AJgoal

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.

they still over the cap though...

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.

xganarchy, on Feb 15, 2012 - 04:02 PM, said:

Columbus gets: Bobrovsky/Schenn/Preds prospect

Nashville gets: Nash

Flyers get: Suter (if he agrees to sign)/Columbus 1st

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.

sure, in theory. assuming you can get him on the ice for every single one of their shifts immediately. the theory starts springing leaks once you factor in penalties, away games, can't-change-because-of-icing, pieces of that opposing top lines double shifting on different lines...all of a sudden you realize there is conceivably a lot of exposure even with that stud shut down guy. best laid plans and all.

I'm not arguing with your point as a whole, because one shut down guy doesn't make a team, and you're right, he's probably only going to hit 25-28 minutes per game. But, on this team, that one shut down guy would be getting added to Timmonen, Coburn, Carle, and Meszaros. If Pronger were to come back tomorrow, he wouldn't be the only guy back there on D. Timonen would be out there for another 2/5 of the game or so. You wouldn't replace Timonen with Pronger, you'd replace Bourdon or Gus. Looking at it in a vacuum, you are right. But on this particular team, when you already have a pretty effective shutdown d-man or pair, the equation changes a bit.

weber would solidy our D more than any single other person, sure, but i question the overall impact a single person can have, outside of a brick wall goaltender or a monster scoring machine. as i said, i think the effect is overstated.

I agree. However, bringing Weber in is something that solidifies the team this year and for the foreseeable future. Given some of the issues in net, I wouldn't go for a rental player. But a guy like Weber, who's in his prime.. Even if you don't win this year, you have years ahead that he helps with.

I was basically trying to point out that the idea that just because a guy hasn't won the cup with a team, doesn't mean that he's not worth having or that he won't on another team.

I understand this. However, Bourque is a hall of famer, and never won a cup with Boston. Would you have not traded for him in the prime of his career simply because he "never did it" for Boston?

He also contributed 59 points in his last season, plus 10 more in the playoffs when they won the Cup. So it's not like he was just along for the ride in his final season.

Bourque never did it for Boston either. Just sayin...

I believe he was the only American on the team last year, however. Corvo wasn't with the team and the guy Sestito ran over was a call-up.

Thomas' beef is with the size and scope of government, at least according to his statement.

I still think that boycotting a traditioinal, non-political event meant to honor your team is the wrong way to make a point, but he did make it.