AJgoal

Funny, when I trade players off my FHL teams, they start putting up points. When I bring them in, they stop.

I fast forwarded through the Rangers portions of the show, so not to have my opinion of their players ruined.

Both have been sent down. Flyers D are now Timonen, Coburn, Meszaros, Carle, Kubina, Gorssman, and Lilja. I'd rather see Lilja sent down than either of the two rooks.

To that point, DGG, the 5-on-3 shorty was just that kind of goal. Giroux madea good play in getting it back to Timonen, but the puck hopped his stick. 9 times out of 10, especially on a 5-on-3, that's out of the zone, regathered, and played back in. Cooke happened to read the play and was going in the right direction to get speed up, while Timonen had to turn and chase. Cooke still got forced wide by Timonen, Bryzgalov has to make that save, it wasn't even a strong shot. but he lets it in, it's a 5-on-3 goal against, the game's tied, the crowd's out of it, and the Pens have all the momentum.

The point of the over-35 contract clause was to prevent teams from signing a player to a long term contract for cap implications and then have them retire a few years down the road, thereby clearing that cap space. Say you sign a 36 year old player to a 6 year contract. If at 40 he retires due to age catching up to him, that's one thing. If not for his concussion, Pronger would still be playing at a fairly high level. Laperriere's career was the same issue. Length and terms of the contract shouldn't matter. It's a farce that a player has to "make an effort" to come back every season in order to be able to go on LTIR. Remember, the Flyers went through the same thing with Rathje, and he earned 3.5 a year, both real money and capwise. If Crosby were to retire today due to his concussion issues, the pens would immediatly get his cap space. His contract was also front loaded, but since he's not over 35, he can retire due to injury and there is no cap implications. All I'm asking for is a bona fide injury exemption to the over-35 rule. Player retires because he can't keep up, fine. that's the risk you take when you sign a guy who's career is going to start trending downward. But let an injured guy hang them up.

Yes, but that also includes players that will likely be on the Phantoms at the start of the season, if they are on a one-way contract. For example, Walker and Leighton counted against the offseason cap this year. Edit: it also includes players on two way contracts, in proportion to the number of NHL games played in the year prior.

It depends on a lot of things, especially what the final deal would look like. First off, I'm not sold on brining in Nash. His cap number is big and the cap is likely to go down after this season when the new CBA is agreed to. If there's a buyout clause, Nash isn't someone you'd want to buy out, but someone you may have to. Turning him into a damned expensive rental. On the flip side, he's a great goal scorer who's languished on Columbus. Adding him to the Flyers makes them that much more dangerous in the offensive zone. The Flyers have five centers right now: Giroux, Briere, Talbot, Schenn, and Couturier. Toss in Read and that's quite a few guys with the ability to line up in the middle. Read has done alright with the transition to wing. Ideally, I would keep them all, but Couturier's and Read's defensive play make them more valuable to me. Also, Schenn's cap hit is still high the next two years. He has potential, but if he'll be able to realize it here is a good question. Couturier is a bigger body, as well. Once he fills out, he could become a monster. Like I said, ideally I'd keep both. We know the talent is there, and Briere is starting to look to me like he's falling apart - but then, I felt the same way two seasons ago. Barring that, I'd prefer to use one to bring in a young, top tier D-man. Barring THAT, if we absolutely must trade one for Nash, I trade Schenn. And I feel dirty just typing that.

I hope he can get some semblance of a life back. I suffered a couple of minor concussions and am still dealing with issues 8 years later. I can't imagine what it's like for guys like him and Primeau and Lindros who have suffered serious ones. I understand the point of the over 35 clause, but hopefully this si something they'll address in the new CBA. If a player is forced to retire due to a bona fide serious injury, he should be allowed to retire and have the cap hit come off the books. The situations with LaPerriere and Pronger the past few seasons are ridiculous. It's not an attempt to circumvent the cap. The guy can't physically play anymore. Have the league doctor review the case file if you need to, but stop this circus.

Contracts can not be renegotiated like they can in the NFL. Once signed, the term and payment are final, unless the player is bought out.

TV Land is right, probably. you figure most afternoon games are either Saturday or Sunday, only one Sunday game is in the evening, typically. I figure the Leafs (and the other canadian teams) play a lot of Sat night games because of HNIC.

