Trade Confirmed Mason a Flyer

[Polaris922]

Remember... Snider borrowed money to make Spectacor happen so he had people to answer to as well. The whole thing is convoluted.

[Vincent05]

BTW...Mason's RFA status may not come into play.

"Holmgren said he has already held discussions with Mason's agent and expects to re-sign him before this season ends."

I read that somewhere also, says he will resign him at a reduce cap hit. If he can then it wouldn't be bad.

[DaGreatGazoo]

Remember... Snider borrowed money to make Spectacor happen so he had people to answer to as well. The whole thing is convoluted.

Wait, I thought you always said Snider was given all his money, and never worked for it??? So which is it.

[JackStraw]

@JackStraw That's kinda how I thought it shakes out. Still leaves me wondering though, if Comcast-Spectacor is a subssidiary of Comcast, it stands to reason that the parent company could indeed hire and fire, no?

I assume that the board of Comcast-Spectacor would have the power to remove Snider as chairman. I can't see that happening though, seeing as how Snider is one of the movers and shakers in the NHL.

[canoli]

you guys really need to quit belly aching about the length of the contracts. I hate this stupid expression but this time it fits: "it is what it is."

Of course 3 years for Hartnell or Bryzgalov (or Pronger or Briere ) would've been better for the Flyers. You ready to pay them $9mil/season? Neither is anyone else. Impact players cost big money and the only way to sign one is to spread his salary over multiple years. Every GM has a couple guys on his roster he knows won't be worth their cap hit toward the end of their contract. He knows it when he signs him but he's convinced he's getting the player's best years and the long-term consequences are tolerable.

Now with the 2 buyouts available there's really no reason to btch about the contracts. Briere and Bryzgalov can be paid to go bye-bye. Kimmo and Hartnell, maybe you think one or both is being overpaid. I don't, at least not by enough to stew about. Kimmo wasn't going to accept 1/2 his former salary - don't make me laugh. Why should he? And Hartnell - if he gets back into the flow and starts earning top line minutes...his cap hit is very reasonable imho at $4.75mil.

The one stinker contract is Pronger's, since the best we can do with him is put him on LTIR. But if I understand it correctly that still hurts us in the off-season as we have to include his cap hit until the new season starts.

[jackhole]

Leighton for Mason maybe. Leighton and a third? Maybe, maybe not.

If we didn't include Leightion, it would've been done for only a 5th round pick. But to include Leaky, we had to pony up a 3rd

[Polaris922]

Wait, I thought you always said Snider was given all his money, and never worked for it??? So which is it.

Some was daddy's money (given) and some was invested into his idea from outside from what I've read. He never actually EARNED a dime from what the articles about him have said.

[TimKerrFan12]

this just wants to make me puke....

Bobrovsky, 24, was a March “Star of the Month” and he’s the big reason the Blue Jackets are in the playoff hunt. He’s got a 2.13 GAA and .927 save percentage.

Columbus has a better D.

[Howie58]

I don't see him deflated, only inflated.

Helium, hydrogen...or pot...or hot air?

Peace,

Howie

[Vincent05]

Helium, hydrogen...or pot...or hot air?

Peace,

Howie

His pocket

[Claude Monet]

@canoli

stop trying to be reasonable!

[brelic]

you guys really need to quit belly aching about the length of the contracts. I hate this stupid expression but this time it fits: "it is what it is."

Hey, we've each got our pet peeves I know what you're saying, but "it is what is" doesn't quite capture it. "It is what Homer has made it" is better

Of course 3 years for Hartnell or Bryzgalov (or Pronger or Briere ) would've been better for the Flyers. You ready to pay them $9mil/season? Neither is anyone else. Impact players cost big money and the only way to sign one is to spread his salary over multiple years. Every GM has a couple guys on his roster he knows won't be worth their cap hit toward the end of their contract. He knows it when he signs him but he's convinced he's getting the player's best years and the long-term consequences are tolerable.

There is no one else in the league - GUARANTEED - that would have given Bryzgalov a 9 year contract. It was a colossal mistake even before the ink dried. I doubt he even would have gotten a 6 year contract on the open market. So "it is what the Flyers made it". This is an organizational failure in negotiation (wait... what negotiation??).

