1. You have chosen to ignore posts from MRELD. Show MRELD's posts

    Re: PC: Deals are in place

    posted at 11/21/2010 9:36 AM EST

    Keep Wheeler, Ryder goes...Paille too if need be but he's a decent 13th man, especially if we lost a PK guy to injury. Trust me, no one here in Providence is going to help....although Colborne looking better as we get more into the season. If we make a trade, get a good AHL goalie.....Nolan "more holes than swiss cheese" Schaefer looks about as good as Peter Schaefer did in his salary dump year here.
     

  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: PC: Deals are in place

    posted at 11/21/2010 9:58 AM EST

    On the broadcast last night, Edwards and Brickley talked about the Bruins' cap situation.  According to them, the activation of players from the LTIR is purely at the discretion of the GM, so he doesn't need to do anything because he can simply decided Savard/Sturm aren't ready.  I would have thought any significant extra time off the roster would be viewed by the league as circumvention.
     

  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: PC: Deals are in place

    posted at 11/21/2010 10:02 AM EST

    In Response to Re: PC: Deals are in place:
    On the broadcast last night, Edwards and Brickley talked about the Bruins' cap situation.  According to them, the activation of players from the LTIR is purely at the discretion of the GM, so he doesn't need to do anything because he can simply decided Savard/Sturm aren't ready.  I would have thought any significant extra time off the roster would be viewed by the league as circumvention.
    Posted by DrCC


    It wouldn't be circumvention, which has become the catch phrase for anything that has to deal with the salary cap this season.

    When a player is on LTIR, an insurance company is paying a lot of the salary.  If the team kept the player on LTIR due to cap reasons, the insurance company would be paying the saraly of a healthy player.

    It would be fraud. 
     

  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: PC: Deals are in place

    posted at 11/21/2010 10:19 AM EST

    In Response to Re: PC: Deals are in place:
    Stanley...If you ever use Lemieux and you-know-who, in the same sentence ever again, I will have to put you on my ignore list! Get a grip, man.
    Posted by biggskye


    I did that over the summer.  It's great. 
     

  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: PC: Deals are in place

    posted at 11/21/2010 10:39 AM EST

    In Response to Re: PC: Deals are in place:
    In Response to Re: PC: Deals are in place : *snip*  It would be fraud. 
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    Well, yes, there would be that too.  That's probably an overriding reason for not doing it.

    But from the League's point of view, the Bruins would be using LTIR relief to keep the team cap compliant, rather than temporarily replace injured players.  Catch-phrase or not, both the League and the NHLPA would get annoyed with that, I think.
     

  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bruins6. Show Bruins6's posts

    Re: PC: Deals are in place

    posted at 11/21/2010 11:29 AM EST

    Ryder is a given. The other player maybe resolved in the next couple of weeks as a young guy like Caron could go down and we could keep Paille as a 13th forward 

     

  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: PC: Deals are in place

    posted at 11/21/2010 12:00 PM EST

    In Response to Re: PC: Deals are in place:
    In Response to Re: PC: Deals are in place : It wouldn't be circumvention, which has become the catch phrase for anything that has to deal with the salary cap this season. When a player is on LTIR, an insurance company is paying a lot of the salary.  If the team kept the player on LTIR due to cap reasons, the insurance company would be paying the saraly of a healthy player. It would be fraud. 
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    As I said in another thread, the debate would be not with the NHL or even the insurance company but on the prognosis.  Nuerologist teams will certainly not be definitive enough to say Savard has recovered from PCS.  Medical teams more than likely would be asking Savard questions after the testing to determine the ability to play without symptoms.  Furthermore the insurance company would rather pay a salary than a lawsuit.  The key in my opinion is Savard.  If he oks, then PC will be making a decision to trade or demote.   
     

