News Conference on Scotty

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=217650&hubname=nhl

the nhl wouldn't be the same without him :(

the nhl wouldn't be the same without him :(

maybe, but this ***** is ridiculous. I'm tired of this, I will play when I want to bull$hit. Retire or don't retire. Simple as that. I love Scotty as much as everyone else, but this is definitely making me lose a lot of respect for the guy.

maybe, but this ***** is ridiculous. I'm tired of this, I will play when I want to bull$hit. Retire or don't retire. Simple as that. I love Scotty as much as everyone else, but this is definitely making me lose a lot of respect for the guy.

well he's been an nhl player for his entire career, so it's not easy to just leave like that... but i understand you, it is getting kind of annoying..

maybe, but this ***** is ridiculous. I'm tired of this, I will play when I want to bull$hit. Retire or don't retire. Simple as that. I love Scotty as much as everyone else, but this is definitely making me lose a lot of respect for the guy.

Ya because it is so simple to give up the only thing you have ever done since you were four years old. His one main passion since childhood.

He has to weigh that passion and giving it up with spending time with his children and watching them grow.

It's not an easy decision like you make it sound.

maybe, but this ***** is ridiculous. I'm tired of this, I will play when I want to bull$hit. Retire or don't retire. Simple as that. I love Scotty as much as everyone else, but this is definitely making me lose a lot of respect for the guy.
Why are you losing respect? He has been honest with the team about his feelings and the team offered to give him time to figure it out. It is not like he did anything to backstab the team or was dishonest in any way.

Here is my guess of what is going on:
When Bouch and Pronger were injured, so was Scotty. But Scotty was the only one who continued to play injured...for 2 months. And then he went through a very long and grueling playoffs where he played 30 min a game also injured. Is it really any surprise that his body was telling him not to do that again?

Now he has had a short summer (due to being in the SC finals) and is feeling better and the itch is starting to coming back. But instead of racing ahead, he is thinking that he does not want to feel the same way he did last season so he is taking a bit of extra time off to heal and just get into the state of mind of enjoying the game again. I can't blame the guy for feeling that way.

And before anyone says this is horrible of him and would never happen in the real world: I did a similar thing. Not in the sports world, but in the business world. I put in 11 months of 60-80hr weeks to get a very important project off and then took a bunch of vacation time. Toward the end of the vacation time I called and talked to my boss and told him I was still burnt out and just not mentally ready to come back. He gave me the time I needed to get my head back together without pressure. If I was a new hire or held a low position in the company he may not have done that, but he thought my value to the company was worth waiting for. I am very grateful I have a boss that understands happy employees will be more productive (and therefore make him more money) then burnt out and frustrated ones.

Why are you losing respect? He has been honest with the team about his feelings and the team offered to give him time to figure it out. It is not like he did anything to backstab the team or was dishonest in any way.

Here is my guess of what is going on:
When Bouch and Pronger were injured, so was Scotty. But Scotty was the only one who continued to play injured...for 2 months. And then he went through a very long and grueling playoffs where he played 30 min a game also injured. Is it really any surprise that his body was telling him not to do that again?

Now he has had a short summer (due to being in the SC finals) and is feeling better and the itch is starting to coming back. But instead of racing ahead, he is thinking that he does not want to feel the same way he did last season so he is taking a bit of extra time off to heal and just get into the state of mind of enjoying the game again. I can't blame the guy for feeling that way.

And before anyone says this is horrible of him and would never happen in the real world: I did a similar thing. Not in the sports world, but in the business world. I put in 11 months of 60-80hr weeks to get a very important project off and then took a bunch of vacation time. Toward the end of the vacation time I called and talked to my boss and told him I was still burnt out and just not mentally ready to come back. He gave me the time I needed to get my head back together without pressure. If I was a new hire or held a low position in the company he may not have done that, but he thought my value to the company was worth waiting for. I am very grateful I have a boss that understands happy employees will be more productive (and therefore make him more money) then burnt out and frustrated ones.

