Panarin and being able to sign Ryan Dzingel. So although Edmonton may be the winner on the ice, Calgary is the winner at the bank.


Calgary is also one of the NHL's most popular teams though so they don't have any trouble paying out signing bonuses. You do however make a good comment because if ownership pays for some of the arena that extra cash could be the difference between Panarin and Dzingel as you said
OldNYIfan a aimé ceci.
20 jui à 1 h 31
#37
Majors and minors
Rejoint: mai 2017
Messages: 77
Mentions "j'aime": 13
it's a stupid trade n unfortunately Edm were suckers. allow me to explain from my pov:

Lucic's: 6.0 aav - but it isn't ... Edm prepaid 5 mil the first 3 years additionally, on the trade, Edm withholds 750K so if a buyout or anything like that Edm is still on the hooks, forget the draft pick for the time being, the actual cash per is only 4.75 on bal of contract.

winner of trade is easy: the Flames.... n they got a draft pick. Holland do you know what you're doing? there were better ways to open up Sal cap space: Even buying out Klefbom/Larsson you would have saved 5 to 6 mil per year... u would have had to replace D men but so does W'peg now.
20 jui à 1 h 32
#38
Ducks Fly Together
Rejoint: fév 2016
Messages: 257
Mentions "j'aime": 79
Quoting: OldNYIfan
This trade isn't nearly as bad for Calgary as everyone thinks/says it is. Everybody has to step back and look at the math.

Calgary and Edmonton are not New York or Los Angeles, or Toronto. Neal's contract was/is all salary, equally spread. Thus the Flames owed Neal $23 million over the next four years. In contrast, Lucic's contract was front-loaded and there was a $3 million signing bonus that Edmonton just paid, so Lucic is owed a total of $16 million by Calgary for the same period. Now subtract the retention ($3 million), and Calgary saves $10 million in real cash by this trade. Now $10 million to us sitting in the comfort of our armchairs at home may not seem important, but to the Calgary GM it means that he can offer a free agent next summer a $2.5 million signing bonus in every year on a four-year contract -- money he didn't have before, but which may mean the difference between being able to sign Matt Duchene or Artemi Panarin and being able to sign Ryan Dzingel. So although Edmonton may be the winner on the ice, Calgary is the winner at the bank.


Good point - going to add to it and say saving your owner $10M isn’t an undesirable outcome either wink
OldNYIfan et CoraStorm a aimé ceci.
20 jui à 1 h 33
#39
Majors and minors
Rejoint: mai 2017
Messages: 77
Mentions "j'aime": 13
Quoting: AH96
Source? That's a pretty fair condition.

Good luck to Lucic in Calgary, great guy but unfortunately not a good contract.


Quoting: AH96
Source? That's a pretty fair condition.

Good luck to Lucic in Calgary, great guy but unfortunately not a good contract.


please do your math that way I don't have to correct you... additionally stop believing everything you hear.
20 jui à 2 h 14
#40
J.L.
Rejoint: jui 2018
Messages: 183
Mentions "j'aime": 65
Quoting: Trickster
I am iffy on this trade.

Does saving 500k really worth this?
Neal much more likely to bounce back over Lucic should be a factor in the decision for this too.


hence the conditional pick
20 jui à 3 h 04
#41
Go Flames Go!
Rejoint: oct 2017
Messages: 63
Mentions "j'aime": 26
As a Flames fans dont really like this trade, but hey - a little cap space and a draft pick is pretty good, so we'll see
20 jui à 3 h 11
#42
Rejoint: mar 2019
Messages: 808
Mentions "j'aime": 821
Quoting: OldNYIfan
Ten million bucks is ten million bucks. See my reply to Trickster.


Yeah sorry I missed it originally. Good point tho.
I don't know about adding players in the future because things can go your way or another at times but saving 10 million is always good.

I know the arena deal has nothing to do with this trade but certainly helps in whatever way one can of.
OldNYIfan, CoraStorm et Trickster a aimé ceci.
20 jui à 3 h 49
#43
Majors and minors
Rejoint: mai 2017
Messages: 77
Mentions "j'aime": 13
Quoting: OldNYIfan
This trade isn't nearly as bad for Calgary as everyone thinks/says it is. Everybody has to step back and look at the math.

Calgary and Edmonton are not New York or Los Angeles, or Toronto. Neal's contract was/is all salary, equally spread. Thus the Flames owed Neal $23 million over the next four years. In contrast, Lucic's contract was front-loaded and there was a $3 million signing bonus that Edmonton just paid, so Lucic is owed a total of $16 million by Calgary for the same period. Now subtract the retention ($3 million), and Calgary saves $10 million in real cash by this trade. Now $10 million to us sitting in the comfort of our armchairs at home may not seem important, but to the Calgary GM it means that he can offer a free agent next summer a $2.5 million signing bonus in every year on a four-year contract -- money he didn't have before, but which may mean the difference between being able to sign Matt Duchene or Artemi Panarin and being able to sign Ryan Dzingel. So although Edmonton may be the winner on the ice, Calgary is the winner at the bank.


don't forget Calg can still buyout n Edm pays portion of contract bal.
OldNYIfan a aimé ceci.
20 jui à 4 h 51
#44
Discord COL's GM
Rejoint: mar 2018
Messages: 6,312
Mentions "j'aime": 1,650
Okay few things I see here. Lucic is owed less, than what Neal is. Lucic was a front loaded deal, so the signing bonus that Lucic was owed was paid by Edmonton. 2nd thing. Lucic might not be great, but all things considered maybe a move to a new style of play helps Lucic out, I mean he might not get backup to previous form, but its not at all out of the realm of possibilities that Calgary gets some sort of production out of Lucic. The other big thing that needs to be considered is that Lucic has a Modified No Trade Clause of a 8-Team No Trade List at the start of the 2021-22 Season. So by all means he could very well be heading into a trade in 2 years, so basically Calgary gets out of both contracts then are pretty much freed of the cap that was being paid. However Neal being traded to Edmonton might help as Neal could very possibly be carried yes, but put solid production up offensively with McDavid. Which is a plus side to Edmonton, and Lucic again could get more than 10 Goals of Production, but I think he won't and with Neal on the line of McDavid think he could get 21 goals. So Calgary gets a good pick out of it in a Loaded 2020 Draft Class.

