Chris Pronger Hired to the Department of Players Safety

[flyercanuck]

The million dollar question? Would you feel the same way if the same scenario was happening with a team not named the Flyers?

 

What the LTIR? Savard...and the guy is legitimately hurt. He CAN'T play.

[Old School Hockey]

What the LTIR? Savard...and the guy is legitimately hurt. He CAN'T play.

One more time! First Savard is NOT on a 35+ contract and secondly Savard has not signed a 2nd contract.

[flyercanuck]

First he's on LTIR which Pronger is as well. Second EVERYONE on here agrees Pronger signing a second contract is wrong.

[Old School Hockey]

First he's on LTIR which Pronger is as well. Second EVERYONE on here agrees Pronger signing a second contract is wrong.

Savard can retire without any cap hit. There must be a chance he can come back?

LTIR is not the part in question. 35+ is at question.

[hf101]

@Old School Hockey

 

Can you find where Chris Pronger is being paid by the NHL?     For everything I've seen states that he is being paid by the Flyers as per his contract, .... as per Article 26 of CBA. No one being paid by a team can be paid by the league.

 

 

 

PRONGER  “So, basically what you’re asking me is, you’re questioning my integrity and whether I can do the job while being paid by somebody else - when I’ve already just told you I’m not the guy making the calls. If you think I can persuade (Stephane Quintal) that much, then you’re a better man than me.

 

 

“And by the way, just for the record, (Brendan Shanahan) had a conflict with each and every team he played on. Any person who is in the Player Safety Department on the former player side is going to have a conflict somewhere. I understand there’s money involved, but they’re going to have a conflict somewhere along the line, a relationship with a player or GM, guys they’ve played with, team owners, there’s going to be conflicts all the way up and down the line. You’re trying to beat a dead horse here.”

 

 

 

PRONGER: “I’ve asked a number of times about the cap situation and my predicament as it relates to that. And, as it was told to me, is another reason why I took the job, is I was told it wasn’t going to hurt the Flyers’ cap situation. To answer your question, no I would not have taken it if it would’ve hurt the Flyers.”

quotes from Pronger in an interview by Frank Seravalli

[Old School Hockey]

@Old School Hockey

 

Can you find where Chris Pronger is being paid by the NHL?     For everything I've seen states that he is being paid by the Flyers as per his contract, .... as per Article 26 of CBA. No one being paid by a team can be paid by the league.

 

 

 

 

quotes from Pronger in an interview by Frank Seravalli

You say potato I say potatoe!

[hf101]

You say potato I say potatoe!

 

In other words you haven't found any reference that Pronger is being paid by the league and the Flyers.   Thus he is basically a committed volunteer for the NHL getting the opportunity to gain knowledge for possibly a future paid position when his contract with the Flyers ends.  He has done some training for the Flyers defensive prospects also last year, I'll doubt he received extra pay for that job.

[Old School Hockey]

In other words you haven't found any reference that Pronger is being paid by the league and the Flyers.   Thus he is basically a committed volunteer for the NHL getting the opportunity to gain knowledge for possibly a future paid position when his contract with the Flyers ends.  He has done some training for the Flyers defensive prospects also last year, I'll doubt he received extra pay for that job.

Yes because Gary and boys have never lied/fabricated anything in the past? Ask them to define HRR?

[Vanflyer]

Would you feel the same way if the same scenario was happening with a team not named the Flyers?

 

I have pondered this aspect (of dual contracts), and my brain says yes I would. Given that I do contract work, I am allowed to sign multiple contracts, yet those contracts are specified for a particular assisgnment (ie it will take 20 hours a week to fulfill contract 1 and 20 hours a week to fulfill contract two- as an example). Prongers job with the NHL if a full time job. His job with the Flyers was a full time job. I think the one should relinquish the other.

 

There is no legality to it and barely a thread of logic, but if Pronger wants to start a new carreer than I think his former one should be releived- so to speak.

[hf101]

Prongers job with the NHL if a full time job. His job with the Flyers was a full time job. I think the one should relinquish the other.

 

Generally speaking full time work is 35-45 hours / week.  I don't think it is out of the ordinary for a person to have a full time job and contract out something on the side -- usually unrelated.  I don't think it has been said how many hours per week Pronger spends researching, advising, teaching player safety for the league.  He just can't be paid for it.

[Vanflyer]

I don't think it is out of the ordinary for a person to have a full time job and contract out something on the side -- usually unrelated. I don't think it has been said how many hours per week Pronger spends researching, advising, teaching player safety for the league. He just can't be paid for it.

 

Yeah, I was thinking that too. My argument is weak and thus while I ended my post that I just think that Prongers position with the NHL should relinguish his "contract" with the flyers. At a minimum, there should be a buy-out provision (ie. he gets his money, but is off the books with the Flyers).

 

I have zero foundation reasoning why that should occur, just a wish-a kind of thing.