For Hartnell, I can accept it more. Again, it's not just the length that bothers me. It's the NMC as well as the age when he gets this contract. You don't have to give him $9M per year for fewer seasons. You just give him fewer seasons and a slight raise. Or give him a NMC for the first 3 years only. Really, no one would pay Hartnell $6M on the open market, so you offer him $5.5M, over 4. It might seem insignificant to squabble over two extra years, but two extra years can make a big difference.

Now with the 2 buyouts available there's really no reason to btch about the contracts. Briere and Bryzgalov can be paid to go bye-bye. Kimmo and Hartnell, maybe you think one or both is being overpaid. I don't, at least not by enough to stew about. Kimmo wasn't going to accept 1/2 his former salary - don't make me laugh. Why should he? And Hartnell - if he gets back into the flow and starts earning top line minutes...his cap hit is very reasonable imho at $4.75mil.

Sure we can btch They were still bad business decisions. In Briere's case, the market dictated the price because it was the year of the 3 centers, but his was the longest contract of the 3. That's a Homer decision. Imagine how different our views of Briere might be on a 5 or 6 year contract, where it ends right after he's basically a playoff hero instead of him hanging around uselessly for an extra 3 years... and we can't even get rid of him. The fact that we can buy out Bryz and Briere via amnesty doesn't erase how bad these contracts are. They are lucky to have that option. Yet we know they are doomed to repeat these mistakes.

For Kimmo, I don't know, I think $4M for a 38 year old defenseman is pretty good. The dilemma with him is that he's still counted on as a #1 and he happens to be having his best year (production-wise) in a few seasons. In any case, this is a contract I don't much care about because it's only one year. But imagine the return we could have gotten for him as a rental. Pominville got a HUGE return, so a rental D-man like Timo would have gotten us a 1st and then some. We still could have re-signed him in the offseason.

The one stinker contract is Pronger's, since the best we can do with him is put him on LTIR. But if I understand it correctly that still hurts us in the off-season as we have to include his cap hit until the new season starts.

Yeah, his full hit counts until the beginning of the season. SO basically, the 10% overage in the summer is swallowed up by his cap hit.

But, yeah, this contract is a stinker in so many ways. The length is one, but the fact that no one in the employ of this organization (of which I'm assuming some are lawyers!!) was able to get the proper read on the 35+ rule. The only word for that is incompetence. I mean, there are people whose sole job it is to draft, understand, and review standard player contracts. What happened?

So, to sum up: yes, I'm probably the biggest whiner about contract lengths, but I think it's exacerbated by the fact that this organization seems to have no clue where it's headed. No plan. If they had a good young goalie in the pipeline, if they were loading up on picks, if they had some bright young prospects on D like just about every other organization, then I don't think I'd care much about Hartnell's contract. But as it stands, it's just one more piece of evidence that this organization has no clue.

[flyercanuck]

BTW...Mason's RFA status may not come into play.

"Holmgren said he has already held discussions with Mason's agent and expects to re-sign him before this season ends."

For the love of God can't the guy play ONE game with the Flyers before Holmgren hands him a multi-year NMC contract?

[brelic]

According to Carchidi, Mason is about to sign a 1 year deal with the Flyers, and he's guessing around $2.75M. His agent says Mason wants to come to Philly to compete for the #1 job next year.

Something tells me that if Mason signs a 1 year deal, Bryz is not going anywhere until at least the end of next year.

[flyercanuck]

@brelic

That's fine. As long as he goes.

[DaGreatGazoo]

Back to RFA status, if he signs a one year, is he a UFA after that, or based on age, does he remain an RFA???

That's an important question for the Flyers..if he gets back to form, has a very good year, and becomes a UFA, they are gonna have to overpay...again. If he's an RFA, it will help them with cost control after the following season.

[flyerrod]

Back to RFA status, if he signs a one year, is he a UFA after that, or based on age, does he remain an RFA???

That's an important question for the Flyers..if he gets back to form, has a very good year, and becomes a UFA, they are gonna have to overpay...again. If he's an RFA, it will help them with cost control after the following season.

Under the old CBA.....listed below...muddling through the new cba trying to find the definition

Players become UFA's when they reach 31 years of age or if they play ten years in NHL and are making less than the league average salary or if their old team does not give them a qualifying offer.

Looks like under the new CBA it is age 27 or 7 accrued years of service for UFA at least for group 3.....still muddling through trying to find a better definition....

Edited April 4, 2013 by flyerrod