radoran

The NFL doesn't have "guaranteed contracts" which is why guys get such ridiculous "signing bonuses". Often players have no real expectation of being with a team for the entire length of the deal signed. I don't think most people expect Vick to play out his whole deal, for example. There are performance bonuses - as there are in hockey. I don't know the specifics. I believe the NHL's CBA severely limits what bonuses can be paid on and the amount they can be within a contract. I don't think the NHLPA wants 100% "performance-based" contracts. It starts to get harder to calculate, too - once you take into account "intangibles" which IMO are more important in hockey. You don't have to be a 30-goal scorer to be a valuable asset to your team. Properly compensating that on a performance based contract is important.

Would I *like* Bryz to stop more in the shootout? Of course. That said, Giguere didn't make any stops in the shootout, either - and if Read's shot was an inch lower... Does it matter to me if he's no good in the carny game they run to award an extra point and giant stuffed bear during the regular season if he puts up 1.95/.926 in the playoffs? No. I like the player. Don't like the contract - amount or length. But I'm not going to do final evaluations before for the first half of the first season of the deal is done. Essentially - if they win the Cup in June, I don't care how many shootouts in December they lose. I'm just of the opinion that a goalie who put up 1.95/.926 doesn't necessarily "******* SUCK" because of a bad performance in a carny game. YMMV

I don't think 3-5 year deals are at all unreasonable. It's the 9, 12, 15 year ones that start getting ridiculous. I think six is even pushing it. The guaranteed money aspect works both ways. You are aaking players to literally risk life and limb out on the ice. At any given time, their career could end. And they have higher rates of post-career trauma (to joints, brain, etc.). I wouldn't mind some sort of system where there is a defined pension and benefits for injured players who are forced out of a contract, but in lieu of that, I don't see it happening.

Three years after this one. Briere's up in 2015. As I read it, he'll be 37. It's definitely a worry with a smaller player. GMs got all hot and bothered with these long term contracts allowing for lower cap numbers, but they missed the point that these are LONG TERM contracts. More often than not, these contracts are counterproductive for the player (see: Ovechkin, Alex) and bad for the team (see: Bryzgalov, Ilya) Buy Bryz out? Sure. Take a $2.8M cap hit each year FOR THE NEXT SIXTEEN YEARS. Would not surprise me at all to see JVR shipped out at the trade deadline. Not. At. All. He's still got some serious value, is locked up for six years and has a fairly reasonable cap number for some Columbus-type squad needing to make sure they're near the salary floor.

I would be surprised if there is another "free buyout" provision in a new CBA. Not completely shocked, but surprised. Even then, I'm not sure that Comcast puts out $45M for absolutely nothing in that circumstance, but it's good to dream. A regular buyout would be an almost $3M cap hit - for the next 16 years. I'll stick with hoping he plays to the level expected and if some bolt from the blue appears to change everything, I won't mind at all.

I'll take a wrister if it also gives us the beauty of that shootout goal. That was a dominant move. He needs more of that in his game play.

I *knew* someone was going to say that ;-)

I just wish his goal calls didn't all sound like they were proud of the puppy's accomplishments. "Oh, look at Jody Shelley and the nice shiny goal he found!" It's a nice goal. Against Atlanta. Last season. JVR & Hartnell beat Miller. Last month. OK, to give credit where due - and I did look this up - Shelley had the first goal of a 5-2 win, so it was a meaningful score. JVR & Hartnell were 2 and 3 in 7 minutes against Ryan Miller. I'll go with the latter if not trying to build a guy up for the waiver wire...

I remember them quite clearly. Two goals on Miller in the first two minutes with JVR powering down the boards and launching a slap shot to beat Miller high glove side just under the crossbar. A few minutes later Hartnell comes down the same side and from virtually the same position - he later said "I saw JVR do it" (paraphrase) - and beat Miller again, chasing him from the game. If Laviolette is going to a Shelley slap shot, it's for a purpose.

1.95/.926 is an indication of lack of focus? of concentration? There are times that it's quite legitimate to criticize a goalie. After a night of 1.95/.926 with the tying goal coming off two own-skates is NOT the legitimate time.

Prod away - I prod when needed. But when a goalie goes out and puts up 1.95/.926 and the game-tying goal is a behind the line deflection of a pass off two own-skates - I'll just opine is NOT the time to do it...

You can only hope that the Flyers' major goalie acquisition crashes and burns into a nine year total disaster in the first half season of the deal? I kinda hope he gets it together and plays better consistently, myself... YMMV

Kipper gave up four goals in his last start - following a five goal outing in the game before. That's nine goals in two games from a $5.8M goaltender. It's the sixth time this season - more than 20% of his starts - that he's given up four or more goals. Kipper's .910 SV% is respectable, I guess, but a 2.54 GAA is simply too high for a #1 caliber goalie. He's eating up 10% of the cap space. PLUS, in five of his past eight starts, he's posted a sub-.900 SV%. Sheeya they were 4-2-2, but that's really just .500. True stories. He's also just one win over .500 for the season 14-11-2 (14-13 duh). This is unacceptable. This sort of performance has obviously nothing to do with the team playing in front of him. It's all on Kipper. This six-year contract has been nothing but a millstone on the Flames' franchise. He's supposed to be a shut-down, elite #1 goalie. I'm just not seeing that in December, 2011. And we've got two more years of this. Karlsson should play more. He just needs a chance to recover his 2.58/.908 form from last season and blossom. Heck, that's almost the same numbers as Kipper but at 15% the salary! KA-CHING! Or maybe the Flames should consider trading with the Flyers to pick up Leighton because Karlsson's injured. Maybe send Iginla to Philly for him? The Flames need a top-flight goalie rightnow and Leighton has the playoff experience of playing in the Stanley Cup Finals. For reals. </ snark> In other news, yes, I own Kipper in NAHANA.

