Whither Lecavalier?

[Bakanekimiwa]

I am going out on a limb here and predicting the following:

 

No one is going to want to take on VLC's contract (and yes, this might be Homers worst move ever) so the Flyers are stuck with him. I still have this sneaking suspicion that Homer will retain VLC and that B Schenn is traded. There is no proof and it is pure speculation but I can totally see Homer making himself believe that VLC's issues were related to being out of his natural position.

 

This is not what I want to happen but if I were a betting man I think VLC is here and Schenn (maybe both) are gone.

 

the only problem i have with this thought is this... Schenn has been sought after in rumored deals time after time. Reputable sources, at the time of the Weber offersheeting, mentioned Schenn as one of the main cogs desired by Nashville. The Flyers declined to trade Schenn then, so why would they agree to trade him now. 

 

I realize it's 2 years later now, but Schenn is still young and I'm sure they had multiple chances to trade him since then. I really believe that Homer finally got on board with NOT trading away our youth a few years ago. 

 

While what you are suggesting is completely possible and probably wouldn't surprise too many people... I just don't see it happening. I think our youth core is in tact for a few more years. Unless Poile reconsiders on Weber this summer ... then I think we could see a few pieces going that way and Schenn would be one to go. All doubtful. 

 

My thought is that the Flyers try to deal VLC this summer with the offer of retaining cash on the deal. There are teams that would love to have him at center at a reduced price. What we can expect back is probably not much. Some lower round picks and maybe a gamble prospect. 

[DaGreatGazoo]

IMHO, if they eat half his salary for the remaining years, someone makes that trade.  I hated the signing, I hate the contract.  I don't hate the player.  

 

VLC played solidly until he hurt his back.  Again, IMHO, he came back too early and never fully healed/recovered.  Assuming he's healthy, someone can use him at $2 million/year. 

 

If they trade him, and have 8 million in dead cap space (for VLC) the next 4 years, I think the heat on Homer gets significantly hotter.  That move and the Bryz buyout would be almost $4 million/season for players NOT on the roster.  Even Homer may not survive that.....

Edited May 2, 2014 by DaGreatGazoo

[murraycraven]

We agree on this, mc. He's going to try and cover up an obvious mistake now by making one that won't be known until later. We *hope* Schenn lives up to expectations, but as of right now, it's all just expectations that mean nothing. You don't win Cups on expectations and projections. That's the angle I'm afraid Homer will take.

 

 

I am afraid so....   It is like watching the stars aling for this very scenario.   I hope not but I woud not be shocked at all. 

Edited May 2, 2014 by murraycraven

[radoran]

I mentioned this in the gm. thread. Trade Hartnell Coburn and 17th pick for oilers 3rd pick and yak. Flip the 3rd and Vinny and half his salary and a prospect to panthers for the 1st .

 

Why would either GM do any of this?

 

Oilers: give up a 3rd overall and former #1 overall pick

Oilers: get a guy who has trouble staying on his skates and is signed for five more years; a second pairing Dman and the 17th overall

 

Florida then gives up the #1 overall for a 3rd overall and four more years of a 34-year-old center who hasn't played a full season in the five years over which he's seen his production drop annually and is signed for four more years.

 

If the Flyers made any of those acquisitions, we'd shoot them.

[murraycraven]

I mentioned this in the gm. thread. Trade Hartnell Coburn and 17th pick for oilers 3rd pick and yak. Flip the 3rd and Vinny and half his salary and a prospect to panthers for the 1st .

 

that is an interesting take on it but I see no reason why the Oilers would want Hartnell's contract let alone the Panterhers wanting an aging vet at center for another 4 years.   not sure it makes much sense...

Edited May 2, 2014 by murraycraven

[radoran]

IMHO, if they eat half his salary for the remaining years, someone makes that trade.  I hated the signing, I hate the contract.  I don't hate the player.  

 

VLC played solidly until he hurt his back.  Again, IMHO, he came back too early and never fully healed/recovered.  Assuming he's healthy, someone can use him at $2 million/year. 

 

If they trade him, and have 8 million in dead cap space the next 4 years, I think the heat on Homer gets significantly hotter.  That move and the Bryz buyout would be almost $4 million/season for players NOT on the roster.  Even Homer may not survive that.....

 

He hasn't played a full season since 2010.

 

I don't hate the player, he's just overpaid, underperforming and doesn't fit on the roster.

[Bakanekimiwa]

IMHO, if they eat half his salary for the remaining years, someone makes that trade.  I hated the signing, I hate the contract.  I don't hate the player.  

