Jump to content
You are a guest user Click to join the site

Ducks Hockey Forum Coyotes Hockey Forum Bruins Hockey Forum Sabres Hockey Forum Flames Hockey Forum Hurricanes Hockey Forum Blackhawks Hockey Forum Avalanche Hockey Forum Blue Jackets Hockey Forum Stars Hockey Forum Red Wings Jackets Hockey Forum Oilers Hockey Forum Panthers Hockey Forum Kings Hockey Forum Wild Hockey Forum Canadiens Hockey Forum Predators Hockey Forum Devils Hockey Forum Islanders Hockey Forum Rangers Hockey Forum Senators Hockey Forum Flyers Hockey Forum Penguins Hockey Forum Sharks Hockey Forum Blues Hockey Forum Lightning Hockey Forum Maple Leafs Hockey Forum Canucks Hockey Forum Golden Knights Hockey Forum Capitals Hockey Forum Jets Hockey Forum

Sign in to follow this  
darthbal

Another Blue Liner gone: Flyers to buyout Schlemko

Recommended Posts

Quote

Philadelphia FlyersVerified account @NHLFlyers

Hidden Content

    Give reaction or reply to this topic to see the hidden content.

  • Add to other Moment

  •  

The

Hidden Content

    Give reaction or reply to this topic to see the hidden content.
have placed defenseman David Schlemko on unconditional waivers for the purpose of terminating his contract.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, AJgoal said:

Just saw this.

 

...Why?

 

I would imagine so they can either overpay Provy or to get a forward tomorrow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, darthbal said:

 

I would imagine so they can either overpay Provy or to get a forward tomorrow

 

But they only gain $125,000 in cap space over demoting him, versus a $600,000 penalty next year. If Fletcher needs $125,000 cap space more than he has today to do something tomorrow, he's doing it wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, AJgoal said:

 

But they only gain $125,000 in cap space over demoting him, versus a $600,000 penalty next year. If Fletcher needs $125,000 cap space more than he has today to do something tomorrow, he's doing it wrong.

 

It makes no sense like you said unless they are about to sign some of these tryouts to contracts for the Phantoms.

 

Otherwise they have Brennan, Willcox and Friedman in the AHL.

 

So not sure what is up...guess we'll find out soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

It makes no sense like you said unless they are about to sign some of these tryouts to contracts for the Phantoms.

 

But even that doesn't line up. They have 15 contracts available, and AHL contracts wouldn't affect the cap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, AJgoal said:

 

But they only gain $125,000 in cap space over demoting him, versus a $600,000 penalty next year. If Fletcher needs $125,000 cap space more than he has today to do something tomorrow, he's doing it wrong.

The Flyers have to employ a cap person right ?...right ?

 

I don't think Schlemko was ever going to fit into the plans here, so perhaps this is a "cutting of bait"?

Making room to offer free agents Phantoms contracts,  maybe they're seeing "a lot to like" at the development camp from some of the FA invitees.

 

Honestly it almost seems like Fletcher is counting on a lock-out. 

I'm not going to pretend to know more than people that do sports management for a living because I don't but the other side of that coin is, i'm not seeing a whole bunch of savvy from this management team.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

The Flyers have to employ a cap person right ?...right ?

 

I assume so. They keep burning my resume in front of me when I drop it off.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its to sign a d-man to a two way contract.

Prosser, who was in minn with fletcher..just a guess..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, AJgoal said:

If Fletcher needs $125,000 cap space more than he has today to do something tomorrow, he's doing it wrong.

 

 

You're catching on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

It makes no sense like you said unless they are about to sign some of these tryouts to contracts for the Phantoms.

 

Otherwise they have Brennan, Willcox and Friedman in the AHL.

 

So not sure what is up...guess we'll find out soon.

I have to guess you're on to something. It may be more about number of contacts, though it doesn't seem like they're up against it, by my count.   It may not be about salary cap at all. They may need the contact slot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, darthbal said:

 

I would imagine so they can either overpay Provy or to get a forward tomorrow

Not possible to overpay Ivan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, AJgoal said:

They have 15 contracts available, and AHL contracts wouldn't affect the cap.

 

1 Provorov

2 Konecny

3 Laughton

4 NAK

 

So they sign all these and they will only have 12 forwards usually have 13.

 

So one more forward so that is only 10 available.

 

You have 11 forwards in the AHL under contract.

 

So they need 3 more forwards. So that leaves 7 available. Not sure how many they have on AHL contracts.

 

Three 3 men and needing 4.

 

So that leaves 3 available.

 

I'm not sure how much cushion contract wise they like to have.

 

But i think when all is said and done they have only or 3 open contracts.

 

But hey Chuck has it all figured out....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

1 Provorov

2 Konecny

3 Laughton

4 NAK

 

So they sign all these and they will only have 12 forwards usually have 13.

