Chris Pronger Hired to the Department of Players Safety

[B21]

Entirely correct. They gambled and lost.

 

That said, I'm not sure the stakes were entirely appropriate. The career ending injury Pronger suffered, really, has nothing to do with age or slowing down, or really anything that would apply to the logic behind the 35+ contract rules.

 

Either way, if the NHL is going to punish teams for players suffering career ending injuries, they shouldn't let LTIR be a cop out. Conversely, if they don't want to punish a team for the injury, they should just let him retire without penalty. The state we are currently in just seems ridiculous, doesn't it? That's my opinion at any rate.

 

Sure about that?  

 

7-year deals like the one Pronger signed are almost always reserved for players at least 4-5 years younger when the chances of a player actually playing out the contract are exponentially higher.  If you look at the top 50 contracts of 7 years or longer the only other players even 30 (!!!) or older when their deal was done were Lundqvist (30), Luongo (30) and Chara (33).  That alone shows you the risk of a deal that long for a player 35+ years old.  

 

Like @radoran has said - the Flyers played shenanigans by adding those extra years to lower the cap hit.  It's no secret why...they were in "win-now" mode so they do what they can to get Pronger at a cap-friendly hit so they can upgrade the roster elsewhere. Gambled and lost.

 

As for the injury itself - I'm no expert but I would think the older one gets the more prone to concussions they would be. Not that it matters.  This can't be a grey area. It has to be black and white.  The NHL could not have made a 35+ rule that stipulated what types of injuries would superceed the 35+ rule.  That's a can of worms that needs to stay closed.

 

The rule is plain and simple. It's fair.  It's applies to everyone. To waive it just because a team feels "the injury can happen at any age" would be a farce.

[B21]

 

The appropriate way out is if they hire him, and pay him, which just might let the Flyers off the hook for the cap penalty (as Tim P alluded to in his post) because the league would be violating its own CBA. It gives the Flyers a legal out. It's a win-win-win in that case. The Flyers get rid of a dead cap hit for a guy who suffered a legitimate career-ending injury; Pronger gets to move on with his life; and the league gets to hire the guy they want.

 

29 other teams would (and should) scream bloody murder if that happened. 

[J0e Th0rnton]

Next up, Ulf Samuellson gets a player safety job. Followed by Bryan Marchment and Claude Lemieux. Oh! and Cooke retires and also gets a player safety job.

 

Meanwhile, Tie Domi is being hired to help find a way to eliminate fighting in the NHL, and Brett Hull on bringing back the foot in the crease = no goal times. Perhaps Garth Snow will take a second job in helping reduce the size of pads.

 

 

DOES THE NHL REALIZE HOW RIDICULOUS THIS IS?

 

It is like having a KKK member join the million man march.

[brelic]

29 other teams would (and should) scream bloody murder if that happened.

Maybe. But at the end of the day, the Flyers are not terribly affected by it. They've managed to use LTIR to nullify the hit for the most part. And it's a legitimate injury.

If he were still playing on the other hand, I think that would be an entirely different story.

[Vanflyer]

Here is what kind of irks me about this situation: if you get hurt on the job and are disabled to work, you get workers compensation. However, the minute you able to return to employment, regardless if its McDonalds or CEO of a company, that workers comp is terminated. I think the same should apply in the NHL. If injured / LTIR if you decide to choose to enter gainful employment elsewhere, the remainder of your contract should become null and void. Collecting two salaries, especially when already a mufti-millionaire, is just absurd to me.

[J0e Th0rnton]

Here is what kind of irks me about this situation: if you get hurt on the job and are disabled to work, you get workers compensation. However, the minute you able to return to employment, regardless if its McDonalds or CEO of a company, that workers comp is terminated. I think the same should apply in the NHL. If injured / LTIR if you decide to choose to enter gainful employment elsewhere, the remainder of your contract should become null and void. Collecting two salaries, especially when already a mufti-millionaire, is just absurd to me.

