Me, because I haven't posted all day
- Jsaquella

You were wrong not to of posted sooner

The only one's who misunderstand what VL said are those with reading comprehension issues.
- Scoob

Wow. I guess that's me, because I thought I read an aging athlete who doesn't know he's done talking to a reporter who kinda thinks he's done but still wants him to get a shot for nostalgia's sake.

I didn't see any hidden messages, but hey

James Tanner glances at a keyboard and it magically just starts spewing forth lies and falsehoods.
- jmatchett383

James Tanner is to analytics what Godzilla is to city real estate.

Some of this I agree with and some I don't. I think there is a lot in there that are his exact feelings. He foolishly still thinks there is hope that he is traded and he can play somewhere else. If he thinks there is hope of him playing as a Flyer, then he is either stupid or delusional, or both.
- MJL

Sure, but again, any player in his position is going to think that. He's human and he's a professional athlete. Meanwhile, he's handling the situation very professionally.

And who knows, maybe some team will have some kind of injury where he'd be just what the doctor ordered. Everyone involved knows that's not a highly likely scenario but it is possible so...come to the rink every day, keep your professionalism, and hope for the best.

You were wrong not to of posted sooner
- Streit2ThePoint

Work called. It was a busy day for January down here. Usually it's a ghost town by now, but I was hopping.

It's really not legitimate at all. The reason it would have no affect on guaranteed contracts is because its a mutual termination. Doesnt matter what the reason is at all..

As long as both the player and team agree, the termination is legal and valid. Nobody would freak out about guaranteed contracts being violated or tampered with.
- jak521

What on earth are you talking about man? Why are you going on about legality and how valid terminating a contract would be?

The reason matters...not from a legal perspective...but from the perspective of Vinny. He needs a reason to mutually terminate. That was his original point and the correct point. He said the situation was unlike any other and that is because Vinny isnt willing give up the money because he doesnt have a viable financial alternative in another league (he wants the NHL). Why terminate if it means the end of your NHL career?

Sure, but again, any player in his position is going to think that. He's human and he's a professional athlete. Meanwhile, he's handling the situation very professionally.

And who knows, maybe some team will have some kind of injury where he'd be just what the doctor ordered. Everyone involved knows that's not a highly likely scenario but it is possible so...come to the rink every day, keep your professionalism, and hope for the best.
- Scoob

I agree with you. There arent any circumstances where he would say...yeah I dont think I am good enough to play until he actually decided to retire. He wants to play...he wants a team to want to play him...he has to say he can play. Pretty standard player talk

Hexy working the phone shard trying to get vinny involved in this Nash/bj trade

Sure, but again, any player in his position is going to think that. He's human and he's a professional athlete. Meanwhile, he's handling the situation very professionally.

And who knows, maybe some team will have some kind of injury where he'd be just what the doctor ordered. Everyone involved knows that's not a highly likely scenario but it is possible so...come to the rink every day, keep your professionalism, and hope for the best.
- Scoob

I feel pretty confident that there isn't a team who will take on that contract in a trade for the player that Lecvalier is.

Seriously, why shouldn't we take Lecavalier stating that it's not about money, and that he feels he can still play, literally?

What on earth are you talking about man? Why are you going on about legality and how valid terminating a contract would be?

The reason matters...not from a legal perspective...but from the perspective of Vinny. He needs a reason to mutually terminate. That was his original point and the correct point. He said the situation was unlike any other and that is because Vinny isnt willing give up the money because he doesnt have a viable financial alternative in another league (he wants the NHL). Why terminate if it means the end of your NHL career?
- YuenglingJagr

The argument we are talking about was why it would open a can of worms for guaranteed contract. That was the original point. Plain and simple. It wouldnt.

For Lecavalier, I think it boils down to a few things:

1. Is there a team willing to sign him to a SPC? Even a $1mm deal for 1 year might be far fetched. The best he might be able to do as a UFA following a mutual termination is a PTO. That potentially puts him in a worse spot than he is now, because at least now he's got an outside shot at playing because he's still on a roster.
- Jsaquella

Right. And he almost certainly wouldn't terminate unless he had a guarantee of something from another team. Not likely to happen.