Understadable, and losing respect was probably not the right thing to say on my part. I am just getting really aggrivated about not knowing yet, especially when the press conference is going to be right in the middle of one of my exams tomorrow, which will take school completely off my mind. However, there are a bunch of bad things to go along with this as well. Yes, maybe it is smart of him, but think of how it affects the team as well... What if he doesn't come back later in the season, but we've been holding that cap room open in case he does? We could use that cap money to bring in a good forward who can help with the lack of scoring, especially if Selanne leaves. I want Scotty to come back as much as everyone else, but if he's almost certain that he's leaving I wish he would retire, because I think it's going to be a distraction to the team, and I don't want this to become a trend in the NHL.

Ok so he is not going to camp. If he decides to sit out the first month or two of the season ,before deciding what he wants to do, how does that affect the salary cap?

I put in 11 months of 60-80hr weeks to get a very important project off and then took a bunch of vacation time. Toward the end of the vacation time I called and talked to my boss and told him I was still burnt out and just not mentally ready to come back.

Christ, I'm so glad I don't have a real job.

I thought your job was drinking?

I wonder how fast Scotty makes decisions at the video store?

pm8Aopl7q6U

I am one of those who expects a retirement. Bye scotty, thanks for the hockey.

I wonder how fast Scotty makes decisions at the video store?

pm8Aopl7q6U

LMAO

As suspected, Scott will not report for training camp. He is no closer to a decision, nor does he have a plan to return. The presser will be an informal meeting to talk to the press.

Scott has already spilled the beans in this article. (http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/sports/pros/ducks/abox/article_1839698.php)

"Once things start rolling, if I'm not there, it will be sort of a new experience," Niedermayer said. "Maybe that will make things clear. Maybe I'll be in camp in a week, or for that matter, I could never put skates on again."
:pullhair:

Ok so he is not going to camp. If he decides to sit out the first month or two of the season ,before deciding what he wants to do, how does that affect the salary cap?

The Ducks will suspend him for not showing up to training camp. He will not get paid, and his salary will not impact the Ducks. I believe that he can return later in the season, so long as both the Ducks and the NHL clear him to play.

maybe, but this ***** is ridiculous. I'm tired of this, I will play when I want to bull$hit. Retire or don't retire. Simple as that. I love Scotty as much as everyone else, but this is definitely making me lose a lot of respect for the guy.

That's fine. You can lose respect for him because you're ignorant to the situation. I'm sure he'll lose sleep over it.

I thought your job was drinking?

Yeah....I suppose that's real enough.

I'm just an outsider and this is purely speculation on my part, but jeez, this is very similar to the Brian Leetch saga. With SN skipping training camp, and no closer to a decision than he was 3 months ago, it seems to me he's actually decided already - even if he doesn't know it. The more time that goes by and the more action he misses, the easier & more final the ultimate decision will be.

Ok so he is not going to camp. If he decides to sit out the first month or two of the season ,before deciding what he wants to do, how does that affect the salary cap?

The salary paid out by a team accrues daily. Until he retires, his salary is counting against the cap. The cap is not a magical number that raises or falls depending on what happens to a player, it is an averaged amount that should all players play all of their games it will be a known amount by the end of the season.

I'm just an outsider and this is purely speculation on my part, but jeez, this is very similar to the Brian Leetch saga.

Except no one outside of his fans cared if Brian Leetch retired or not because he wasn't going to be of significant help, let alone lead an NHL team when he was contemplating retirement. This player is a 34 year old captain, who this past season was both a Norris Trophy finalist and the recipient of the Conn Smythe Trophy, Leetch was a shell when he was going through his debacle.

The Ducks will suspend him for not showing up to training camp. He will not get paid, and his salary will not impact the Ducks. I believe that he can return later in the season, so long as both the Ducks and the NHL clear him to play.

That is the best tactic they can use. Can't wait until the rants attacking or defending Burke when that happens though. It might kill the bandwidth.
:shakehead

That is the best tactic they can use. Can't wait until the rants attacking or defending Burke when that happens though. It might kill the bandwidth.
:shakehead

Hah, yeah. It should make for fun times. :)

That's fine. You can lose respect for him because you're ignorant to the situation. I'm sure he'll lose sleep over it.