Gives too easy an out for circumventing the cap. Efff that

 

I understand in this situation why you think so, but imagine the abuse.

[Polaris922]

Lets fix the whole situation by limiting the duration LTIR can be used to circumvent the cap penalty shall we? If a player misses two consecutive seasons with injury, the LTIR no longer excuses the cap hit.

Problem solved for ridiculous late age contracts.

[hf101]

Lets fix the whole situation by limiting the duration LTIR can be used to circumvent the cap penalty shall we? If a player misses two consecutive seasons with injury, the LTIR no longer excuses the cap hit.

Problem solved for ridiculous late age contracts.

 

So then you are saying the contract is null and void and the player doesn't get the remaining money on his contract and the NHL team isn't on to hook to pay it?

[Polaris922]

So then you are saying the contract is null and void and the player doesn't get the remaining money on his contract and the NHL team isn't on to hook to pay it?

No. I'm saying that after two years of LTIR the player's cap hit counts against the team whether the guy plays or not, injured or otherwise, for the duration of the contract. That will stop teams circumventing, or at least appropriately punish those who do it with over 35 contracts.

[Vanflyer]

I understand in this situation why you think so, but imagine the abuse.

 

I am not following the abuse aspect? As it is, I think it would be the exception to the rule and not the norm. Meaning, how many players are on LTIR getting paid and have another lucrative jobI just think the collecting two pay checks it ridiculous.

[Vanflyer]

So then you are saying the contract is null and void and the player doesn't get the remaining money on his contract and the NHL team isn't on to hook to pay it?

 

Where does the NHLPA come into play regarding this? Isn't their insurance via the NHLPA for players??? I kind of get what Polaris is saying. Limit the LTIR to two years, if the player is still injured, let the NHLPA step in via their disability insurance policies.

[hf101]

Where does the NHLPA come into play regarding this? Isn't their insurance via the NHLPA for players??? I kind of get what Polaris is saying. Limit the LTIR to two years, if the player is still injured, let the NHLPA step in via their disability insurance policies.

 

I would think at some point that is exactly what needs to happen.  I just don't see the need to punish both the player, the contracting organization and the players on the team for several years after an injury ends a player's career.

[jammer2]

  So, if I have this straight.....The Flyers are being blessed with a one time "get out of jail card", because the NHL just has to have Chris Pronger in this capacity?  This is like a gift from heaven!  Totally unfair to all the other teams, but then again, they don't have the Golden Goose, the *guy* the NHL *must* have....LMAO!  This is great! 

 

  If the NHL thinks they must have Chris as the safety dude, who are we to question this?  Who would know more about player safety than a guy who bashed brains for a living?  Perfect fit. Cross all the T's, dot all the I's....let's get er' done!!

[flyercanuck]

  So, if I have this straight.....The Flyers are being blessed with a one time "get out of jail card", because the NHL just has to have Chris Pronger in this capacity?  This is like a gift from heaven!  Totally unfair to all the other teams, but then again, they don't have the Golden Goose, the *guy* the NHL *must* have....LMAO!  This is great! 

 

  If the NHL thinks they must have Chris as the safety dude, who are we to question this?  Who would know more about player safety than a guy who bashed brains for a living?  Perfect fit. Cross all the T's, dot all the I's....let's get er' done!!

 

So if it actually does happen....who can we get to sign to a 35+ longterm deal who's played a physical game his entire career and will never last the duration of the contract saddling us with yet another anvil to drag arouind? Who's out there? Cause we just gotta have him!

[Samifan]

@FC- Teemu Selanne meets all of your criteria and would make an excellent winger for G's line. He's 44 so I think a 6 year deal sounds reasonable

[flyercanuck]

@Samifan

 

Perfect. I'm sure the wheels of deja-vu are already in motion.

[brelic]

No. I'm saying that after two years of LTIR the player's cap hit counts against the team whether the guy plays or not, injured or otherwise, for the duration of the contract. That will stop teams circumventing, or at least appropriately punish those who do it with over 35 contracts.

