AJgoal

Niedermeyer wasn't injured. He had contemplated retirement and skipped training camp. Pronger was named Captain in the beginning of the season to replace an apparently retired player. Completely different situation. I also don't see the need to give someone the "C." You already have Timmonen, Briere, Talbot, and Giroux wearing A's. Is changing one of those to a "C" really going to matter all that much? There's leadership in place, designating one of those guys the Captain for the remainder of this year isn't going to make him any more of a leader on and off the ice. It's not like the team has been losing without Pronger and needs something to get them motivated.

It sticks with the Flyers until his contract expires in five years, as he was over 35 when his extension kicked in. The Flyers will likely LTIR him each season if he is done to get relief to get around this, but it's not as "clean" as just getting his cap hit removed from the books. The Flyers would want to be right at the cap when they place him on LTIR to get maximum credit, and it may hamper what they can do in the offseason. The over 35 rule was intended to prevent teams from signing guys to ridiculously long contracts in order to circumvent the cap, knowing full well that the player wouldn't be playing that long. But a guy retiring due to a severe injury is quite different from someone retiring because he doesn't feel he's competitive anymore. Case in point: Everyone knows Lappy "retired" last season, but they're keeping up the charade just because he has to pretend that he's coming back. There's no penalty being handed out, so what's the point? This is something I'd like to see addressed in the new CBA.

1. Flyers projected cap space next year is 4.5 million, with only Jagr, Carle, and Voracek on the healthy roster needing contracts (Harry Z, Marshall, and Bourdon are RFAs, as well, and I assume that Laperriere and Bets will not be re-signed). If you assume Pronger is done, that's another 4.9 million. This also assumes that the cap stays the same, which with a new CBA needed, is impossible to judge which way it will go. but it isn't as impossible as it seems on the face. 2. Giroux, Couturier, Talbot, Read. Talbot's the oldest at 27. While I'm not in favor of ditching Schenn, It's not like the Flyers have a dearth of young players able to play top 9 minutes at center, either.

Not sure that will be enough. On the surface, they're still 266 thousand over. That's with Lilja and Gus still on LTIR, Marshall, Walker, and Z sent down. Bourdon goes down when either Lilja or Gus comes back, but that basically evens out. Schenn may have to go back down, again, if you want to fit Weber in. Of course, if you want to bring Weber in, you may be trading Schenn anyway.

According to capgeek, Pronger is on LTIR already, giving the Flyers a bit over 2 million in cap credit right now. However, that also includes Gus and Lilja, who will be coming off soon. They'd need to shed over 2 million in pro-rated salary to fit Weber in under the cap this year. Suter, on the other hand, may fit.

Guess I'm in the minority, but I don't think the team can assign someone else the "C" at this stage. Pronger hasn't retired, and you don't take the captaincy away from a guy due to injury, it sends the wrong message. What if Pronger comes out of this perfectly fine at the start of next year (I realize it's a long shot, but not outside the realm of possibility)? Do you give it back to him, thereby stripping your newly anointed captain of the "C"? On the other hand, if Pronger were to voluntarily give it up, stand in front of the team and say, "Thank you for letting me be captain, but you need a leader on the ice," then you can assign a new captain, and then I think it goes to Kimmo. I think he's really been quietly leading the team all season, has a great presence on the ice, and is a natural choice.

The problem with grading concussions is that the brain is such a complex thing that we don't really understand at all - all the research and knowledge we have barely scratch the surface. And everyone who has had one reacts differently to it. As a counterpoint to Aziz's story: My vehicle was caught in an explosion and I banged my head on an instrument panel (from about 3-4 inches away, with a helmet on). I ended up with what might have been called a "mild" concussion back then (way back in 2004) - few headaches, nothing major (it seemed). A couple years later, I took a stick across the bridge of my nose which resulted in a minor break and likely another "mild" concussion. To this day I still have memory issues to the point where I lose what I was talking about mid-sentence at times. Neither of these incidents caused me to lose consciousness, neither was particularly violent (the stick shot just happened to catch me just right). But here I am, 6 years later, still suffering from some signs of PCS. All I'm trying to illustrate here is that it's just so hard to know anything about what's going on in the brain, which may be why they're getting away from claassifying concussions based on symptoms. Since every trauma is different, there's no way to be sure how the brain will react in any particular case. At least with increased understanding, we're seeing increased caution after the fact. Hopefully we'll see better head protection and less plastic armor on players.

