Chris Pronger Hired to the Department of Players Safety

[Old School Hockey]

@Old School Hockey

 

Read post #4 in this thread. 

 

Its a joke the NHL hire a guy under contract when it clearly states that's against the CBA. I personally don't care if they hire him...it really has no effect on me whatsoever. But it is stupid for a league to go against its own rules.

 

You brought up how this was "benefitting" the Flyers. I just disagreed. And it's not.

4.9m in cap relief benefits the Flyers!! Tell me how it doesn't?

[jammer2]

@Old School Hockey  The league allows teams to go over the cap by the amount of the LTIR money, so the Flyers cap was 69 million PLUS 4.9 mill. All this ruling did was make it a bit more convenient for the Flyers, we don't have to wait until October to spend the money.

[Old School Hockey]

@Old School Hockey  The league allows teams to go over the cap by the amount of the LTIR money, so the Flyers cap was 69 million PLUS 4.9 mill. All this ruling did was make it a bit more convenient for the Flyers, we don't have to wait until October to spend the money.

SMFH that you guys are trying to justify the cap circumvention. It's like YOU have a short memory. We lot 1.5 seasons to get the system they OWNERS are now circumventing. And somehow this will be the players problem for concession again!

[Polaris922]

I think the point remains, LTIR was not meant to stall retirement from career ending injuries.  They're using it to circumvent the cap hit.  He's not LTIR.. he's permanent.  Is it within the rules?  Yes... but only because they didn't spell it out better.  The penalty to the Flyers is extremely minor.  

 

Now we've argued that point to no end.  No point going over it again.  You guys don't mind it because it benefits the Flyers, and I understand that.  I agree with Old School here.  The NHL buying him out is a travesty.  The idea of Pronger judging and issuing punishment with his history as a cheap shot artist is a travesty.  No different than if they'd put Ulf Samuelsson in there in my eyes.    

[jammer2]

@Polaris922  I predict unprecedented suspensions coming for Crosby 

[hf101]

I found this blog that explains LTIR for anyone interested.

 

 

Club's Averaged Club Salary until such time as the Club's Averaged Club Salary reaches the Upper Limit. A Club may then exceed the Upper Limit due to the addition of replacement Player Salary and Bonuses of Players who have replaced an unfit-to-play Player, provided, however, that when the unfit-to-play Player is once again fit to play (including any period such Player is on a Bona Fide Long-Term Injury/Illness Exception Conditioning Loan to another league), the Club shall be required to once again reduce its Averaged Club Salary to a level at or below the Upper Limit prior to the Player being able to rejoin the Club.

 

Essentially, this allows a team to replace the player on LTIR with any number of other players in order to fill the roster hole. The wording in this passage is quite verbose and involved, so a quick and dirty example should serve our purposes fine:

 

FTF Example: The salary cap Upper Limit is $60.0MM, and a team currently has a 20 man roster of $59.0MM. There is $1.0MM in cap room available to them. In the first day of the regular season, a player making $2.0MM is hit along the boards, injured, and subsequently placed on LTIR. The team now has that $2.0MM to use in order to bring in replacement player(s) to fill the hole left by that $2.0MM player-- that number is equal to the injured player's salary. They are able to spend up to $61.0MM (or, $1.0MM over the cap) to replace that player.

 

This is because, at the time of injury, the team had $1.0MM in cap space available to them. Since the injured player on LTIR had a salary of $2.0MM, $1.0MM of that goes towards getting the team to the Upper Limit of that year (which is $60.0MM), and then the remaining $1.0MM is used to allow the team to temporarily exceed the Upper Limit until the player on LTIR is able to return.

 

Think of it this way-- a $2.0MM player was injured on a team that had $1.0MM in cap room. The cap hit of the injured player ($2.0MM) minus the amount of salary cap space ($1.0MM) equals the amount that team can exceed the upper limit by ($1.0MM).

