So which one of the women were you, I forget?

- mayorofangrytown

whichever one you want me to be, big boy.

The pick was used to acquire the rights to Bryzgalov
- bradleyc4

now that hurts

whichever one you want me to be, big boy.


- BringBack25

i dunno. the whole thing is starting to look dysfunctional at this point, however.

that re-boot relying on old dmen and a system goalie in his 30's, along w/ younger forwards was a discordant gamble even before pronger's final injury. the off season last yr was one that would get many GMs fired. the prob is, there isn't a sense that homer is on his last legs as he should be, imo. we'll have to see.
- isaiah520

You don't fire a GM for one off season where all the moves attempted weren't successful. Especially when a lot of it was beyond his control. He's not on his last legs, because there isn't a reason for him to be on his last legs.

How much more do you want a guy to make for what he gives you over the past 4 years? I'm not even talking last year. Of course he'll bounce back I expect him to also, he was horrid last year.

It's a fact he gets paid a premium to bring the game you mentioned to the ice.
- Just5

I think that's fair market value for when he signed the contract. With the cap going down next year it hurts a little bit, but they should shoot right back up in 2014-2015.

His contract is going to be big, but I'm not scared of Giroux's payday. What I am scared of is the remote (perhaps nonexistent) possibility we don't keep him. The moment he puts ink to paper (not an offer sheet), I'll breath a sigh of relief.
- BulliesPhan87

I can't see him going anywhere...

that said

I own a Richards jersey and signed picture of Captain Mike so I am often wrong

How much more do you want a guy to make for what he gives you over the past 4 years? I'm not even talking last year. Of course he'll bounce back I expect him to also, he was horrid last year.

It's a fact he gets paid a premium to bring the game you mentioned to the ice.
- Just5

4M or so for a top 4 NHL defenseman today, is not really a premium.

Look at the end results. Waiving Vannanen and Metropolit allowed the Flyers to bring back Briere, and keep Giroux with the Flyers. They had a choice. They could've sent Giroux back down as he was waiver exempt. They made a choice. And that choice made the Flyers better. So it's incorrect to label those moves a mistake in my opinion.
- MJL

Those are the kinds of things that don't bother me, he weighed two options, and left a couple ok players out in the cold to keep the best players on the roster.

I do have a problem with things like the Pronger extension. It was definitely done thinking he wouldn't be subject to 35+ rules, in my mind, and by the time it became clear we couldn't not extend him, we'd already traded assets for him.

I can't see him going anywhere...

that said

I own a Richards jersey and signed picture of Captain Mike so I am often wrong
- Marc D

Precisely. Logically, he's a Flyer. But with our track record of surprises, I'll be watching for updates from the edge of my seat.

Precisely. Logically, he's a Flyer. But with our track record of surprises, I'll be watching for updates from the edge of my seat.
- BulliesPhan87

ugh, the thought of no G makes me physically ill

Those are the kinds of things that don't bother me, he weighed two options, and left a couple ok players out in the cold to keep the best players on the roster.

I do have a problem with things like the Pronger extension. It was definitely done thinking he wouldn't be subject to 35+ rules, in my mind, and by the time it became clear we couldn't not extend him, we'd already traded assets for him.
- BulliesPhan87

To be fair to Homer, the written language of the CBA really left it in a grey area. It's not specified whether the over 35+ applied to when the contract was signed or when it kicked in.

ugh, the thought of no G makes me physically ill
- Marc D

If that happened, I might have to take a season or so off just to recover.

ugh, the thought of no G makes me physically ill
- Marc D

No G? Where did this come from?

So which one of the women were you, I forget?

- mayorofangrytown

No G? Where did this come from?
- GirouxForTheShow

just a conversation I was having with Bullies

talking about G's next contract, I said it was going to be scary big,
he said he wasn't afraid of the $s, just had a fear of G going somewhere else

we both said Impossible!

except I said the same about Mike Richards

he's not going anywhere, don't worry

To be fair to Homer, the written language of the CBA really left it in a grey area. It's not specified whether the over 35+ applied to when the contract was signed or when it kicked in.
- GirouxForTheShow

It was clear enough to rule he'd be subject to the 35+ rule. The Flyers pay people (or at least, a person) specifically to understand these things, he can't make mistakes like that.

No G? Where did this come from?
- GirouxForTheShow

Only from the need to expect the unexpected as a Flyers fan.

It was clear enough to rule he'd be subject to the 35+ rule. The Flyers pay people (or at least, a person) specifically to understand these things, he can't make mistakes like that.
- BulliesPhan87

What I remember reading, it wasn't clear at all. And I'm somewhat familiar with legal jargon. However, you're right, they have person(s) on payroll to understand these things. And they didn't.

just a conversation I was having with Bullies

talking about G's next contract, I said it was going to be scary big,
he said he wasn't afraid of the $s, just had a fear of G going somewhere else

we both said Impossible!

except I said the same about Mike Richards

he's not going anywhere, don't worry
- Marc D

Thank you I just had a mini heart attack. Although its funny because it's true, you never know with this team.

What I remember reading, it wasn't clear at all. And I'm somewhat familiar with legal jargon. However, you're right, they have person(s) on payroll to understand these things.
- GirouxForTheShow

All Player Salary and Bonuses earned in a League Year by a Player who is in the second or later year of a multi-year SPC which was signed when the Player was age 35 or older (as of June 30 prior to the League Year in which the SPC is to be effective), regardless of whether, or where, the Player is playing, except to the extent the Player is playing under his SPC in the minor leagues , in which case only the Player Salary and Bonuses in excess of $100,000 shall count towards the calculation of Actual Club Salary.

http://www.aolnews.com/20...ngers-contract-extension/

Seems clear to me, unless Holmgren can't see things contained in parenthesis.

http://www.aolnews.com/2009/07/08/did-philadelphia-screw-up-chris-prongers-contract-extension/

Seems clear to me, unless Holmgren can't see things contained in parenthesis.
- BulliesPhan87

"...which was signed when the Player was age 35 or older" Thats the part, just before the parenthesis, that I remember reading that wasn't clear. Or clear enough at least. Pronger signed it before he turned 35. So what guideline do you roll by? The rule or the stipulation?

- jak521

What a hitter...

http://www.aolnews.com/2009/07/08/did-philadelphia-screw-up-chris-prongers-contract-extension/

Seems clear to me, unless Holmgren can't see things contained in parenthesis.
- BulliesPhan87

Yes. There were unsubstantiated reports at the time that the reason he wrecked his bike was because he ran into a set of parenthesis that he didn't see.

Those are the kinds of things that don't bother me, he weighed two options, and left a couple ok players out in the cold to keep the best players on the roster.

I do have a problem with things like the Pronger extension. It was definitely done thinking he wouldn't be subject to 35+ rules, in my mind, and by the time it became clear we couldn't not extend him, we'd already traded assets for him.
- BulliesPhan87

Then there is a question to be asked. Let's accept that they were mistaken about the 35+ rule. Do you think they wouldn't have traded for Pronger, and not extended him because of that? I don't think it would've changed anything.

Yes. There were unsubstantiated reports at the time that the reason he wrecked his bike was because he ran into a set of parenthesis that he didn't see.
- BringBack25

Probably a sign that said "(Watch out Stupid!)"