Ignorant? That's his opinion. The gyu has had all summer to come to a decision. All you Nieds fan make it sound like he's plaing for free. He signed that contract!!! He's obligated to perform or retire. If he was a professional, he'da made a freakin decision about by now.

Ya because it is so simple to give up the only thing you have ever done since you were four years old. His one main passion since childhood.

He has to weigh that passion and giving it up with spending time with his children and watching them grow.

It's not an easy decision like you make it sound.


He's not making a decision about the rest of his life. It's about the next year or two. He can be retired for the rest of life after that. I don't see the big deal. He's probably thinking if he continues to play, he might not retire on a cup win.

Ignorant? That's his opinion. The gyu has had all summer to come to a decision. All you Nieds fan make it sound like he's plaing for free. He signed that contract!!! He's obligated to perform or retire. If he was a professional, he'da made a freakin decision about by now.

Opinions can be as ignorant as anything...

well he's been an nhl player for his entire career, so it's not easy to just leave like that... but i understand you, it is getting kind of annoying..

well he is still young enough where he can take a break and come back. Who knows, but he wont be attending training camp, that to me is either selfish on his part or he wont be back. If he returns ill lose respect for him. As a Rangers fan, I watched him alot on the Devils and is talented but if he dont want to attend training camp, and then join the team, that is this selfish, and is wrong. Its not like he is a contract holdout.

If the Ducks suspend him, he wouldn't count against the cap while suspended - but, the team would have to keep payroll room open for if/when he's no longer suspended. In other words, the team wouldn't gain anything immediately, but would slowly gain more and more room as the year progresses and less and less of his salary would potentially count if/when he returns.

A very simple example: if they start off with $3 million in cap space and suspend him to start the season, they'd still have $3 million in cap space after suspending him; when the season is 10% complete, they'd have gained $650,000 (1/10th of his $6.5 million cap hit) to give them $3.65 million; after 20% of the season is complete, they'd have gained $1.3 million (1/5th of his $6.5 million cap hit) to give them $4.3 million, and so forth and so on.

Link to listen to this pseudo-conference?

If the Ducks suspend him, he wouldn't count against the cap while suspended - but, the team would have to keep payroll room open for if/when he's no longer suspended. In other words, the team wouldn't gain anything immediately, but would slowly gain more and more room as the year progresses and less and less of his salary would potentially count if/when he returns.

A very simple example: if they start off with $3 million in cap space and suspend him to start the season, they'd still have $3 million in cap space after suspending him; when the season is 10% complete, they'd have gained $650,000 (1/10th of his $6.5 million cap hit) to give them $3.65 million; after 20% of the season is complete, they'd have gained $1.3 million (1/5th of his $6.5 million cap hit) to give them $4.3 million, and so forth and so on.

Yep, that is pretty much how it works.

Which makes me believe that they will suspend him, and ask that he not return until December or January, or even February. They had an original budget of around $42-$45 million. They could ask him if he would consider returning only when they start getting closer and closer to their budget. Maybe ask that he return when they start getting around the $45-$46 million mark. That would mean they would want him to miss about half the season (or about $3.25 million worth of salary), since they are currently at around $49 million (about $1 million in salary cap space).

10 minutes.

My prediction:

Scotty is still injured and needs more time to recover and reconsider whether he will play again. I believe he wants to play but he is not sure whether his injury will affect his health.

The time will also help the team re: salary cap issues.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 93 (34 members and 59 guests)
‎Pwnasaurus, ‎lwvs84, ‎PuckGuy0218, ‎Zennon, ‎chief G, ‎9h0st, ‎rmp, ‎Duck Fan, ‎GarryH24, ‎Chone, ‎likewall32, ‎iamcaper, ‎LatvianRiflemen, ‎BlueBaron, ‎formerlyMN, ‎Bergie, ‎vinnycal, ‎bjac, ‎Chuba, ‎wabwat, ‎Lyons71, ‎beach, ‎Cocoa Crisp, ‎weskoot, ‎guzmania, ‎lahc, ‎bowld, ‎jess5751


Where's the fake Larry Birkhead account when you need it?

Ahh it should have started 15 minutes ago. Has anything happened?

Ahh it should have started 15 minutes ago. Has anything happened?

Yes...I had some chicken fingers and vodka.