[Polaris922]

NHL player contracts all have exclusivity clauses to prevent crazy dual league employment and things like that. So for Pronger to take a contract with the NHL it violates his signed contract with the Flyers. That's just a standard.

I think everyone here agrees there should not be two concurrent contracts. Where we disagree is whether Pronger's contract with the Flyers should be terminated, and/or whether the LTIR should be used to shelter the Flyers from the over 35 penalties.

[radoran]

NHL player contracts all have exclusivity clauses to prevent crazy dual league employment and things like that. So for Pronger to take a contract with the NHL it violates his signed contract with the Flyers. That's just a standard.

I think everyone here agrees there should not be two concurrent contracts. Where we disagree is whether Pronger's contract with the Flyers should be terminated, and/or whether the LTIR should be used to shelter the Flyers from the over 35 penalties.

 

The LTIR is being used exactly as it is intended to be used - to take a guy who is injured and allow the team to recoup some cap based on that injury. Pronger is injured.

 

There is nothing, absolutely nothing, in the 35+ rule that says LTIR cannot be used. There wasn't then. There isn't now. Other teams have gotten LTIR relief from injured guys on over 35 contracts.

 

The same thing is happening with Kimmo Timonen right now. If Craig Adams goes down with an injury this season, the Pens would get relief via LTIR. If Datsyuk goes down with an injury, the Red Wings would get relief the same way.

 

It is really not difficult, complicated or controversial at all.

 

The second contract with the NHL is a flat out joke. Should never have been allowed. Period.

[jammer2]

@Old School Hockey  Geez bro, let it go. Nobody here is disagreeing with you. You are freaking out and everyone is in basic agreement with you. At this point, the onus is on you to produce proof that Pronger is getting paid by the league.

[radoran]

At this point, the onus is on you to produce proof that Pronger is getting paid by the league.

 

I don't think the rule says "being paid" as much as "under contract"

 

The league itself admits it "hired" Pronger.

[jammer2]

@radoran   I guess it comes down to....is it wrong to have a second contract...even when it appears he's not being compensated for his efforts?

[Polaris922]

The LTIR is being used exactly as it is intended to be used - to take a guy who is injured and allow the team to recoup some cap based on that injury. Pronger is injured.

There is nothing, absolutely nothing, in the 35+ rule that says LTIR cannot be used. There wasn't then. There isn't now. Other teams have gotten LTIR relief from injured guys on over 35 contracts.

It is really not difficult, complicated or controversial at all.

And again I disagree. Again I point to the LTIR is meant for players missing at least 24 calendar days and at least 10 regular season games, but where the intent of the LTIR was cap relief where players would return after the injury.

Pronger will not return and is ONLY staying under contract to protect the Flyers from their own stupidity. Admitted by Holmgren and Pronger both.

A loophole in the CBA because owners didnt think they had to write it all out doesn't make it right. Allowed/legal? Yes. But not, as you put it, "as it is intended to be used".

Do you really want to repeat ourselves over and over again every time somebody adds another post to this thread? Yes we disagree. I get it. You're just wrong

[flyercanuck]

 Yes we disagree. I get it. You're just wrong

 

 

This is a democratic board...whats say we vote on it? 

[Polaris922]

This is a democratic board...whats say we vote on it?

Okay but electoral vote where every non-Flyers fan vote counts as ten! Lol.

[radoran]

@radoran   I guess it comes down to....is it wrong to have a second contract...even when it appears he's not being compensated for his efforts?

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/puck-daddy/stop-whining-about-chris-pronger-s-conflict-of-interest--the-f-a-q-143738560.html

 

Beats me.

[Polaris922]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/puck-daddy/stop-whining-about-chris-pronger-s-conflict-of-interest--the-f-a-q-143738560.html

Beats me.

Very opinionated piece after stating the facts. I think it comes down to the fact that the CBA prohibits it quite clearly, despite what anyone thinks of the Flyers contract, his injury, or the man himself. But the NHL has shown it's quite willing to violate the CBA and the NHLPA isn't going to fight against one of its own.

[radoran]

where the intent of the LTIR was cap relief where players would return after the injury.

 

Where do you get that? Because it's not the CBA.

 

From the CBA:

 

"Injured Reserve List" or "Injured Reserve" means the list of all Players who,

because of injury, illness, or disability are deemed by their respective Clubs to be unable to

render playing services to such Clubs for an extended period of time as set forth in Article 16 of

this Agreement.

 

Do you see anything about "intent" to only apply where players would "return after injury"?

 

'cause I don't.

 

Here's Article 16

 

 

16.11 Injured Reserve List/Injured Non-Roster.

(a) The Injured Reserve List is a category of the Reserve List. A Club may place a

Player on the Injured Reserve List only if such Player is reasonably expected to be injured, ill or

disabled and unable to perform his duties as a hockey Player for a minimum of seven (7) days

from the onset of such injury, illness or disability. A Player who finishes an NHL Season on the

Injured Reserve List and continues to be disabled and unable to perform his duties as a hockey

Player by reason of the same injury at the time he reports to the Club's Training Camp in the next

League Year, will again be eligible to be placed on the Club's Injured Reserve List. For any

other Player who fails the Club's initial physical examination in any League Year, or is injured,

ill or disabled while not on the Club's Active Roster, he shall not be eligible for, and may not be

placed on, Injured Reserve, but instead shall be eligible to be, and may be designated as, Injured

Non-Roster.