Richards' and Carter's NTC/NMCs hadn't kicked in at the time of their trades. Carter's still hasn't kicked in yet. Once they kick in, they remain in effect until the end of the contract or the end of the term, as far as I know. What the hot stove guys were saying yesterday is that a player is not elligible for an NTC/NMC until they reach Tier 3 free agency elligibility (they don't have to actually become a FA, though). Since Carter hasn't reached Tier 3 elligibility, his NTC/NMC can't take effect.

He's signed til 2017, I believe

I didn't even think JVR caught his hand. And how about the 5 and a game on Staal for his crosscheck/board on Coburn? Oh right, that's only 2. And 2 for Timonen for 'splaining to the ref what the call should have been.

Canoli, I agree in principle. But if Mason is on the table, and the Jackets are pushing Philly hard for the trade as has been reported, I look at it. Maybe there's a way to take Nash and Mason, then flip Nash, and get rid of Bryz's contract. Mason can't be worse than we're getting right now, he's a lower cap hit, and he's a free agent after next season. I don't think the Flyers gut the team to bring in a scoring winger when scoring isn't what they need.

IIRC, they don't need to be cap compliant until 5pm tomorrow, which gives them time to send Bourdon down or place Sestito on LTIR.

I would have to wait to see what happened. If they were to trade Bryz (we can hope), JVR, and Carle off the roster for Nash and Mason, I wouldn't consider that gutting the team, and it might address the goaltending issue if a change of scenery and better d helps out Mason.

I was just looking from a cap perspective.

Flyers are also over the cap, per capgeek. So something's really gotta give. Waiving Shelley? <FINGERS crossed> Edit: OK, they'll probably just drop Sestito onto LTIR

Kubina had 3 goals, 8 assists, and was a +1 on the Lightning. The lightning as a team are -33 in goal differential. While I haven't payed much attention to the Lightning this year, that seems pretty good.

We can also use Carle as a trade chip if necessary to clear cap space. I've not advocated trading Carle, but with the addition of Grossman, you could conceiveably trade one of the veteran Dmen. We'd miss Carle's puck moving ability, but if you can add Weber (still a longshot), he'd replace most of that.

Wouldn't work under the Cap. Plus you need to replace Bob.

From LeBrun's article on ESPN: "Temporary salary cap In what has been a vastly under-the-radar story, a buzz item among NHL GMs these days is how they’re going to approach this summer with what will be a higher but temporary salary cap number. Confused? The collective bargaining agreement doesn’t expire until Sept. 15 at midnight ET. But NHL teams have to conduct business under this current CBA until then. As per the current system, the salary cap is once again expected to rise as of June 30 from the current $64.3 million upper limit to as high as $68 million to $69 million, according to guesstimates from some team executives. That new cap number will exist only from June 30 to whenever a new CBA comes into effect. The obvious issue is that most teams believe the cap will go down in the new CBA as owners try to scale back the players’ percentage of revenues (the players will have a mighty say in that, however). So, you could have a situation where the cap is around $69 million for the summer and then much lower come the fall with a new CBA (again, the players will have a say in that). This will force teams to come up with their own internal cap number based solely on guesswork this summer, because the last thing a team wants is to have a $69 million payroll on Aug. 30 and then be told it needs to shed a chunk of it come the new CBA in the fall. Either way, just another wrinkle for this summer’s free-agent market." Consider this: The Flyers have two contracts (Bryzgalov and Pronger) that at the end of the season, they may not want to have anymore. If the salary cap drops by a significant amount from the projected 68-69 million, the new CBA almost must have a buyout clause. This could give the Flyers an out should they wish it. Might depend on if they are over the new cap, though.

Unless he agrees to sign before the trade, nothing. I don't want a rental, not this year.

Also, he can't sign with the Flyers (or anyone other than the Preds unless they trade his rights) before the free agency period starts.

True, although I disagree that one top end guy won't change much, because you're replacing your worst defender with one that's at least on par with your best. While I like Bourdon, if you were to take him out and slot Pronger back into his place it would be night and day. While I like Bourdon and think he's got a good future, Pronger's got a better shot, is better positionally, and is a more physical presence. Add to that the intangibles he brings to the game, and it would be a marked improvement to the team.