Interesting combo. Especially at 10:30. You are a champion.

Yep, that is pretty much how it works.

Which makes me believe that they will suspend him, and ask that he not return until December or January, or even February. They had an original budget of around $42-$45 million. They could ask him if he would consider returning only when they start getting closer and closer to their budget. Maybe ask that he return when they start getting around the $45-$46 million mark. That would mean they would want him to miss about half the season (or about $3.25 million worth of salary), since they are currently at around $49 million (about $1 million in salary cap space).

Technically, they can't "ask" him to do anything of the sort. The NHL has rules against teams trying to manipulate their salary cap in such a manner.

anybody know if this is streaming anywhere?

Interesting combo. Especially at 10:30. You are a champion.

It's 1:50 pm here now...assuming I counted the vertical lines correctly.

Technically, they can't "ask" him to do anything of the sort. The NHL has rules against teams trying to manipulate their salary cap in such a manner.

How would the NHL be able to prove any conspiracy between the Ducks and Niedermayer?

The Ducks could play dumb, and pretend as though they don't know what is going on. And then they act all surprised when he "decides to come back".

That is why I think everything has been so secretive and murky over the past few months as it relates to Niedermayer and Selanne. They don't want to incriminate themselves.

I see. Its true though, the verticle lines can sometimes be tricky, you can never be 100% certain.

Must not be good news.. if he was playing he'd just continue on like any other player.

Must not be good news.. if he was playing he'd just continue on like any other player.

Thats a good point.

How would the NHL be able to prove any conspiracy between the Ducks and Niedermayer?

The Ducks could play dumb, and pretend as though they don't know what is going on. And then they act all surprised when he "decides to come back".

That is why I think everything has been so secretive and murky over the past few months as it relates to Niedermayer and Selanne. They don't want to incriminate themselves.

I can't answer that, because I honestly don't know.

Must not be good news.. if he was playing he'd just continue on like any other player.

Not if the Ducks are way over budget, and they need him to take the first half of the season off to get back down to budget.

Not if the Ducks are way over budget, and they need him to take the first half of the season off to get back down to budget.

Someones holding on a little too tightly.

Someones holding on a little too tightly.

What do you mean?

Not if the Ducks are way over budget, and they need him to take the first half of the season off to get back down to budget.

What's your cap situation look like?

What do you mean?

I think the idea he is holding a press conference to announce he is going to play half a year so the salaries all work out is a little far fetched.

What's your cap situation look like?

The Ducks are currently at about $49 million with Niedermayer. Their budget was supposedly $42-$45 million though.

I think the idea he is holding a press conference to announce he is going to play half a year so the salaries all work out is a little far fetched.

The Ducks are currently at about $49 million with Niedermayer. Their budget was supposedly $42-$45 million though.

Not that bad. Don't you guys have a pretty full roster? Even if he came back you guys would be ok, right?

I think the idea he is holding a press conference to announce he is going to play half a year so the salaries all work out is a little far fetched.

He won't announce he is playing half a year. That was my point. The Ducks won't want him saying that, because then it becomes obvious that they are screwing around with the salary cap.

I think he will announce that he won't be in training camp, and is also unsure about his future.

Then, come the middle of the season, he will come back.

It is a win-win situation for both him and the Ducks.

Niedermayer gets time off, which he clearly was craving or else he wouldn't consider retiring in the first place. And the Ducks get salary cap relief and fit it all in under budget.

The Ducks are currently at about $49 million with Niedermayer. Their budget was supposedly $42-$45 million though.

I don't want to know where they are currently, I want to know where they are NOW!

I don't want to know where they are currently, I want to know where they are NOW!

What is the difference between "currently" and "now"?

What is the difference between "currently" and "now"?

Nothing.

There's a clip on youtube of the introductions at the 1983 MLB All-Star Game...all my heroes are there...how did we ever survive without youtube?

Any updated Scotty news?

The lack of news is crimping my drinking plans.

Either I get to drink myself into a drunken stupor in celebration of the retiring of Scott Niedermayer, or I get to drink myself into a drunken stupor in mourning of his return to the NHL and my division.

Come on news, I'm thirsty.