 

So now let's take the two ideas together-- since the player on LTIR counts against the year-end cap, but the team is allowed to exceed the Upper Limit, couldn't that pose some issues for teams who are close to the Upper Limit already?

 

Yes, yes, and most definitely yes. In this example, we'll look at what would happen if a capped team was forced to place a player on the LTIR:

 

FTF Example Two: The salary cap Upper Limit is $60.0MM, and a team currently has a 20 man roster of $60.0MM. Right at the limit, absolutely no breathing room. In the first day of the regular season, a player making $2.0MM is hit along the boards, injured, and subsequently placed on LTIR. Using the formula in the last paragraph of example one, we know that the team now has $2.0MM to use to exceed the Upper Limit and bring up players.

 

However, as we've learned, the player on LTIR still counts against the team's year end cap when he's injured. By promoting a player, they will be over the year end cap and not compliant with the CBA. So what gives? Essentially, if this situation were to occur, a team would have to trade a player right before the injured player returns in order to become salary cap compliant.

 

*****

 

Those are the basics of the LTIR, and covers most of what we'll see throughout the regular season. Let's review what we've learned:

 

In order to qualify for the LTIR, a player must be deemed to be unavailable for 24 days and 10 NHL games after the time of injury.

A team is allowed to exceed the salary cap Upper Limit by x amount after applying this formula: The cap hit of the injured player on LTIR minus the amount of salary cap space equals the amount that team can exceed the upper limit by.

And most importantly, a player on LTIR does not generate any extra cap room for the team. He does not come off the books, and will be factored into the calculations of the year-end salary cap of the team.

Club's Averaged Club Salary until such time as the Club's Averaged Club Salary reaches the Upper Limit. A Club may then exceed the Upper Limit due to the addition of replacement Player Salary and Bonuses of Players who have replaced an unfit-to-play Player, provided, however, that when the unfit-to-play Player is once again fit to play (including any period such Player is on a Bona Fide Long-Term Injury/Illness Exception Conditioning Loan to another league), the Club shall be required to once again reduce its Averaged Club Salary to a level at or below the Upper Limit prior to the Player being able to rejoin the Club.

 

Essentially, this allows a team to replace the player on LTIR with any number of other players in order to fill the roster hole. The wording in this passage is quite verbose and involved, so a quick and dirty example should serve our purposes fine:

 

FTF Example: The salary cap Upper Limit is $60.0MM, and a team currently has a 20 man roster of $59.0MM. There is $1.0MM in cap room available to them. In the first day of the regular season, a player making $2.0MM is hit along the boards, injured, and subsequently placed on LTIR. The team now has that $2.0MM to use in order to bring in replacement player(s) to fill the hole left by that $2.0MM player-- that number is equal to the injured player's salary. They are able to spend up to $61.0MM (or, $1.0MM over the cap) to replace that player.

 

This is because, at the time of injury, the team had $1.0MM in cap space available to them. Since the injured player on LTIR had a salary of $2.0MM, $1.0MM of that goes towards getting the team to the Upper Limit of that year (which is $60.0MM), and then the remaining $1.0MM is used to allow the team to temporarily exceed the Upper Limit until the player on LTIR is able to return.

 

Think of it this way-- a $2.0MM player was injured on a team that had $1.0MM in cap room. The cap hit of the injured player ($2.0MM) minus the amount of salary cap space ($1.0MM) equals the amount that team can exceed the upper limit by ($1.0MM).

 

So now let's take the two ideas together-- since the player on LTIR counts against the year-end cap, but the team is allowed to exceed the Upper Limit, couldn't that pose some issues for teams who are close to the Upper Limit already?

 

Yes, yes, and most definitely yes. In this example, we'll look at what would happen if a capped team was forced to place a player on the LTIR:

 

FTF Example Two: The salary cap Upper Limit is $60.0MM, and a team currently has a 20 man roster of $60.0MM. Right at the limit, absolutely no breathing room. In the first day of the regular season, a player making $2.0MM is hit along the boards, injured, and subsequently placed on LTIR. Using the formula in the last paragraph of example one, we know that the team now has $2.0MM to use to exceed the Upper Limit and bring up players.

