HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Notices

Feb 8 update posted: Pronger (concussion) likely out for the season

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-16-2011, 11:57 AM
  #576
MountainHawk
Registered User
 
MountainHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Salem, MA
Country: Vanuatu
Posts: 12,771
vCash: 450
Quote:
Originally Posted by BringBackStevens View Post
Just do away with the 35+ rule. Change the rule that when over 35, there is a maximum contract term based on current age. 35, 5 years max, 36, 4 years max, ... , 40+ 1 year max

Still accomplishes the point of the rule to prevent teams from signing old players for longer than they attend to play

Removes the punishment that a 36 year old player can get a life altering concussion and stick a team with their cap hit. It's kind of stupid and and not necessary at all
I also think this is very likely. The owners are going to want to cut the 57% (the NBA and NFL are closer to 50/50) and have a Kovalchuk rule, so I expect the players to get rid of some of the other restrictions (35+ rule, shorter RFA period or less compensation at top end, reentry waivers).

MountainHawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:01 PM
  #577
GoneFullHolmgren
def. hockey FAIL
 
GoneFullHolmgren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 29,793
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
Yep.

There's a new CBA this summer and I have a feeling that Snider will push hard for an amendment to the 35+ rule.
I am sure there will be something in the CBA, but I will be shocked if they grandfather the rule.

GoneFullHolmgren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:04 PM
  #578
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 12,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BringBackStevens View Post
Just do away with the 35+ rule. Change the rule that when over 35, there is a maximum contract term based on current age. 35, 5 years max, 36, 4 years max, ... , 40+ 1 year max

Still accomplishes the point of the rule to prevent teams from signing old players for longer than they attend to play

Removes the punishment that a 36 year old player can get a life altering concussion and stick a team with their cap hit. It's kind of stupid and and not necessary at all
Not unreasonable, but I'm not sure it really addresses the league's concern about circumventing the cap. For the sake of argument, they's say Kimmo was UFA this offseason.

He's 36 now, right? Let's say he intends to come back and give it two more years. Let's say he's comfortable with 5 million in compensation.

Contact option A: two years, $10 million (5-5) = $5 million cap hit.
Option B: Four years, $14 million 5-5-2.5-1.5 = 3.5 million cap hit.

Kimmo retires after season 2 either way, having banked $10 million, but the team reaps the advantage of the lower cap hit with the latter option.

What am I missing.

Jack de la Hoya is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:07 PM
  #579
MountainHawk
Registered User
 
MountainHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Salem, MA
Country: Vanuatu
Posts: 12,771
vCash: 450
They could change the cap hit for 35+ contracts to the annual value, instead of average.

MountainHawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:12 PM
  #580
JoeFlyer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeh82 View Post
Not unreasonable, but I'm not sure it really addresses the league's concern about circumventing the cap. For the sake of argument, they's say Kimmo was UFA this offseason.

He's 36 now, right? Let's say he intends to come back and give it two more years. Let's say he's comfortable with 5 million in compensation.

Contact option A: two years, $10 million (5-5) = $5 million cap hit.
Option B: Four years, $14 million 5-5-2.5-1.5 = 3.5 million cap hit.

Kimmo retires after season 2 either way, having banked $10 million, but the team reaps the advantage of the lower cap hit with the latter option.

What am I missing.
They could also change the way a contract can scale over time. For example maybe you could only take a 20% drop from one year to the next once over 35 and implement a maximum length or something like that.

JoeFlyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:13 PM
  #581
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 12,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainHawk View Post
They could change the cap hit for 35+ contracts to the annual value, instead of average.
And leave the rest of the restrictions in place (e.g., no relief from retirement, etc.)?

In that case, they Flyers would have to eat 7.6, 7.2, and 7.0, over the next three seasons if he retired. (The last three years of his deal are @ 4.0, .525, .525, per capgeek).

Jack de la Hoya is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:15 PM
  #582
Prongo
Beer
 
Prongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 12,692
vCash: 500
http://twitter.com/#!/FriedgeHNIC/st...41545502752768 This is the original and I just kept adding future comments from his timeline.