While I hate to see Giroux hurt, how nice is it to be "arguing" whether Read or Couturier is the better fit on the top line on the merits of the two players, not based on their failings? I think either would be fine up on the top line. I'm also fine with keeping Briere where he is. In a situation like this, I'd rather juggle the first and 3rd or 4th line, than the first and 2nd, if you can get away with it talent wise.

I'd do it like the NFL - that year's salary plus a pro-rated portion of any signing bonus.

I've played off and on at Skatezone, Igloo, and Grundy. Started playing back in college in the late 90s.

He can. I don't know the specifics on his waiver elligibility, but a one-way contract just means he gets paid the same whether he's on the Flyers or sent down to the minors. Doesn't effect the ability to go to the minors. Walker and Leighton are on one-way contracts as well.

I went to Game 3 of the ECF against Tampa in 2004. Flyers lost the game, and I don't really remember the score, but it was memorable because I had only been back from Iraq for about a week, came home from Colorado, and went to the game that night. Guy next to me bought me a beer, then punched out a Tampa fan who rolled down like 5-6 rows of seats. He got thrown out. Most memorable for me though wasn't really a game...Went down with a buddy to the Wachovia to watch game 7 against Boston two years ago. Insane atmosphere at the start went to total silence, then started to build back up. Once they tied it, the place stayed loud and when Gagne scored to go ahead the crowd went nuts and didn't stop until well after it was over. Totally amazing experience.

I hated the way it looked, from both ends of the ice. Not sure I want the NHL to do anything about it though... I'd prefer teams find a consistent way to beat it and force Tampa to abandon it - although I admit I don't know what it is. But 23rd in goals against says to me it isn't impossible. The more the NHL legislates, the more open to interpretation the rules will get, and we'll just have more penalties per game than we already do now.

From LeBrun's article on ESPN.ugh: Don't feel like breaking this down. "We're not playing our system.." When your dman keeps a forward to the outside and the forward just blows one past you? That's not on a "system." And Leino is struggling because he has too much pressure? No, he's struggling because he isn't the player they thought and signed him to be.

4 games for a repeat offender doing something obviously dirty? Meh, I guess I can live with it, but a few more wouldn't have hurt.

telling? Not really an antonym for ironic that fits this context. Besides, let's leave semantics on the other board.

Irony: (n) an outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been, expected. You're saying it was unexpected he would score when he was separated from Shelley?

Touche. Of course, I think that was more putting the skilled guy on the line with the goon, than vice versa.

FWIW, they showed Shelley as the team was leaving the ice at the end of the period just staring over at the Buffalo players while everyone else went down the chute. Seemed pretty obvious that if he was on the ice, he would have done something. Of course, nobody puts the goon on the line with your skilled guys anymore.

Yeah. I wonder if Nash has had discussions with Weber's agent and decided that they just would not be able to re-sign him. Although he's still an RFA, so you would think they'd have some leverage.

I disagree. Nodl and Talbot, especially, I thought were playing well, forechecking and controlling the puck well, and generating some chances.

Not for nothing, but that was not an injury that would be more likely with age. The rest of your post is well taken though, especially the part about how long it will take him to get into shape if he is injured frequently.

If the above is what you mean, just hit the quote button on the bottom right of the post you're replying to.

Sure, thanks.

Whatever, I found it funnier that way. Besides, who cares. edit: it's switched over now. I do worry that having the link in a post on the site is dangerous, but if the ignore feature blocks threads started by an individual, I'll get by.