 

However, as we've learned, the player on LTIR still counts against the team's year end cap when he's injured. By promoting a player, they will be over the year end cap and not compliant with the CBA. So what gives? Essentially, if this situation were to occur, a team would have to trade a player right before the injured player returns in order to become salary cap compliant.

 

*****

 

Those are the basics of the LTIR, and covers most of what we'll see throughout the regular season. Let's review what we've learned:

 

In order to qualify for the LTIR, a player must be deemed to be unavailable for 24 days and 10 NHL games after the time of injury.

A team is allowed to exceed the salary cap Upper Limit by x amount after applying this formula: The cap hit of the injured player on LTIR minus the amount of salary cap space equals the amount that team can exceed the upper limit by.

And most importantly, a player on LTIR does not generate any extra cap room for the team. He does not come off the books, and will be factored into the calculations of the year-end salary cap of the team.

 

[hf101]

Can you not see the hypocrisy of the NHL hiring a guy that is under contract? They are basically saying bury that contract and we will support it.

 

The contract isn't buried, but the hypocrisy of the league is bang on, but not for the reason that you posted.

 

A significant portion of the owners wanted to make sure the TEAMS who sign long term contracts be accountable for them.  Pronger's  and Savard's contracts are prime examples of that.   Neither Pronger nor Sarvard will play another game in the NHL and their teams will payout the full amount to them.  

 

Neither player could be bought out in the 2 alloted buyouts given to each team at the end of the lockout because buyouts were not allowed for injured players.  

 

The hypocrisy in my opinion is that the league didn't set rules for contract length in the CBA when they created the cap, and they also didn't provide a means of allowing a career injured player to be paid their money due via the contract  and be removed from a team to retire.  None of this benefits the Flyers, and none of it benefits Pronger.  

 

IMO once a player is medically stated to never play another game in the NHL after a year of full time LTIR that players contract should be paid off via insurance and removed from the Cap and the team.  Let that player move forward in their life.  Personally I wish the CBA had rules which allowed no more than 5 year contracts and players over the age of 35 could only sign a maximum of a 2 year contract.  Simple rules like that would solve much of the problems here.

 

As far as Pronger in a position for the league in Player Safety.  Yeah, I get the whole bad boy gets job handing out suspensions.  Chances are he'll be great at that job.  The Flyers aren't the only team Pronger played for.  There has been some favoritism in that position in the past also with Colin Campbell and Yserman.   

[radoran]

Personally I wish the CBA had rules which allowed no more than 5 year contracts and players over the age of 35 could only sign a maximum of a 2 year contract.  Simple rules like that would solve much of the problems here.

There are now limits to contract length and amount of difference between lowest and highest paid years.

They have addressed much of the abuse.

The Pronger contract is a dinosaur that is almost extinct.

And, yes, the whole league hiring him thing is a sad, sad joke.

[jammer2]

There has been some favoritism in that position in the past also with Colin Campbell and Yserman.

 

 Yeah, ain't that the truth. Campbell in particular was brutal for favourtism.  We now have our hidden spy on board, running the suspension gig....cut loose boys!!  ha ha

 

 

  and yeah, I have heard that Chris has to recuse himself from a Flyer case, but maybe he can shed some behind the scenes wisdom anyways!

[Polaris922]

The contract isn't buried, but the hypocrisy of the league is bang on, but not for the reason that you posted.

 

A significant portion of the owners wanted to make sure the TEAMS who sign long term contracts be accountable for them.  Pronger's  and Savard's contracts are prime examples of that.   Neither Pronger nor Sarvard will play another game in the NHL and their teams will payout the full amount to them.  