 

So one more forward so that is only 10 available.

 

You have 11 forwards in the AHL under contract.

 

So they need 3 more forwards. So that leaves 7 available. Not sure how many they have on AHL contracts.

 

Three 3 men and needing 4.

 

So that leaves 3 available.

 

I'm not sure how much cushion contract wise they like to have.

 

But i think when all is said and done they have only or 3 open contracts.

 

But hey Chuck has it all figured out....

 

And buying out Schlemko gives them one at the expense of a player that could have filled that role. It doesn't really help answer the "problem." Especially when they only have 3 defensemen for LHV at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, AJgoal said:

 

And buying out Schlemko gives them one at the expense of a player that could have filled that role. It doesn't really help answer the "problem." Especially when they only have 3 defensemen for LHV at the moment.

You're usually better at this than me. Does the bought out contract count toward the (I think) 50 total contract limit? 

 

Did the 50 limit even survive the last CBA? 

Edited by ruxpin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, AJgoal said:

 

And buying out Schlemko gives them one at the expense of a player that could have filled that role. It doesn't really help answer the "problem." Especially when they only have 3 defensemen for LHV at the moment.

 

Oh i agree i am trying to understand and i can't really so i am going to hope Chuck knows what he is doing or going to do and don't make matters worse....he could have buried him and just took the 950K cap relief and have a body in case of emergency stashed in case injuries crop up. Oh well enjoy the ride...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

You're usually better at this than me. Does the bought out contract count toward the (I think) 50 total contract limit? 

 

Did the 50 limit even survive the last CBA? 

 

No, it clears his contract from the 50. But of course, now you have to replace him, so it doesn't really do you any good to clear that spot. Honestly, the only time it makes sense to use a buyout to clear a contract is when you're right up against the limit. I suspect tomorrow we'll see WTF this was about, and say, "WTF?"

  • Uggh... 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, AJgoal said:

 

And buying out Schlemko gives them one at the expense of a player that could have filled that role. It doesn't really help answer the "problem." Especially when they only have 3 defensemen for LHV at the moment.

 

Double talk???

No surgeries and likely no buyouts

 

Outside of goaltending, the Flyers were relatively healthy this season with the majority of players dealing with minor issues throughout the course of the season. The Flyers don’t anticipate any offseason surgeries, but they should know definitively after some follow-up exams. 

 

Fletcher also added he’s "not a big fan of buyouts." In buying out contracts, teams stretch out the cap hit over future seasons and that’s not an ideal situation for the Flyers' GM. Defenseman Andrew MacDonald would appear to be the likely candidate with one season at a $5 million cap hit. 

 

 

Hidden Content

    Give reaction or reply to this topic to see the hidden content.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So i have seen rumors swirling (not sure the origins) of Nate Prosser or Chris Tanev being signed?? WTF???

 

I'm like really and put them where??? And WTF is being moved then???

 

Oh lawd this is getting scary...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, AJgoal said:

 

No, it clears his contract from the 50. But of course, now you have to replace him, so it doesn't really do you any good to clear that spot. Honestly, the only time it makes sense to use a buyout to clear a contract is when you're right up against the limit. I suspect tomorrow we'll see WTF this was about, and say, "WTF?"

Thanks for that.

 

I think they're clearing out a contract slot.  Ghost is going for a player and a prospect. Lol. I seriously think it's about the contact slot, though. 

 

Because I agree with you and others that salary cap reason makes no sense. 

 

I seriously think it's about the roster 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CoachX said:

Ghost isnt being traded 👻

I wish you'd said that sooner.  🤔

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did. 

 

Apparently, along with poor attempts at sarcasm, my involvement in friendly conversation is an effort in futility

 

Perhaps I should be GM 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, CoachX said:

I did. 

 

Apparently, along with poor attempts at sarcasm, my involvement in friendly conversation is an effort in futility

 

Perhaps I should be GM 

 

Ithink it could be Hagg and maybe pick(s) for something of value in return...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

Ithink it could be Hagg and maybe pick(s) for something of value in return...

Whats the point of that? Just to move someone from a crowded D ? If so, I get it, but it has nothing to do with solving the 3rw issue, or signing a UFA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Most Liked Posts in This Topic

    • 3
      Post
      I assume so. They keep burning my resume in front of me when I drop it off.
    • 2
      Post
      Ghost isnt being traded 👻
    • 1
      Post
      Ithink it could be Hagg and maybe pick(s) for something of value in return...
    • 0
      Post
      No, it clears his contract from the 50. But of course, now you have to replace him, so it doesn't really do you any good to clear that spot. Honestly, the only time it makes sense to use a buyout to clear a contract is when you're right up against the limit. I suspect tomorrow we'll see WTF this was about, and say, "WTF?"

Game Room 1

    You don't have permission to chat.
    ×
    ×
    • Create New...