 

VLC played solidly until he hurt his back.  Again, IMHO, he came back too early and never fully healed/recovered.  Assuming he's healthy, someone can use him at $2 million/year. 

 

If they trade him, and have 8 million in dead cap space the next 4 years, I think the heat on Homer gets significantly hotter.  That move and the Bryz buyout would be almost $4 million/season for players NOT on the roster.  Even Homer may not survive that.....

 

 

I think most of us here are probably ready for the Hextall experiment to begin. Maybe Homer will fall on his sword for us? 

[mojo1917]

@radoran

 

Well, the player may have some value to some team other than a team that is already 5 first round draft picks deep at the center position.

He was/is a bad fit here, doesn't mean he would be a bad fit everywhere,  That is the thought process,  he is still Vincent LeCavalier , he still has a great shot , is still big, still has + puck skills. it is not like trying to get rid of Zac Rinaldo.

[DaGreatGazoo]

I don't hate the player, he's just overpaid, underperforming and doesn't fit on the roster.

 

Pretty much sums it up nicely in one sentence.

[murraycraven]

the only problem i have with this thought is this... Schenn has been sought after in rumored deals time after time. Reputable sources, at the time of the Weber offersheeting, mentioned Schenn as one of the main cogs desired by Nashville. The Flyers declined to trade Schenn then, so why would they agree to trade him now. 

 

I realize it's 2 years later now, but Schenn is still young and I'm sure they had multiple chances to trade him since then. I really believe that Homer finally got on board with NOT trading away our youth a few years ago. 

 

While what you are suggesting is completely possible and probably wouldn't surprise too many people... I just don't see it happening. I think our youth core is in tact for a few more years. Unless Poile reconsiders on Weber this summer ... then I think we could see a few pieces going that way and Schenn would be one to go. All doubtful. 

 

My thought is that the Flyers try to deal VLC this summer with the offer of retaining cash on the deal. There are teams that would love to have him at center at a reduced price. What we can expect back is probably not much. Some lower round picks and maybe a gamble prospect. 

 

 

bak, all fair points and again, I could see either scenario.   For whatever reason I thought the signing of VLC put Schenn in an odd postiion w/ the Flyers.   Another Center?   Really Homer?  At this point Schenn is going to be way more tradable and the Flyers will get assets in return.   Homer is basically going to have to pay a Team to take VLC off their hands.  

 

I also think it comes down to the contract that Schenn and his agent are looking for.   Schenn might want to get paid and not be willing to take a "bridge" contract similar to Cooter. 

[murraycraven]

I don't hate the player, he's just overpaid, underperforming and doesn't fit on the roster.

 

perfectly stated ^^

[radoran]

bak, all fair points and again, I could see either scenario.   For whatever reason I thought the signing of VLC put Schenn in an odd postiion w/ the Flyers.   Another Center?   Really Homer?  At this point Schenn is going to be way more tradable and the Flyers will get assets in return.   Homer is basically going to have to pay a Team to take VLC off their hands.  

 

I also think it comes down to the contract that Schenn and his agent are looking for.   Schenn might want to get paid and not be willing to take a "bridge" contract similar to Cooter. 

 

That would fit with the generally delusional nature of his ELC - with performance clauses that Sidney Crosby would have been hard pressed to meet.

 

The problem with that is that the Flyers hold most of the best cards. They can tender Schenn and - as we've discussed before - likely match up to $5M at which point teams are giving up a 1/2/3 for him. Unless the offer sheet is equally as ridiculous as, say, Weber's.

[radoran]

@radoran

 

Well, the player may have some value to some team other than a team that is already 5 first round draft picks deep at the center position.

He was/is a bad fit here, doesn't mean he would be a bad fit everywhere,  That is the thought process,  he is still Vincent LeCavalier , he still has a great shot , is still big, still has + puck skills. it is not like trying to get rid of Zac Rinaldo.

 

Ima move this over to the VLC thread but... I completely agree that he has some immediate value.

 

But a team is making a four year commitment to him, he can approve/reject any trade and he has seriously underperformed.

[aziz]

Tampa makes sense, but only for sentimental reasons. There is a reason they bought him out, after all. And they've cut all ties to the Glory Years (Richards/St. Louis/VLC). I could see him there in a swan song, but this swan song is four years long...

 

i'm still hanging on the theory that he is headed back to tampa, and that was the plan all along.  hear me out:

 

lecavelier's cap hit pre-buyout was $7.7mil, running until the 2019-20 season.  a huge cap hit, for a player no longer anywhere close to that valuable.  tampa had $60mil in salary commitments, for something like 13 players, at the time, and the cap ceiling was dropping to $64mil.  no breathing room at all.  with the no-consequence buyouts offered after the CBA was put in place, tampa had a chance to remove VLC's caphit, give themselves some space, and save cash over the long run (buyout was $32.6mil, salary remaining was over $40mil, as i recall).