 

Neither player could be bought out in the 2 alloted buyouts given to each team at the end of the lockout because buyouts were not allowed for injured players.  

 

The hypocrisy in my opinion is that the league didn't set rules for contract length in the CBA when they created the cap, and they also didn't provide a means of allowing a career injured player to be paid their money due via the contract  and be removed from a team to retire.  None of this benefits the Flyers, and none of it benefits Pronger.  

 

IMO once a player is medically stated to never play another game in the NHL after a year of full time LTIR that players contract should be paid off via insurance and removed from the Cap and the team.  Let that player move forward in their life.  Personally I wish the CBA had rules which allowed no more than 5 year contracts and players over the age of 35 could only sign a maximum of a 2 year contract.  Simple rules like that would solve much of the problems here.

 

As far as Pronger in a position for the league in Player Safety.  Yeah, I get the whole bad boy gets job handing out suspensions.  Chances are he'll be great at that job.  The Flyers aren't the only team Pronger played for.  There has been some favoritism in that position in the past also with Colin Campbell and Yserman.   

 

 

And I find the hypocrisy in the Pronger contract to be that there wasn't supposed to be a way to dump the contract in the over 35 category... THAT was supposed to be the risk a team took signing a long term deal to avoid a bigger cap hit.  That was supposed to be the price when it didn't work out or a player was no longer able to perform.  It wasn't supposed to be something you could circumvent with the LTIR.  Where you see it as something that should be done away with when the player is injured beyond recovery, I see it as something that should be more thoroughly enforced to penalize cap circumvention.  

[jammer2]

@Polaris922    

 

  Um....acts of favourtism by the NHL :  Pens 1003   Flyers 1

 

 

   EDIT...  2 if you count the NHL accepting Mike Rathje's retirement papers.

[Old School Hockey]

And I find the hypocrisy in the Pronger contract to be that there wasn't supposed to be a way to dump the contract in the over 35 category... THAT was supposed to be the risk a team took signing a long term deal to avoid a bigger cap hit.  That was supposed to be the price when it didn't work out or a player was no longer able to perform.  It wasn't supposed to be something you could circumvent with the LTIR.  Where you see it as something that should be done away with when the player is injured beyond recovery, I see it as something that should be more thoroughly enforced to penalize cap circumvention.

And in few years the owners will be saying!!!!!!

Players we need confessions from you again because WE can't control ourselves again.

And then starts the next lockout.

[Old School Hockey]

@Polaris922    

 

  Um....acts of favourtism by the NHL :  Pens 1003   Flyers 1

 

 

   EDIT...  2 if you count the NHL accepting Mike Rathje's retirement papers.

While I'm sure the Pens have had their share of favoritism. None of that has anything to do with the Flyers and NHL CIRCUMVENTING THE SALARY CAP.

Ignored is there is a reason why the 35+ rule was put in place and what LTIR was designed allow!

[Polaris922]

@Polaris922

Um....acts of favourtism by the NHL : Pens 1003 Flyers 1

EDIT... 2 if you count the NHL accepting Mike Rathje's retirement papers.

In your perspective yes... But facts on paper? The NHL has done nothing to favor the Pens any more than any other team out there.

[hf101]

And I find the hypocrisy in the Pronger contract to be that there wasn't supposed to be a way to dump the contract in the over 35 category... THAT was supposed to be the risk a team took signing a long term deal to avoid a bigger cap hit.  That was supposed to be the price when it didn't work out or a player was no longer able to perform.  It wasn't supposed to be something you could circumvent with the LTIR.  Where you see it as something that should be done away with when the player is injured beyond recovery, I see it as something that should be more thoroughly enforced to penalize cap circumvention.  

 

Disagree if you like, but I don't think the Flyers thought Pronger would qualify for under the 35 category when they traded for him and attracted him to sign with the team at age 34.  If we all remember the cap rules weren't well defined then and the Flyers "Cap staff"  made a huge blunder not knowing the detail of the rules.  But I'm not sure how many knew the rules that well either.  I do believe they thought they were signing him at age 34 as he was 34 when the deal was made after the trade.  The League said no, the contract started after Pronger turned 35.  The Flyers were stuck in their own muck.  