  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: PC: Deals are in place

    posted at 11/21/2010 12:06 PM EST

    In Response to Re: PC: Deals are in place:
    In Response to Re: PC: Deals are in place : As I said in another thread, the debate would be not with the NHL or even the insurance company but on the prognosis.  Nuerologist teams will certainly not be definitive enough to say Savard has recovered from PCS.  Medical teams more than likely would be asking Savard questions after the testing to determine the ability to play without symptoms.  Furthermore the insurance company would rather pay a salary than a lawsuit.  The key in my opinion is Savard.  If he oks, then PC will be making a decision to trade or demote.   
    Posted by islamorada


    Right.  Of course.  The fraud scenario would be Savard saying "I'm good to go" with the doctors saying "He says he's good to go" and the team saying, "You're injured" in order to keep him on LTIR.
     

  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: PC: Deals are in place

    posted at 11/21/2010 1:46 PM EST

    In Response to Re: PC: Deals are in place:
    In Response to Re: PC: Deals are in place : Right.  Of course.  The fraud scenario would be Savard saying "I'm good to go" with the doctors saying "He says he's good to go" and the team saying, "You're injured" in order to keep him on LTIR.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    Right, of course.  Then you agree with the insurance company saying "we would rather pay the salary than the costs of a lawsuit".  Doctors will disagree under that pressure to make a firm determination to play, me thinks NAS.  
     

  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Kurako. Show Kurako's posts

    Re: PC: Deals are in place

    posted at 11/21/2010 4:40 PM EST

    In Response to Re: PC: Deals are in place:
    On the broadcast last night, Edwards and Brickley talked about the Bruins' cap situation.  According to them, the activation of players from the LTIR is purely at the discretion of the GM, so he doesn't need to do anything because he can simply decided Savard/Sturm aren't ready.  I would have thought any significant extra time off the roster would be viewed by the league as circumvention.
    Posted by DrCC



    I remember that too. I dare say they get it from a pretty reliable source.

    To my mind the wording of the section of the CBA relating to an injured player returning is a bit fuzzy. It states that cap space must be cleared before a player is allowed to rejoin his club. There doesn't seem to be any obligation to do so.

    Section 50.10 of the CBA

    "(iv) The replacement Player Salary and Bonuses for any Player(s) that replace(s) an unfit-to-play Player may be added to the Club's Averaged Club Salary until such time as the Club's Averaged Club Salary reaches the Upper Limit. A Club may then exceed the Upper Limit due to the addition of replacement Player Salary and Bonuses of Players who have replaced an unfit-to-play Player, provided, however, that when the unfit-to-play Player is once again fit to play (including any period such Player is on a Bona Fide Long-Term Injury/Illness Exception Conditioning Loan to another league), the Club shall be required to once again reduce its Averaged Club Salary to a level at or below the Upper Limit prior to the Player being able to rejoin the Club."
     

  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Kurako. Show Kurako's posts

    Re: PC: Deals are in place

    posted at 11/21/2010 4:45 PM EST

    And bear in mind this is only an issue when both players come back since the cap relief from one will cover the salary of the other.

    With 4.9m of cap relief at present, you'd need to clear 2 roster spots to bring them both back. That'll take care of the best part of 2m. Which leaves a further 3m or so to be shifted off the books.
     

  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: PC: Deals are in place

    posted at 11/21/2010 5:02 PM EST

    In Response to Re: PC: Deals are in place:
    Though I don't get the Mario Lemieux comparison at all, I must say, I like Wheeler and hope they hold on to him. I never understood why people turned on him so hard, so fast.  I mean, last year was his SECOND YEAR IN THE LEAGUE.  He's shown he has good puck skills, a decent shot, good passing and he's become quite the penalty killer as well.  Having Wheeler as a 3rd, 4th line forward is a pretty good thing in my eyes.  I would sooner see them cut ties with Paille and or Ryder, because we we know what they are....or more so, what they're not.  Wheeler on the other hand is just getting started
    Posted by Swearengen

    I love the idea of having Wheeler on the 3rd line.I think what rubs people the wrong way is his salary.What folks tend to forget is that having depth dictates your 3rd line being expensive.I think you're absolutely right that Wheeler has potential and Ryder is on the downslope.gotta put Hunwick and Ference into the same category.Hunwick has some offensive upside and is young.Fernce,though I like his game,has shown us all he's got.