2. Walking away from money. Granted Vinny doesn't likely need the money, and he's still getting paid by Tampa Bay. But if he terminates, he's leaving a lot of cash on the table and might have no guarantee of another contract.

Yep. Regardless of how much money you already have, the amount he'd be walking away from is huge. Doing this he'd be concluding that he's done as an NHL player. But if that is in his mind, why walk away from the money? He's got a contract and it wouldn't be immoral, unethical, or illegal to simply continue on with what he's doing now.

3. Will the Flyers execute a buy out? I would, but Hextall may well decide not to. While I don't feel that the buy out penalties are severe enough to hurt, a valid argument could be made about just keeping Lecavalier right where he is until he decides to retire or the deal expires. In that case, Lecavalier's best chance to play is injuries to others.

The buyout decision for the Flyers is a pure financial decision. How soon do they want/need his money off the books?

It sucks for Lecavalier, but these are the likely options he faces.

Yep, but on the scale of things that truly suck, this barely registers.

What on earth are you talking about man? Why are you going on about legality and how valid terminating a contract would be?

The reason matters...not from a legal perspective...but from the perspective of Vinny. He needs a reason to mutually terminate. That was his original point and the correct point. He said the situation was unlike any other and that is because Vinny isnt willing give up the money because he doesnt have a viable financial alternative in another league (he wants the NHL). Why terminate if it means the end of your NHL career?
- YuenglingJagr

Because not terminating might mean that you end your NHL career by sitting in the press box for 82 games, eating popcorn next to Tim Panaccio.

That's a very real possibility for Vinny if he doesn't terminate/retire. If he wants to play, the only real option is to terminate. I can't see a trade, even if the Flyers eat 50%. The Flyers may well just buy him out anyhow.

I'm sure his agent has permission to talk to other teams about a potential deal if Vinny is suddenly unencumbered with a contract

I feel pretty confident that there isn't a team who will take on that contract in a trade for the player that Lecvalier is.

Seriously, why shouldn't we take Lecavalier stating that it's not about money, and that he feels he can still play, literally?
- MJL

Remember when you defended his signing for the longest time. Lolololol

I feel pretty confident that there isn't a team who will take on that contract in a trade for the player that Lecvalier is.
- MJL

I agree.

Seriously, why shouldn't we take Lecavalier stating that it's not about money, and that he feels he can still play, literally?

Because no player in his right mind is going to say it's about the money. It's always about the money for every player. Always. Every. He wants to play in the NHL again but he also isn't going to simply walk away from the money.

The argument we are talking about was why it would open a can of worms for guaranteed contract. That was the original point. Plain and simple. It wouldnt.
- jak521

I dont recall that being an argument at all, and it certainly wasn't one I was involved in

There's no precedence for a mutual termination of an SPC?
- MJL


... to sign a new SPC immediately.

is what I am referring to

Because not terminating might mean that you end your NHL career by sitting in the press box for 82 games, eating popcorn next to Tim Panaccio.

That's a very real possibility for Vinny if he doesn't terminate/retire. If he wants to play, the only real option is to terminate. I can't see a trade, even if the Flyers eat 50%. The Flyers may well just buy him out anyhow.

I'm sure his agent has permission to talk to other teams about a potential deal if Vinny is suddenly unencumbered with a contract
- Jsaquella

At least he gets paid for it. It is his only safety net. Any termination is a leap of faith and he will have to trust the information his agent collects to see if he can sign elsewhere for a contract that would be worth it

What on earth are you talking about man? Why are you going on about legality and how valid terminating a contract would be?

The reason matters...not from a legal perspective...but from the perspective of Vinny. He needs a reason to mutually terminate. That was his original point and the correct point. He said the situation was unlike any other and that is because Vinny isnt willing give up the money because he doesnt have a viable financial alternative in another league (he wants the NHL). Why terminate if it means the end of your NHL career?
- YuenglingJagr

I'd like to know what you're talking about, because the point was not about Lecavalier needing a reason to terminate.