 

they really had to take advantage of the opportunity.

 

theory:

 

he's still a big part of the family thing down there, though.  there was a silent agreement in place to have VLC sign somewhere else, for a more reasonable salary and a more reasonable cap hit...he'd play out the season with this other team, and then there'd be a deal of some sort to send him back to tampa once it was legal to do so.  which is to say, July 1.  it won't be for much, 2nd/3rd round pick kind of thing.

 

i think that is why holmgren signed VLC to a contract that made no sense in the long run for the flyers, because he had no intention of keeping him for the long run.  from tampa's point of view, VLC's caphit is now more than $3mil less, and ends two years earlier.  they can almost see it as a win for a player their very casual fan base might like to see end his career there.

 

conspiracy and conjecture, but it makes some sense to me.  and makes the initial signing by the flyers a little less insane looking.

[radoran]

he's still a big part of the family thing down there, though. there was a silent agreement in place to have VLC sign somewhere else, for a more reasonable salary and a more reasonable cap hit...he'd play out the season with this other team, and then there'd be a deal of some sort to send him back to tampa once it was legal to do so. which is to say, July 1. it won't be for much, 2nd/3rd round pick kind of thing.

i think that is why holmgren signed VLC to a contract that made no sense in the long run for the flyers, because he had no intention of keeping him for the long run. from tampa's point of view, VLC's caphit is now more than $3mil less, and ends two years earlier. they can almost see it as a win for a player their very casual fan base might like to see end his career there.

conspiracy and conjecture, but it makes some sense to me. and makes the initial signing by the flyers a little less insane looking.

 

This is absolutely plausible. And the best theory I've heard.

 

From your fingers to God's screens, @aziz!

 

And if the league doesn't come down on it like a ton of bricks, they may as well just admit that all of the posturing and wailing and gnashing of teeth in the past two lockouts has been nothing but show.

[Samifan]

If aziz is correct, does that mean we can expect to see Briere back in Philly in the fall?

Edited May 2, 2014 by Samifan

[aziz]

And if the league doesn't come down on it like a ton of bricks, they may as well just admit that all of the posturing and wailing and gnashing of teeth in the past two lockouts has been nothing but show.

 

honestly, i never really understood the rule that a bought out player couldn't resign with his previous team.  a situation like tampa, where really were pretty well screwed cap-wise, wants to essentially renegotiate the deal, and paid the player $32mil for his trouble.  a one-year-elsewhere thing obviously violates the spirit of that particular rule, but imo the rule itself was pointless.

[radoran]

honestly, i never really understood the rule that a bought out player couldn't resign with his previous team.  a situation like tampa, where really were pretty well screwed cap-wise, wants to essentially renegotiate the deal, and paid the player $32mil for his trouble.  a one-year-elsewhere thing obviously violates the spirit of that particular rule, but imo the rule itself was pointless.

 

As I said to Brelic elsewhere, if you're going to allow teams to renegotiate down then you're going to have to allow players to renegotiate up.

 

Players have gone to the wall over guaranteed contracts twice - and seem dead-set against losing them still.

 

The whole point of the salary cap was to promote competition and "level the playing field" for all teams. Allowing big pocket teams to sign guys to HUGE long term deals and then weasel out of them would be a serious competitive disadvantage to about 2/3 of the league.

[peter puck]

Just a "pipe" dream. Maybe edm. Ice will help hartnells skating and I believe rumor was they covet Coburn. Oilers get two vets they could use. Hartnell replaces smith and had twice as many points. Coby replaces ference and nail is -37 over two years not exactly losing much there "yet" like I said just a dream!

[aziz]

As I said to Brelic elsewhere, if you're going to allow teams to renegotiate down then you're going to have to allow players to renegotiate up.

 

but there is nothing there that would specifically preclude that.  i mean, it'd be dumb for a team to buy out a player and then agree to pay him more, but....  like i said, the player gets 2/3rds of his remaining contract right away, so it isn't like he's been stuck high and dry.

 

i guess what i don't understand is how signing a new contract with tampa is any different than signing a contract with philly.  VLC was paid a significant percentage of his remaining deal, and then can start billing again for the years he was just paid for.  i don't see why the "who is doing the paying" part makes any difference one way or the other.