So what it comes down to is Calgary gets cap space Lucic was Top Heavy, compared to Neal who is spread out evenly and was guaranteed the entire contract which means 23 Million. As for Lucic he has a total of 8.5 Million in Signing Bonuses, and base salaries are 7.5 Million. Which goes to 16 Million. So Calgary gets about 7 Million Shaved off their books, and to add onto that Lucic was also retained 750,000 over the next 4 Years of his contract which is another 3 Million off the books for the next few years. Brings the total down to 13 Million compared to 23 Million. So where Neal might be the better player, Calgary definitely got a great deal out of this cutting 10 Million out of the books.

So even when people believe Edmonton won this deal by a mile, they really didn't it was more of Calgary articulately planning Cap out so they have room next summer for other players, and 2 years down the road when his contract isn't out of the question of being traded because it won't be that much the next year because of the due salary of 3.5 Million when his 8-Team No Trade List kicks in, and 2 you would most likely see Calgary paying for that 2.5 Million Signing Bonus during the 2021-22 Offseason so bringing his contract down to a total of 6.5 Million for the next 2 seasons. So I think it was sort of smart by Calgary, it gives them some room later on when players are on expiring contracts. Production wise they aren't really that much different. James Neal had 19 Points in 63 Games, so for the season averages out to about a 24 point pace. Lucic had 20 in 79, and he was on pace for just shy in numbers of 21 Points at 20.75. So basically Calgary made a smart move to shave cap as for Edmonton they might get better production, but definitely took some cap brunt on as they are now paying for 23 Million on James Neal which is all Guaranteed, and 3 Million that they retained over the next 4 Years. So 26 Million to 13 Million in total. Calgary wins this deal.
OldNYIfan a aimé ceci.
20 jui à 5 h 16
#45
Rejoint: jui 2018
Messages: 186
Mentions "j'aime": 86
Money trade for Calgary but EDM still wins. Neal had a bad season, but he was a 20+ goalscorer in any other season. He'll likely play top 6 with McDavid or Draisaitl as centre. He should be able to bounce back. Both contracts are bad, but I'd rather have Neal than Lucic on the team. Especially since Lucic has been declining for a while and he likely needs to be protected because of his NMC. Imagine the terrible CGY trade if they want to move Lucic before the expansion draft lol
BurgerBoss a aimé ceci.
20 jui à 5 h 30
#46
Rejoint: déc 2017
Messages: 446
Mentions "j'aime": 240
I don't know if essentially paying Neal 6,5 is a win but at least his production potential should be better? I guess? Iffy at best deal for both sides.
20 jui à 9 h 37
#47
I just need sauce
Rejoint: oct 2017
Messages: 1,999
Mentions "j'aime": 803
Quoting: Brian2016
Wasn't that the whole point of bringing in Lucic to EDM in the first place, providing a physical presence on McDavid's wing?


Yes but, WhEn SoMeOnE tAlKs LiKe ThIs It Is SaRcAsTiC.
20 jui à 10 h 17
#48
rangersandislesfan
Rejoint: mar 2017
Messages: 26,843
Mentions "j'aime": 2,893
Quoting: Brian2016
Grabner to the Devils was like the first ever trade between the 2 teams. And the trade was a flop.


I'm just saying some people say big rivals will never trade with each other.
20 jui à 12 h 14
#49
BtZ's buttercup
Rejoint: mai 2018
Messages: 2,366
Mentions "j'aime": 1,246
Quoting: OldNYIfan
This trade isn't nearly as bad for Calgary as everyone thinks/says it is. Everybody has to step back and look at the math.

Calgary and Edmonton are not New York or Los Angeles, or Toronto. Neal's contract was/is all salary, equally spread. Thus the Flames owed Neal $23 million over the next four years. In contrast, Lucic's contract was front-loaded and there was a $3 million signing bonus that Edmonton just paid, so Lucic is owed a total of $16 million by Calgary for the same period. Now subtract the retention ($3 million), and Calgary saves $10 million in real cash by this trade. Now $10 million to us sitting in the comfort of our armchairs at home may not seem important, but to the Calgary GM it means that he can offer a free agent next summer a $2.5 million signing bonus in every year on a four-year contract -- money he didn't have before, but which may mean the difference between being able to sign Matt Duchene or Artemi Panarin and being able to sign Ryan Dzingel. So although Edmonton may be the winner on the ice, Calgary is the winner at the bank.


I will admit I did not know of the Lucic contract structure, so Flames save on actual money payout... I get it.

What about the cap situation???
Its 500k difference? So they have 9 million left to spend on Bennett, Mangiapana, Rittich, and Tkachuk.

Neal signing itself was a mistake.
They should have spent the assets to move his contract out instead this trade.
oneX et OldNYIfan a aimé ceci.
20 jui à 13 h 01
#50
Rejoint: mai 2016
Messages: 4,634
Mentions "j'aime": 1,303
I like the deal for both teams, but I think Neal with McDavid becomes a 30/30 guy.
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Soumettre les modifications du sondage