Laviolette has said that one of the good things about the injury situation is that he's been able to give more time to Voracek - and I think Voracek is showing why he was a top 10 pick. He's gone from the 15-minute range into the mid-20s and has looked pretty good doing it.

It's not like Bryzgalov hasn't been kinda hippy-dippy for his entire career. This isn't something that just came up. If the Flyers were at all put off by that during their interviews (which I assume they conducted as part of their due diligence on a 9-year, 10%-cap space deal) they shouldn't have made the deal. But they did. Goalies are infamous for being head cases. All of them. There's more than enough to criticize and seek improvement on in Bryz's on-ice play. To get wrapped up on postgame interviews and 24/7 comments is, to me, losing focus.

The Flyers play like warmed over dogmeat against Boston and it's Bryzgalov's fault they lost. Bryzgalov puts up 1.95/.926 against Colorado and it's Bryzgalov's fault they lost. Nobody likes Bryzgalov's contract, but it's like "water being wet" - it is what it is. We can't change it. In fact, with the NMC, the only person who *can* change it is... Bryzgalov. Bobrovsky isn't going to "take over." Leighton isn't going to be given the reins (thank GOD). Boucher's got a two-year deal in Carolina. It's mind-boggling to me, but Ed Snider apparently tapped a Russian goalie to be "His Guy" for the Cup. Bryzgalov does need to play better. The whole TEAM needs to play better. And yet they're second in the conference with the third most points in the league. It's rough being so awful.

Didn't Hartnell do that earlier this season on Miller? About four minutes after JVR had done exactly the same thing?

That's the one that went off one Flyer skate and then off another Flyer skate? That's the "horrible" goal? His teammates were going "how can *that* happen?" - not "how can Bryz let that goal in?" but "how can an errant pass go off two skates and be a perfect shot into the goal?" Last night Bryz was 1.95 GAA/ .926 SV%, with the game tied on a two-skate deflection from behind the goal. Who stops that? Lundqvist? Brodeur? Fleury? Thomas? Tretiak? Roy? Parent? Plante? Come on now. Yes, he didn't look stellar in the carny ride where you get an extra point and giant stuffed bear, but he *was* 1.95/.926 in the game... oh, and Giguere's "win" came on a shot that hit the crossbar (in other words, got by him). In essence, no goalie last night stopped any shootout shooter. I take some positives out of last night's game: 1.95/.926 is just the start; the fighting back to secure the point on the road in the final minute; strong play from Voracek and Simmonds; a semi-productive nine minutes from Holmstrom (6 for 8 on FOs). With Bryzgalov my glass if half full - with vodka. As for Cechmanek, his career NHL GAA/SV% is 2.08/.919 regular season and 2.33/.909 in the playoffs. Tim Thomas' career NHL GAA/SV%? 2.50/.922 (2.06/.936 playoffs). Yes, it was "Cechmanek's fault" that the team quit against Ottawa. 100% Cechmanek's fault that the team managed two entire goals in the five game series. Yes, they scored two goals in five games and WON A GAME and it was entirely the goalie's fault that they lost. Book. It.

I know it's not popular to bash on Mr. Snider, but this does seem to be his call. You can't entirely blame Homer for making an offer to a player he was told to acquire. You can't entirely blame Bryzgalov for signing the deal he was offered. You also can't assume that scouts/Homer/etc. didn't bring up these potential pitfalls to Mr. Snider when discussing the deal. You can blame the guy who told Homer that the deal had to be done. Ed put all his money on #30 - orange and we're hoping that number hits before his is up.

Yep. Lavy will have "mismanaged the goalie situation" and "lost the room" after the playoffs. Then in 2013 it's Bryzgalov's fault. And 2015. And 2017...

You are, unfortunately, right. I see this somewhat akin to the "must sign a #1 C" debate over Briere/Drury/Gomez a few years back. The Flyers ABSOLUTELY HAD TO HAVE one of those "top flight, can't miss" guys. The fact we got Briere, who turned out to be the cheapest and best of the three, is small consolation when they didn't "need" to do that - and they had Richards/Crater already in the system and had drafted Giroux the year before... The guys that also "had to sign one of them" and wound up with Drury and Gomez - how'd that work out for them? They didn't "need" to go after a goalie, aside from their esteemed 78-year-old owner who really *really* wants another Cup... They certainly didn't "need" one for the NEXT NINE YEARS. On that note, I absolutely could see Bryz taking a "waiver" out of town - but not for a few years.

All of these long term deals have been typical Flyer overreaaching. This organization appears to start contract negotiations with a free agent that they covet by offering the best possible deal they can come up with. The fact that this is their default STARTING position weakens them considerably. It also explains the Shelley Situation. I like Bryzgalov, but think he has some flaws that are compensated by a solid defense. That said, the length and size of this contract is, quite frankly, inexcusable. The only thing I can think is that they will eventually waive him, he will refuse assignment and play KHL. To an extent, this could be Homer sticking it to the NHL for the Pronger contract SNAFU.

Buffalo's downtown is a little dumpy (if rebounding), but there are some very nice areas right nearby. That said, if Lupul can't figure out to get a lake view room, I don't know what to tell him...

The LTIR exemption isn't something you can sign other players long-term with. It accumulates during the season and - as noted above - only applies in some situations. It adds space to the cap, but doesn't create a season-to-season exemption - you still have to be in compliance (within 10%?) in the offseason. I do expect the Flyers to spend and get virtually all of the LTIR exemption used over the course of a season - but it seems more useful in terms of bringing up players and making in-season trades.

If you were a relatively healthy player, why on earth would you want to take the Flyers' C? I say they just retire the C permanently and go with three As.