Quote:
Holmgren: We sensed something was wrong with Chris...bit I don't think anyone expected that...Pronger "devastated" by news.
Quote:
Pronger "felt awful" after Nov. 19 game in Winnipeg. "Couldn't deal with the noise...or the lights.
Quote:
Holmgren: I made 29 phone calls yesterday when I got the news. Doesn't expect anything "anytime soon." Christmas trade freeze coming soon.
Quote:
Holmgren: haven't had time to digest a lot of things...discussion on captaincy "is far down the list." But leaning to not doing anything.
http://twitter.com/#!/davegisaac/sta...41673357705216

Quote:
Homer says the stick to the eye seems to be where all the Pronger problems started. As expected.
Quote:
Homer when asked if its career threatening: I guess you'd have to say yeah.
Quote:
Homer: if we have the chance to improve our team now and for the future we'd probably be interested.
Alright looks like the presser with the media has died down. Hope some of this answers some questions. Also I didn't see any updates on the other injuries.


Last edited by Prongo: 12-16-2011 at 12:39 PM.
Prongo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:29 PM
  #583
Doyle
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,150
vCash: 500
Flyers Will Have To Proceed As If Pronger Is Never Returning


The devastating news was reported early Thursday evening by Sportsnetís Nick Kypreos via Twitter, and confirmed by the team later during the first period of last nightís Philadelphia Flyers contest in Montreal ó the clubís top defenseman and team captain, Chris Pronger, will miss the remainder of the regular season and playoffs due to severe post-concussion symptoms.

Read More: http://nhlhotstove.com/flyers-will-h...medium=twitter

Doyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:29 PM
  #584
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 9,739
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyersfan9180 View Post
http://twitter.com/#!/FriedgeHNIC/st...41545502752768 This is the original and I just kept adding future comments from his timeline.






http://twitter.com/#!/davegisaac/sta...41673357705216
Well looks like we're going to have to bleed another batch of picks and prospects to get anything of significance to replace Pronger. Trade for Pronger ultimately wasn't worth the cost IMO..always a high risk but we almost pulled off a cup.

I just hope we don't mess with the chemistry too much....I think Schenn might have to be moved along with our first rounders and maybe Bob..sux but we need a quality big minute D man no matter what for now and the future. Looks like Prongs short career as a Flyer is over..sadly. Hopefully, his personal life is not impacted by this as badly as it sounds right now...

FreshPerspective is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:31 PM
  #585
BringBackStevens
Registered User
 
BringBackStevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 11,879
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BringBackStevens
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeh82
Not unreasonable, but I'm not sure it really addresses the league's concern about circumventing the cap. For the sake of argument, they's say Kimmo was UFA this offseason.

He's 36 now, right? Let's say he intends to come back and give it two more years. Let's say he's comfortable with 5 million in compensation.

Contact option A: two years, $10 million (5-5) = $5 million cap hit.
Option B: Four years, $14 million 5-5-2.5-1.5 = 3.5 million cap hit.

Kimmo retires after season 2 either way, having banked $10 million, but the team reaps the advantage of the lower cap hit with the latter option.

What am I missing.
It might not be perfect in the exact form I proposed it, but I think it would be better along those lines.

In your same scenario, if Timonen was 34 and signed the contract to play until he was 38, the cap hit would be wiped no matter how long it was, since it would have not been a 35+ contract.

So why is there punishment for a 36 year old player signing for 4 years but only to play for 2, but it's OK for a 34 year old player to sign for 6 years only to play for 4?

I would probably ammend my idea to apply to all contracts. Can only take you to somewhere around 40 and after that its 1 year deals. Perhaps you could also sign only for a maximum of 8-10 years as well.

Still could be a degree of "circumvention" but it would be reigned in to a reasonable level. And removes the need to punish a team for a player that has to retire due to injury

BringBackStevens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:32 PM
  #586
phillyfanatic
Registered User
 
phillyfanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,631
vCash: 500
I am lost. WHy is everyone complaning about the 35+ rule? The 35+ rule is a good one; it prevents the signing of a contract with the full intention of a player retiring before the end of the deal. LTIR is where Pronger is; not retirement. If he retires, we are ******. If he stays LTIR, then we can spend the 4.9 million per year on another player. LTIR is in place for this reason; Snider is willing to pay more than the cap; we will spend the 65 million instead of 60 million and have 60 million worth of injury free players on our team; just like everyone else.

I wish Pronger wasn't injured; but the CBA rules are fine.

phillyfanatic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:33 PM
  #587
Mota
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doyle View Post
Flyers Will Have To Proceed As If Pronger Is Never Returning.
Great. Expect a "Carle signs for 6 year, 35 mil extension" headline by christmas.