 

to me, in a buyout situation, the player is almost always the winner.  yes, he only gets 2/3rds of what was promised, but he can get paid a second time for the years that were previously covered.  his potential for making money almost always goes up, and sometimes significantly.  VLC got the $32mil from the buyout, plus the new $18mil contract, plus has two years once this contract is up he could conceivably make even more.  $50mil, total, with the possible extra (he'll be pretty old at that point, though, so probably not).  he was due a total of $48mil under his previous contract.  VLC wins.  so who cares what team is paying him the extra?

[canoli]

After what he showed this year, who's really lining up for him?

 

even paying 1/2 his salary - if that's allowed / legal under the CBA (i guess it must be or you guys wouldn't suggest it) - the only way a team shows any interest at all in VLC is if it's revealed in the upcoming days that he requires surgery or has some sort of injury that prevented him playing his best.

 

Nobody will want this guy now after that year. Come on be realistic. Getting him for $2.25million/year is great - IF the guy can play. With the kind of year he just had ...

 

[edit: @radoran

from your post I quoted:

"Having VLC on the fourth in a situation where the coach plays the fourth 6-8 minutes isn't that effective. Even giving him second line PP minutes."

 

This sounds like you're saying it's unacceptable he plays 4th line minutes and 2nd unit PP. ]

Edited May 2, 2014 by canoli

[murraycraven]

i'm still hanging on the theory that he is headed back to tampa, and that was the plan all along.  hear me out:

 

lecavelier's cap hit pre-buyout was $7.7mil, running until the 2019-20 season.  a huge cap hit, for a player no longer anywhere close to that valuable.  tampa had $60mil in salary commitments, for something like 13 players, at the time, and the cap ceiling was dropping to $64mil.  no breathing room at all.  with the no-consequence buyouts offered after the CBA was put in place, tampa had a chance to remove VLC's caphit, give themselves some space, and save cash over the long run (buyout was $32.6mil, salary remaining was over $40mil, as i recall).

 

they really had to take advantage of the opportunity.

 

theory:

 

he's still a big part of the family thing down there, though.  there was a silent agreement in place to have VLC sign somewhere else, for a more reasonable salary and a more reasonable cap hit...he'd play out the season with this other team, and then there'd be a deal of some sort to send him back to tampa once it was legal to do so.  which is to say, July 1.  it won't be for much, 2nd/3rd round pick kind of thing.

 

i think that is why holmgren signed VLC to a contract that made no sense in the long run for the flyers, because he had no intention of keeping him for the long run.  from tampa's point of view, VLC's caphit is now more than $3mil less, and ends two years earlier.  they can almost see it as a win for a player their very casual fan base might like to see end his career there.

 

conspiracy and conjecture, but it makes some sense to me.  and makes the initial signing by the flyers a little less insane looking.

 

 

I still laugh at this conspiracy theory... why would the Flyers eat 5M in a cap hit for one year as a favor to the Bolts? It makes no sense... So you are basing it on we eat 5M per year, slow the development of Schenn all for a 2/3rd rounder? Sorry, not buying it one bit. I also think the Flyers bought out Briere only to bring him back next year for the playoffs

[aziz]

I still laugh at this conspiracy theory... why would the Flyers eat 5M in a cap hit for one year as a favor to the Bolts? It makes no sense... So you are basing it on we eat 5M per year, slow the development of Schenn all for a 2/3rd rounder? Sorry, not buying it one bit. I also think the Flyers bought out Briere only to bring him back next year for the playoffs

 

because they thought they'd be getting a strong second line player who had won a cup to help with the development and transition of the team for a year.  they were dead wrong, but when the deal was made, my only complaint was the length, i thought it a really good idea for the very short term.  it totally wasn't, but hindsight and all.

 

edit:  obviously, this is only a hunch/guess on my part.  i'm 50-50 that it is what is going on.  we'll see in a couple months.

Edited May 2, 2014 by aziz

[murraycraven]

the development and transition of the team for a year.

 

but in the end it forced young players out of position - sorry, no disrepect meant aziz but I just dont buy it...   How did Vinny help anyone's development this year?  This was one of the main arguments when he was brought in.   He is only clogging up the lineup and there is no room for him...  The structure of the deal screams Homer all over it.  Overpay for an aging vet, give him a NMC and make sure the contract is about 3 years to long.

 

I dont see any merit to this scenario - the Flyers sign an aging vet as a favor for another club?  Only to overpay him & over extend the years while taking away ice from your "core" players for one year?   If this is true then Homer should be fired immediately.   It makes really no sense other than Tampa loves vinny and wants him back.  

[Samifan]

The only reason VLC is in Philly!

Edited May 2, 2014 by Samifan