 

In this case, there is no abuse. Pronger is legitimately injured. And his age has no bearing on his injury. As long as they reevalute the player according to whatever schedule they are supposed to in order to determine his injury status ("yep, Pronger's brain is still mush and he should not play"), there is no abuse. 

 

The Flyers are paying the price for attempting to circumvent the cap with a 35+ contract - they must pay him for the duration of his contract. The fact that Pronger is injured is separate and apart from the 35+ issue. Instead of paying an old bum even though his play has significantly declined, they're paying a guy who can't even lace up his skates. LTIR affords them the ability to replace Pronger because he can't play - which is no different than using LTIR money to replace Crosby, or Giroux, or Savard, or whomever.

[Polaris922]

In this case, there is no abuse. Pronger is legitimately injured. And his age has no bearing on his injury. As long as they reevalute the player according to whatever schedule they are supposed to in order to determine his injury status ("yep, Pronger's brain is still mush and he should not play"), there is no abuse.

The Flyers are paying the price for attempting to circumvent the cap with a 35+ contract - they must pay him for the duration of his contract. The fact that Pronger is injured is separate and apart from the 35+ issue. Instead of paying an old bum even though his play has significantly declined, they're paying a guy who can't even lace up his skates. LTIR affords them the ability to replace Pronger because he can't play - which is no different than using LTIR money to replace Crosby, or Giroux, or Savard, or whomever.

And that is the problem with long term LTIR fraud. There's NO chance of him returning and everyone knows it. What is the penalty to the team? There is none. $5 mill a year? Pfft... It's not counting against the cap. That's all that matters. So lets pretend Pronger can return and avoid the cap penalty... First they circumvented the salary cap with ridiculous contract terms, and now the circumvent the penalty for it with fraudulent LTIR claims.

That is the problem. Not just in Philly but league wide.

[brelic]

What is the penalty to the team?

 

Why should the Flyers be penalized for something they cannot control? Pronger was injured in the course of a hockey game - and it was a freak injury at that. I'm not sure where you are getting the 'fraudulent' LTIR claims. 

 

If a doctor were to clear him to play, the Flyers could no longer use LTIR. I believe the NHL has its own medical professionals who make their own assessments (instead of just taking teams at face value). 

 

It's not counting against the cap. That's all that matters.

 

Right. Because he's legitimately injured.

 

First they circumvented the salary cap with ridiculous contract terms, and now the circumvent the penalty for it with fraudulent LTIR claims.

 

Actually, they did not circumvent the cap because the league approved the contract. You and I know it's 'circumvention', but in the eyes of the league and the law, it is most certainly not.

 

And they are not 'circumventing' a penalty. They continue to pay Pronger his full NHL salary without the benefit of actually having the player. That's the penalty for a 35+ contract - you must pay the entire contract out regardless of whether or not the player sucks, is demoted, is benched, is injured, or retires. There's no way out. 

 

The fact that they are getting cap relief is a different issue! He's injured! On a non-35+ contract, the player probably would have retired by now - and that's the only iffy area for me. But the Flyers aren't forcing Pronger to remain on LTIR - he's a big boy and can make his own decisions. He doesn't owe the Flyers anything because he's getting his money regardless. 

[Polaris922]

@brelic

This is where you and I disagree. They circumvented the cap by tacking two extra low dollar years on it to thin out his overall cap hit. The over 35 clause is written to penalize teams for doing that and letting a player retire before the contract is up (see Kovalchuk, Ilya).

The Flyers should be penalized for using that tactic to keep the hit down and signing a circumventing contract. Injury is in nobody's control, but that's supposed to be the risk you take for the over 35 contract. That was the whole point of it.

That risk has been mitigated by pretending he's could recover and play again (hence LTIR fraud). They pretend it because that way the stupid contract doesn't count against the team for cap purposes. And no it's not NHL doctors, its team doctors.