Mota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:38 PM
  #588
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 12,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by phillyfanatic View Post
I am lost. WHy is everyone complaning about the 35+ rule? The 35+ rule is a good one; it prevents the signing of a contract with the full intention of a player retiring before the end of the deal. LTIR is where Pronger is; not retirement. If he retires, we are ******. If he stays LTIR, then we can spend the 4.9 million per year on another player. LTIR is in place for this reason; Snider is willing to pay more than the cap; we will spend the 65 million instead of 60 million and have 60 million worth of injury free players on our team; just like everyone else.

I wish Pronger wasn't injured; but the CBA rules are fine.
The more I think about it, the more I agree with this.

Jack de la Hoya is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:39 PM
  #589
Protest
C`est La Vie
 
Protest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Deptford, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,080
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by phillyfanatic View Post
I am lost. WHy is everyone complaning about the 35+ rule? The 35+ rule is a good one; it prevents the signing of a contract with the full intention of a player retiring before the end of the deal. LTIR is where Pronger is; not retirement. If he retires, we are ******. If he stays LTIR, then we can spend the 4.9 million per year on another player. LTIR is in place for this reason; Snider is willing to pay more than the cap; we will spend the 65 million instead of 60 million and have 60 million worth of injury free players on our team; just like everyone else.

I wish Pronger wasn't injured; but the CBA rules are fine.
It's a good idea, but poor execution.

What if Pronger got his severe concussion in a car accident? Is there anything in there that prevents the team from being stuck with his cap hit? And why should they be on the hook for something like that?

Protest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:41 PM
  #590
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 12,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest View Post
It's a good idea, but poor execution.

What if Pronger got his severe concussion in a car accident? Is there anything in there that prevents the team from being stuck with his cap hit? And why should they be on the hook for something like that?
He would go on LTIR and the insurance would cover his salary, no? I mean, how is the situation different from the Flyers perspective?

Jack de la Hoya is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:43 PM
  #591
Banger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainHawk View Post
If he is medically cleared, he CANNOT remain on LTIR.
all he needs to do is say he's dizzy/nautious....they can't detect that stuff otherwise this concussion stuff would be a snap.

Banger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:46 PM
  #592
BringBackStevens
Registered User
 
BringBackStevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 11,879
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BringBackStevens
Quote:
I am lost. WHy is everyone complaning about the 35+ rule? The 35+ rule is a good one; it prevents the signing of a contract with the full intention of a player retiring before the end of the deal. LTIR is where Pronger is; not retirement. If he retires, we are ******. If he stays LTIR, then we can spend the 4.9 million per year on another player. LTIR is in place for this reason; Snider is willing to pay more than the cap; we will spend the 65 million instead of 60 million and have 60 million worth of injury free players on our team; just like everyone else.

I wish Pronger wasn't injured; but the CBA rules are fine.
If the Player wants to retire, he can retire. The team can't stop him from doing that. But if he's doing so because he's injured too badly to play, then whats the difference between LTIR and retirement? In either case it's unfair to stick the team with the cap hit.

Pronger shouldnt have to come back every year and pretend to try and come back if he truly can't just to help the team out

BringBackStevens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:48 PM
  #593
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 12,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BringBackStevens View Post
If the Player wants to retire, he can retire. The team can't stop him from doing that. But if he's doing so because he's injured too badly to play, then whats the difference between LTIR and retirement? In either case it's unfair to stick the team with the cap hit.

Pronger shouldnt have to come back every year and pretend to try and come back if he truly can't just to help the team out
What's the alternative, doing away with the 35+ rule entirely. Then we are back to square one re: cap abuse.

You're also forgetting the part where Pronger gets paid to try to come back each year. It's not like he (or any other player) would be doing it solely out of fidelity to the organization.

Jack de la Hoya is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:50 PM
  #594
JLHockeyKnight
IMA Real American
 
JLHockeyKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Central Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 19,439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by phillyfanatic View Post
I am lost. WHy is everyone complaning about the 35+ rule? The 35+ rule is a good one; it prevents the signing of a contract with the full intention of a player retiring before the end of the deal. LTIR is where Pronger is; not retirement. If he retires, we are ******. If he stays LTIR, then we can spend the 4.9 million per year on another player. LTIR is in place for this reason; Snider is willing to pay more than the cap; we will spend the 65 million instead of 60 million and have 60 million worth of injury free players on our team; just like everyone else.

I wish Pronger wasn't injured; but the CBA rules are fine.
I'm not expert on LTIR but I would guess that if you're on LTIR you have to make some sort of effort to make a return. If his brain injury won't allow him to be cleared to play again, he will be unable to make that effort regardless, thus be forced into retirement, where his cap hit will effect everything.