(b) A Player on whose behalf a Club has exercised the Bona Fide Long Term

Injury/Illness Exception shall be placed on Injured Reserve for the period of such Exception,

including any period the Player is on a Bona Fide Long Term Injury/Illness Exception

Conditioning Loan.

© Players on the Injured Reserve List may attend team meetings, travel with the

Club (at the Club's option) and participate in practice sessions with other Players on the Club's

Active Roster. Players on Injured Reserve are prohibited from appearing in NHL Games,

participating in pre-game warm-ups with their Clubs, or dressing in game uniforms on NHL

Game days. Players on Injured Reserve and Injured Non-Roster shall have access to the Club's

primary training and medical facilities during regular business hours provided, however, that the

Club may restrict such Players' access during periods when Players on the Club's Active Roster

are expected to be present at such primary training and medical facilities (e.g., pre-game skates,

practices, games, medical and physical treatments for other Players) and within a reasonable

period of time before and after such time periods.

(d) Once a Player is placed on the Injured Reserve List, the Club may replace said

Player on its NHL Active Roster with another Player, and during such period of his designation

as an Injured Reserve Player he will not count against the Club's Active Roster limit, provided,

however, that the Injured Reserve Player's Player Salary and Bonuses and his replacement's

Player Salary and Bonuses are each included in calculating a Club's Actual Club Salary and

Averaged Club Salary, and the Players' Share, for purposes of Article 50.

(e) Any determination that a Player is eligible to be placed on the Injured Reserve

List, or designated as Injured Non-Roster, shall be made by the Club's physician in accordance

with the Club's medical standards and documented by a verification signed by the Club physician

and countersigned by a Club executive in the forms attached to this Agreement as Exhibit 28

(which shall also be signed by the Player) and 28-A, respectively. Such forms must be received

by Central Registry and sent to the NHLPA and the Player, all in accordance with Exhibit 3,

prior to the Player being added to the Injured Reserve List or designated as Injured Non-Roster,

as applicable.

(f) The Commissioner may take whatever steps he deems necessary to investigate the

circumstances under which a Player is: (i) placed, or remains, on the Injured Reserve List, or (ii)

designated Injured Non-Roster. If the Commissioner has reason to believe that the Injured

Reserve List or Injured Non-Roster status has not been utilized properly by the involved Club or

otherwise Circumvents any provision of this Agreement, or if he determines that the Club has

used the Injured Reserve and/or Injured Non-Roster designations to evade the Active Roster

limit, he may take such disciplinary action against the Club as he deems appropriate.

(g) A Player placed on the Injured Reserve List will be ineligible to compete in NHL

Games for a period of not less than seven (7) days from the date of the injury, illness or disability

for which the Player was placed on the Injured Reserve List. A Player will be eligible for

activation to play in NHL Games beginning on the 8th day following the date of injury, illness or

disability for which the Player was placed on the Injured Reserve List or any day thereafter that

the Player is medically cleared to play by the Club physician. The Club must notify Central

Registry, the NHLPA and the Player, in accordance with Exhibit 3, of its intent to activate a

Player who is on the Injured Reserve List, or to remove the designation of Injured Non-Roster,

prior to the Player playing in an NHL Game by way of a verification signed by the Club

physician, and countersigned by a Club executive, attached as Exhibit 28-B. This form must be

received by Central Registry, the NHLPA and the Player, all in accordance with Exhibit 3, on the

day the Club activates the Player to play and, upon Central Registry's receipt of such verification,

the Player will be officially removed from the Injured Reserve List or have the designation of

Injured Non-Roster removed.

 

Again, do you see anything about "intent" to only apply where players would "return after injury"?

 

In fact, there is specific language covering this specific situation.

 

Who's wrong again?

[radoran]

Very opinionated piece after stating the facts. I think it comes down to the fact that the CBA prohibits it quite clearly, despite what anyone thinks of the Flyers contract, his injury, or the man himself. But the NHL has shown it's quite willing to violate the CBA and the NHLPA isn't going to fight against one of its own.

 

I was trying to digest the CBA language in it.

 

Then I went and read the damn CBA itself.

 

To wit: you're wrong.

[Polaris922]

@radoran

Somewhere on these forums is a quote from Holmgren i believe stating he knows that's not the intent of the LTIR but since it's not written he sees no issue with using it. It's in one of the numerous other threads started over the CBA, or Pronger, or over. 35 contracts, or ice cream, or Olympic swimming, or toyotas, or....

[Polaris922]

On a side note... Pronger is one if only three players in history to be suspended twice in the same postseason, and is one of the most suspended players of the modern era.