 

The Flyers weren't the only team making these lengthy deals.  Do I think they tried to push the limits - yeah.  Other teams with money did also.  They've been a team that could buy players for years and they didn't adjust or foresee how the league was changing.  They also haven't won anything thus there isn't any hardware to brag about.

[hf101]

And in few years the owners will be saying!!!!!!

Players we need confessions from you again because WE can't control ourselves again.

And then starts the next lockout.

 

The last lockout was about the Owners realizing the future was bright for the NHL and they wanted to make sure most of the profits to be made were due to the owners.  The entire thing was about how much profit the players were forced  to give up to play.

[radoran]

And I find the hypocrisy in the Pronger contract to be that there wasn't supposed to be a way to dump the contract in the over 35 category.

They haven't "dumped" the contract and it is a legitimate injury.

[radoran]

While I'm sure the Pens have had their share of favoritism. None of that has anything to do with the Flyers and NHL CIRCUMVENTING THE SALARY CAP.

Ignored is there is a reason why the 35+ rule was put in place and what LTIR was designed allow!

I've been calling it circumvention since it happened.

But LTIR is designed for players with lelegitimate injuries and Pronger has a legitimate injury.

Everything is working exactly as designed no matter how many capital letter you want to use.

[Old School Hockey]

I've been calling it circumvention since it happened.

But LTIR is designed for players with lelegitimate injuries and Pronger has a legitimate injury.

Everything is working exactly as designed no matter how many capital letter you want to use.

And somehow you can't see how hypocritical and wrong it is for the NHL to sign a contract with Pronger while he's still under contract with an NHL team.

The NHL is basically saying f-off to the CBA and isn't even attempting to hide it. And some here are silly enough to just say oh well!

Why did we lose 1.5 seasons again?

[Old School Hockey]

I've been calling it circumvention since it happened.

But LTIR is designed for players with lelegitimate injuries and Pronger has a legitimate injury.

Everything is working exactly as designed no matter how many capital letter you want to use.

The CBA was designed to allow for multiple contracts in the NHL?

Rest assured if this were to benefit the NHLPA the owners wouldn't allow it.

[jammer2]

In your perspective yes... But facts on paper? The NHL has done nothing to favor the Pens any more than any other team out there.

 

 Ummm.....no. Fact...Crosby intentionally skated up behind a player and with his right first clenched, punched a player in the balls as hard as he could. FACT....he was not suspended, despite the intent and the follow through. THAT is favourtism at it's best. I can only imagine if Carbomb or Rinaldo did that kinda thing, they would be escorted from the ice with an armed detail!!!

[radoran]

And somehow you can't see how hypocritical and wrong it is for the NHL to sign a contract with Pronger while he's still under contract with an NHL team.

The NHL is basically saying f-off to the CBA and isn't even attempting to hide it. And some here are silly enough to just say oh well!

Why did we lose 1.5 seasons again?

I've said thar dozens of times.

Dial the keyboard testosterone down, Chief

[jammer2]

@Polaris922   Here is a quote from you in another thread, even you admit it......

 

  "Clarence Campbell handed you two... Bettman only helped us with one... So far..."

[radoran]

The CBA was designed to allow for multiple contracts in the NHL?

Rest assured if this were to benefit the NHLPA the owners wouldn't allow it.

Yer preaching to the Pope, bud.

Yap yap yap

[Vanflyer]

There was no need to bring in Pronger to the League Offices. None. Zero. Ziltch.

 

PR. Nothing more, nothing less. To see Shannahan give them the finger was stinging them. How many posts are there on this topic? And thats exactly what they want. They (NHL) don't care if its the right move, they only care about "buzz" and marketing.