I don't know if that's true or not but might explain why everyone is going nuts.

JLHockeyKnight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:50 PM
  #595
JXC
#LaviPondHockeyFail
 
JXC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 13,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chimrichalds18 View Post
As a hockey fan, I really, really hope that the Penguins' decision to let him play (and not be cautious) following the Winter Classic isn't the decision that changed everything. That Hedman hit definitely did something.
Yeah it would be a shame. I never had anything against Crosby, only the people who fawned over him.

JXC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:55 PM
  #596
BringBackStevens
Registered User
 
BringBackStevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 11,879
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BringBackStevens
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeh82
What's the alternative, doing away with the 35+ rule entirely. Then we are back to square one re: cap abuse.
I feel like it would be handled better by putting in restrictions on contract term. I think it achieves the same effect.

Theres also a possibility that a 35+ player could one day wake up and decide he's sick of playing and stick the team with the cap hit, and it was not part of a circumvention conspiracy. Unlikely but if someone pulled a Legein on you it would be frustrating

BringBackStevens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:57 PM
  #597
phillyfanatic
Registered User
 
phillyfanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest View Post
It's a good idea, but poor execution.

What if Pronger got his severe concussion in a car accident? Is there anything in there that prevents the team from being stuck with his cap hit? And why should they be on the hook for something like that?
Define "on the hook". If by "on the hook" you mean they have to pay it; then it doesn't matter the age, all NHL contracts are guaranteed contracts, so regardless of where the injury occured, the player gets paid. If you are talking about against the cap; then again, the CBA allows teams to spend that players dollars in replacement players. If the replacement player money does not take you "over the cap", then your cap number does not increase. If it does, then you are allowed to go over by the injured players salary (pro-rated based on average daily number for the days he is injured).

LTIR is a problem when players "come back" before end of year. The Flyers got screwed with this when Briere was hurt, in Prongers case, he is gone, the Flyers are free to spend money to replace him because he is not coming back.

IMO - The system is working. If they didn't have a 35+ rule, Lidstrom could sign in Detroit for 5 years 3 million per cap hit front loaded at 6 mllion per in the first two years. Then retire about year 2 leaving 3 million on the table; Lidstrom wins, Detroit wins......but every other team is the league loses. No good. You need the 35+ rule in place. The only way out of it is; if you have a major injury that is preventing you from playing. Pronger has that injury, is on LTIR, so we are not screwed by the 35+ rule.

phillyfanatic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:58 PM
  #598
achdumeingute
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NorCal
Posts: 2,183
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BringBackStevens View Post
If the Player wants to retire, he can retire. The team can't stop him from doing that. But if he's doing so because he's injured too badly to play, then whats the difference between LTIR and retirement? In either case it's unfair to stick the team with the cap hit.

Pronger shouldnt have to come back every year and pretend to try and come back if he truly can't just to help the team out
If he retires he doesn't get his salary either.
It can't be difficult to come to Philly skate around in non contact drills for two weeks and get 1 million dollars.
I really don't see how anyone just walks away from that.
Heck even if he can't skate for 1 minute, there is the LTIR. He's not going to "retire" on paper until the contract ends.

achdumeingute is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:58 PM
  #599
Prongo
Beer
 
Prongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 12,692
vCash: 500
http://twitter.com/#!/BroadStBull/st...52016867893248

Quote:
Gus is about a week away from playing, Homer says. #Flyers

Prongo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2011, 12:58 PM
  #600
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 12,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLHockeyKnight View Post
I'm not expert on LTIR but I would guess that if you're on LTIR you have to make some sort of effort to make a return. If his brain injury won't allow him to be cleared to play again, he will be unable to make that effort regardless, thus be forced into retirement, where his cap hit will effect everything.

I don't know if that's true or not but might explain why everyone is going nuts.
I don't think that's right. If you aren't medically cleared to practice, then you don't need to practice to show that you are trying to return.

Basically, as long as he isn't medically cleared to practice or play, and decides not to voluntarily retire, the Flyers problem is more an inconvenience (less flexibility in the offseason) than a catastrophe. As long as Pronger is stands to take in millions of dollars just to not say he's retiring, I'm fairly confident he won't.

The last two years of his deal, when he stands to make "just" 525, would be the only time I could really imagine him voluntarily walking away.

Jack de la Hoya is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:47 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.