The cap hit is supposed to be the penalty not some measly $5 mill a year. To us that's a lifetime of profits. But to them that's a game's concession sales. No real penalty there.

Circumvents the purpose of the over 35 contract penalty.

[B21]

Maybe. But at the end of the day, the Flyers are not terribly affected by it. They've managed to use LTIR to nullify the hit for the most part. And it's a legitimate injury.

If he were still playing on the other hand, I think that would be an entirely different story.

 

No - but at least it's not a free pass either. 

[flyercanuck]

@Polaris922

 

I just popped in to congratulate you on making 2 posts in a row without mention of Claude Girouxs cop ass grab...a new record!    .

[mojo1917]

@Polaris922 

take off your black and gold glasses buddy...

eh, i got nothing, the injury muddles this for me.

i'd have no problem paying the player to play even if his play was poor.  that's what you get for signing a guy to that type of deal...

the guy will never play again and the LTIR is a sham , fraud whatever you want to call it, no question.  I think this is a situation where the league could arbitrate some sort of settlement with the player and the team.  What is happening now is BS on many levels.

[brelic]

This is where you and I disagree. They circumvented the cap by tacking two extra low dollar years on it to thin out his overall cap hit. The over 35 clause is written to penalize teams for doing that and letting a player retire before the contract is up (see Kovalchuk, Ilya).

 

Actually, I agree with you. We know that was the intention. But the league disagrees with us because they okayed the contract. That means they accepted it as valid, unlike the first Pronger contract they rejected, and the Kovalchuk example too. There is no doubt that even though they were accepted, the GMs were really pushing the envelope. The fact that some have been rejected under anti-circumvention clauses tells me that in a court of law, Pronger's current contract would not likely be viewed as a circumvention because of precedence the league itself established.

 

Would you agree with that? If so, then the last part of your quote, "The over 35 clause is written to penalize teams for doing that and letting a player retire before the contract is up (see Kovalchuk, Ilya)." still holds because the Flyers are penalized by having to carry Pronger for the full 7 years. If Pronger was on the ice right now and dogging it or playing 3rd pairing minutes, it's too bad - the FLyers are stuck with him. If Pronger was healthy and decided this year "I"m retiring,", the Flyers would be on the hook no matter what for the next 3 years.

 

The Flyers should be penalized for using that tactic to keep the hit down and signing a circumventing contract.

 

I'm not sure why you think the Flyers deserve punishment long after the contract was signed and accepted. The time to determine whether or not it was an attempt to circumevent was when the contract was forwarded to the league for approval. Not 4 years later, unless they can prove there is some funny business (say in Hossa's case or Kovalchuk's case).

 

That risk has been mitigated by pretending he's could recover and play again (hence LTIR fraud). They pretend it because that way the stupid contract doesn't count against the team for cap purposes. And no it's not NHL doctors, its team doctors.

 

It sounds like you believe that Pronger is faking his injury. Is that the case?

 

And if the league doesn't do independent medical audits, I would suggest they need to revamp their process!

 

The cap hit is supposed to be the penalty not some measly $5 mill a year.

 

They *are* saddled with the cap hit. You make it sound like the Flyers are in some sort of wonderful situation here. They are deprived of the services of a hall of fame defenseman, one who led them to the Stanley Cup Final in his very first season here. LTIR is not a get out of jail free card - the guy has a debilitating injury. One of the reasons they have not recalled a defenseman from the farm might have to do with cap reasons - it's a constant juggling act. Over the summer, they have less maneuverability because they need to carry the full hit.

 

As I stated in a previous post, if the doctors gave him medical clearance to play, I would bet my house that he would decline - at that point, he would have to retire and the Flyers could no longer use LTIR. But unless you believe a medical professional, who has taken an oath to conduct himself professionally and ethically, is lying and risking litigation and malpractice suits to give the Flyers a bit of cap space, I'm not sure how this is LTIR fraud.

[mojo1917]

@brelic

Nice post