Bill Meltzer: Meltzer's Musings: Matt Walker and the CBA

Bill Meltzer: Meltzer's Musings: Matt Walker and the CBA
- bmeltzer

I think we may be up the creek anyways with the cap going down and what will probably be zero room to upgrade the D. God help us if Timo goes down or Mesz can't return until the end of the season.

I think we may be up the creek anyways with the cap going down and what will probably be zero room to upgrade the D. God help us if Timo goes down or Mesz can't return until the end of the season.
- Hextall271

Need to have a season before you can worry about who goes down with an injury

Bill Meltzer: Meltzer's Musings: Matt Walker and the CBA
- bmeltzer

The Flyers will have to be a good deal more cautious in the future, especially in signing free agents.

Well the Cap is probably going to stay where it is now for this Season if they ever play. Just pray that the NHLPA is successful in negotiating the contract term limit to a higher number.

Need to have a season before you can worry about who goes down with an injury
- funmaster18

Lol, well that's a good point, but I still see the plan as being to play an abbreviated season starting in Jan so I am starting to think about what the team will look like.

Another grand scheme which simulates staring down the barrel of a gun. Great thinking NhL ... Hey how about a team in Hawaii?!

Honestly, they need to improve their cap system....either do the soft cap/luxury tax system...or include a Franchise System, where one player doesnt count against the CAP. They also need to remove the floor of the CAP or reduce it GREATLY, The floor is seriously killing some of those small market teams, where they barely have enough revenue to pay out the floor....The system in terribly flawed and yet we will be back in this same situation when the next CBA expires.

Another grand scheme which simulates staring down the barrel of a gun. Great thinking NhL ... Hey how about a team in Hawaii?!
- JoeRussomanno

Hawaii Ice Surfers?


Im down...

Honestly, they need to improve their cap system....either do the soft cap/luxury tax system...or include a Franchise System, where one player doesnt count against the CAP. They also need to remove the floor of the CAP or reduce it GREATLY, The floor is seriously killing some of those small market teams, where they barely have enough revenue to pay out the floor....The system in terribly flawed and yet we will be back in this same situation when the next CBA expires.
- Pyzik

No question about it.

On the plus side, this has to be the end of Jody Shelley. Can't afford that season long 1.1 mill healthy scratch any more.

Pronger's contract had cap circumvention written all over it when it was signed. There was no way he was going to play those last 2 years @500k/yr even if he was healthy.

The question I have is if the 5% variance rules and 5 year limit were in effect when Holmgren was negotiating with him, what would've happened?

Would've he still have gotten 7.5 mill/yr in actual salary?
How would that have affected the Flyers roster?
Would've he gotten less wherever he landed?

On the plus side he'd be off the Flyers books (assuming he still signed here) 2 years sooner and if he signed with someone else they, unlike the Flyers, would probably take into consideration that the contract would be 35+

On the plus side, this has to be the end of Jody Shelley. Can't afford that season long 1.1 mill healthy scratch any more.


- Flyers_01

What good would it do for the Flyers to waive him and send him down if he's going to count against the cap anyway?

Honestly, they need to improve their cap system....either do the soft cap/luxury tax system...or include a Franchise System, where one player doesnt count against the CAP. They also need to remove the floor of the CAP or reduce it GREATLY, The floor is seriously killing some of those small market teams, where they barely have enough revenue to pay out the floor....The system in terribly flawed and yet we will be back in this same situation when the next CBA expires.
- Pyzik

I'm going to disagree with just about all of that. Reducing the player share to 50% is going make it easier for the small market teams to reach the floor. Eliminating loopholes means that teams like the Flyers and Rangers (until/unless new loopholes are found) are going to be reigned in which will result in talent being more evenly spread around, imo. Drafting and astute contract management will be the only way to be a consistant winner. Burying a contract like Redden's in the minors will absolutely kill you.

I'm going to go the complete opposite way from you in what needs to be changed. I don't want more ways for the cap to be circumvented, which is all you are suggesting, more ways to funnel money to the players.

Nonguaranteed contracts. I know the NHLPA won't go for it but it's a far simpler solution which doesn't make a mockery of the cap, like the NHLPA supporters would like.

What good would it do for the Flyers to waive him and send him down if he's going to count against the cap anyway?
- MJL

It wouldn't. Either play him or trade him to someone else who would play him but for god sakes, when his contract is up this year, don't resign him.

It wouldn't. Either play him or trade him to someone else who would play him but for god sakes, when his contract is up this year, don't resign him.
- Flyers_01

Do you think the Flyers can trade him?

