View Single Post
Old
01-17-2013, 01:32 PM
  #18
Bill_Meltzer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryker View Post
These beat reporters should read the CBA and other NHL regulations themselves, so that they would know which rule takes precedence. Not guess and go by hearsay and second-hand knowledge the whole time. I really don't get how these people are paid if they can't get something as simple as that in first try and have to "clarify" later.
1) You weren't in the pressbox when it was being discussed at length over two days this week; as a hypothetical situation on Tuesday and then as a need-to-know matter yesterday. The writers knew the over-35 rule, and knew the new threshold. There was disagreed over which took precedence under the new CBA. Some of us (myself included) believed that the over-35 takes priority because the rules are explicitly unchanged per the NHL. Others said the threshold negated the rule for players making under $900K because the new waiver rules as far we know say nothing about applying "except for over-35 contracts".

2) We checked with the Flyers assistant GM whose sole function it is manage the salary cap. That is the proper step to take anyway for confirmation, even if you THINK you know the answer. He would be considered a source that ought to be able to provide the definitive answer. That's not "second-hand" info or "hearsay". It's a first-hand source.

3) When the answer came from the Flyers that there was no cap hit for Lilja, we all took that as the right information. Then the Flyers circled back later on and corrected themselves.

Hope that explains what happened.

Bill_Meltzer is offline   Reply With Quote