View Single Post
Old
01-17-2013, 01:46 PM
  #19
Ryker
Registered User
 
Ryker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Triangle, NC, USA
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 4,163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill_Meltzer View Post
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.
Thanks for the explanation, I see why and where the confusion arose now. However, contacting the assistant GM, while not hearsay, is still second-hand. First hand is consulting the source yourself. But I do agree they, too, ought to know the correct interpretation.

Ryker is offline   Reply With Quote