I'm going to disagree with just about all of that. Reducing the player share to 50% is going make it easier for the small market teams to reach the floor. Eliminating loopholes means that teams like the Flyers and Rangers (until/unless new loopholes are found) are going to be reigned in which will result in talent being more evenly spread around, imo. Drafting and astute contract management will be the only way to be a consistant winner. Burying a contract like Redden's in the minors will absolutely kill you.

I'm going to go the complete opposite way from you in what needs to be changed. I don't want more ways for the cap to be circumvented, which is all you are suggesting, more ways to funnel money to the players.

Nonguaranteed contracts. I know the NHLPA won't go for it but it's a far simpler solution which doesn't make a mockery of the cap, like the NHLPA supporters would like.
- Flyers_01

So the NHLPA supporters would like the Cap to be made a mockery if. Most NHLPA supporters, myself included. Realize that the reduction of the players share to 50%, doesn't solve the cap floor limit issue for struggling teams. It may slow it down for a year or two. But in a long term CBA, were likely to see the same thing in the last CBA.

I'm going to disagree with just about all of that. Reducing the player share to 50% is going make it easier for the small market teams to reach the floor. Eliminating loopholes means that teams like the Flyers and Rangers (until/unless new loopholes are found) are going to be reigned in which will result in talent being more evenly spread around, imo. Drafting and astute contract management will be the only way to be a consistant winner. Burying a contract like Redden's in the minors will absolutely kill you.

I'm going to go the complete opposite way from you in what needs to be changed. I don't want more ways for the cap to be circumvented, which is all you are suggesting, more ways to funnel money to the players.

Nonguaranteed contracts. I know the NHLPA won't go for it but it's a far simpler solution which doesn't make a mockery of the cap, like the NHLPA supporters would like.
- Flyers_01

Yet a reduced floor and luxury Tax system funnels money back into the league which can help the struggling teams more so than an equal split, much like was pointed out just above, the system would get a band aid for a few seasons then once the cap goes up and up and up based on revenues like it has in the past, those bottom teams get strangled again.

Yet a reduced floor and luxury Tax system funnels money back into the league which can help the struggling teams more so than an equal split, much like was pointed out just above, the system would get a band aid for a few seasons then once the cap goes up and up and up based on revenues like it has in the past, those bottom teams get strangled again.
- Pyzik

Exactly. But the problem he sees, and what the NHL will most likely object to, is money outside of the system going to the players.

Bill Meltzer: Meltzer's Musings: Matt Walker and the CBA
- bmeltzer

So, what we're saying here is that, when and if they play again, Matt Walker is our new 7th defenseman?

GAGNE

I miss him

So, what we're saying here is that, when and if they play again, Matt Walker is our new 7th defenseman?
- johndewar

Very good chance. Unless maybe they can deal him.

So, what we're saying here is that, when and if they play again, Matt Walker is our new 7th defenseman?
- johndewar

After Timonen, Meszaros, Coburn, Grossman, Schenn, Gervais, Lilja, Bourdon and Gustafsson, Walker MIGHT have a chance if he can outplay Brandon Manning.

So the NHLPA supporters would like the Cap to be made a mockery if. Most NHLPA supporters, myself included. Realize that the reduction of the players share to 50%, doesn't solve the cap floor limit issue for struggling teams. It may slow it down for a year or two. But in a long term CBA, were likely to see the same thing in the last CBA.
- MJL

Both you and Prizk just advocated a luxury tax on teams going over the cap or a franchise player on each team that does not count against the cap. How does having a franchise player not counting against the cap not circumvent the CAP system? How does having a Franchise player not counting against the cap help the struggling teams?

If you want to advocate reducing the cap floor, which is a seperate issue than the 2 mentioned above, I'm going to disagree with it but at least your argument makes sense for that. Franchise players would make a mockery of the cap.

Nonguaranteed contracts. I know the NHLPA won't go for it but it's a far simpler solution which doesn't make a mockery of the cap, like the NHLPA supporters would like.



BINGO...I've been saying this all along...
if you are not needed or you just plain suck, you can get cut. Allow the player to get picked up by someone else and the team can get rid of the contract.

Nonguaranteed contracts. I know the NHLPA won't go for it but it's a far simpler solution which doesn't make a mockery of the cap, like the NHLPA supporters would like.



BINGO...I've been saying this all along...
if you are not needed or you just plain suck, you can get cut. Allow the player to get picked up by someone else and the team can get rid of the contract.
- phi1671

It really does work out for all involved. Players don't want to toil away in the minors for the sake of an inflated paycheck to they? It also gives them the chance to hit FA more often. I've heard someone say that players hitting FA more often will drive up salaries so it's a WIN/WIN. Teams don't have dead cap and the players get to play on teams where they are wanted.