Here are Tomahawks comments and what the conversation is about.

"Seriously... as a union member, he's not gonna just terminate, especially after the Richards situation."

" The situation that you guys are hoping for has never happened before... and there's a reason for that... it would be an attack on guaranteed contracts. "

"It's not like VL wants out for no reason -- (right or wrong) the team refuses to give him an opportunity and life is miserable for him.

Imagine the slippery slope that could become. "

"... to sign a new SPC immediately. "

Remember when you defended his signing for the longest time. Lolololol
- PhillySportsGuy

I loved it when he signed here and thought he would be a nice role model.


I am not wrong I was just misguided.

Most of you know that I've defended Vinny for awhile now.

Vinny aside, and even though it's not within the rules of the cap, I believe teams should play every player on their roster before making a call up. Call ups obviously have to depend on the position that needs to be filled but regardless, I think teams should play everyone before calling up another player. Just my belief but what the rules are and what I believe are 2 different things.

Now back to Vinny.

Vinny's skating to me is the only thing that holds him back. I don't think he's horrid player but I do think he's an embarrassingly horrid skater. Outside of the game in Calgary, I liked his play downlow in the offensive zone but if I have to bring up Calgary, that might have been the single worst performance I've ever seen a Hockey player play.

However, if Vinny were to play as much as Umberger has this season, even with all of Vinny's limitations, I think Vinny would out produce RJ Umberger. It's not even a question for me.

I think Umberger offers very little right now. Maybe even less than Vinny.

Remember when you defended his signing for the longest time. Lolololol
- PhillySportsGuy

He's a top-4 defenseman who is, if anything, slightly overpaid.

What, whoops, sorry.

Remember when you defended his signing for the longest time. Lolololol
- PhillySportsGuy

LOL, I stand by everything I said. Unfortunately, I can't predict that a player will sustain an injury, which would greatly speed up his decline. I have no problem with the reason why he was signed. Unfortunately, it just hasn't worked out.

I'd like to know what you're talking about, because the point was not about Lecavalier needing a reason to terminate.

Here are Tomahawks comments and what the conversation is about.

"Seriously... as a union member, he's not gonna just terminate, especially after the Richards situation."

" The situation that you guys are hoping for has never happened before... and there's a reason for that... it would be an attack on guaranteed contracts. "

"It's not like VL wants out for no reason -- (right or wrong) the team refuses to give him an opportunity and life is miserable for him.

Imagine the slippery slope that could become. "

"... to sign a new SPC immediately. "
- MJL

...see above

Right. And he almost certainly wouldn't terminate unless he had a guarantee of something from another team. Not likely to happen.
- Scoob

As Butch said to Marcellus Wallace..."Feel that sting, Big Boy? That's pride, (frank)ing with you" Even without a guarantee, he's basically not playing unless there's short term injuries on the Flyers. If there's an ounce of extra space, on the cap or roster, he's not playing.

Yep. Regardless of how much money you already have, the amount he'd be walking away from is huge. Doing this he'd be concluding that he's done as an NHL player. But if that is in his mind, why walk away from the money? He's got a contract and it wouldn't be immoral, unethical, or illegal to simply continue on with what he's doing now.
- Scoob

If he was going to terminate, I'd imagine it'd be July 2nd, right after that $2mm bonus hits his bank account.

The buyout decision for the Flyers is a pure financial decision. How soon do they want/need his money off the books?
- Scoob

To me the decision is more about freeing up roster space to work in youngsters and have flexibility. Granted salary cap space is part of that flexibility, but a buy out gives you both cap and roster space.

Yep, but on the scale of things that truly suck, this barely registers.
- Scoob

Oh yeah. I was more upset I spilled my coffee getting into my truck this morning.

I loved it when he signed here and thought he would be a nice role model.


I am not wrong I was just misguided.
- Streit2ThePoint

I remember thinking that was a neat signing and being concerned about the Streit deal

I wonder if I had my shirt on backwards too

Is Ghost a bust??!? When were you guys gonna tell me this?