Not if the Ducks are way over budget, and they need him to take the first half of the season off to get back down to budget.

They aren't over the cap so I doubt that they'd have Niedermayer sit out the season to get "under budget."

How would the NHL be able to prove any conspiracy between the Ducks and Niedermayer?

The Ducks could play dumb, and pretend as though they don't know what is going on. And then they act all surprised when he "decides to come back".
Article 26
26.3 Circumventions.
(a) No Club or Club Actor, directly or indirectly, may: (i) enter into any agreements, promises, undertakings, representations, commitments, inducements, assurances of intent, or understandings of any kind, whether express, implied, oral or written, including without limitation, any SPC, Qualifying Offer, Offer Sheet or other transaction, or (ii) take or fail to take any action whatsoever, if either (i) or (ii) is intended to or has the effect of defeating or Circumventing the provisions of this Agreement or the intention of the parties as reflected by the provisions of this Agreement, including without limitation, provisions with respect to the financial and other reporting obligations of the Clubs and the League, Team Payroll Range, Player Compensation Cost Redistribution System, the Entry Level System and/or Free Agency.
(i) Any act by a Club Actor that, if committed by the Club would constitute a Circumvention, shall be imputed to the Club and shall be deemed to be a Circumvention by the Club.
(b) No Player or Player Actor, directly or indirectly, may: (i) enter into any agreements, promises, undertakings, representations, commitments, inducements, assurances of intent, or understandings of any kind, whether express, implied, oral or written, including without limitation, any SPC, Qualifying Offer, Offer Sheet or other transaction, or (ii) take or fail to take any action whatsoever, if the Player knows or reasonably should have known (measured by the objective standard of the "reasonable Player under the circumstances") that either (i) or (ii) is intended to and has the effect of defeating or Circumventing the provisions of this Agreement or the intention of the parties as reflected by the provisions of this Agreement, including without limitation, provisions with respect to the Team Payroll Range, the Entry Level System and/or Free Agency.
(c) Such knowledge or knowledge imputed under Section 26.3(c)(i) of a Player applies to all references to Players set forth in Sections 26.1, 26.3 and 26.5, i.e., a Player has not engaged in a Circumvention unless the Player knew or reasonably should have known that the conduct at issue was intended to have and did have the effect of defeating or Circumventing the provisions of this Agreement or the intention of the parties as reflected by the provisions of this Agreement, including without limitation, provisions with respect to the Team Payroll Range, the Entry Level System, and/or Free Agency.
(i) Any act by a Player Actor that, if committed by the Player would constitute a Circumvention, shall be imputed to the Player and shall be deemed to be a Circumvention by the Player.
(d) No Club or Club Actor or Player or Player Actor may commit any act through a third party where, if such activity were attributed to the Club itself, or to the Player himself, as the case may be, it would constitute a Circumvention. Such activities as are, or are attempted to be, carried out by or through third parties that constitute Circumventions shall be treated as if the Circumvention were committed by the Club itself, or the Player himself, as the case may be.

...

26.10 Investigations.
(a) The Commissioner of the NHL or the Executive Director of the NHLPA (the "Investigator") may, sua sponte or based upon reports or complaints received by either, commence an investigation regarding whether a Circumvention has occurred.
(b) The Investigator's authority to investigate (i) a possible Circumvention relating to an SPC shall in no way be limited by the fact that such SPC was approved and registered by Central Registry pursuant to Article 11 of this Agreement; or (ii) a possible Circumvention relating to financial reporting by a Club, Clubs or the League shall in no way be limited by the fact that the Initial, Interim or Final HRR Report has been issued by the Independent Accountants.
(c) The Investigator may obtain the authority, upon good cause shown to the System Arbitrator, to require any Player, Player Actor, Club or Club Actor to produce any relevant books and records, including without limitation, insurance records, telephone records, e-mails, tax returns or other relevant tax materials disclosing (i) the income or revenue information of the Player, Player Actor, Club or Club Actor and/or (ii) any information of the Club or any Club Actor in the custody or control of the Player or the Player Agent, which materials and information shall be treated as highly confidential.
(d) There shall be no limitation of time barring the investigation of a Circumvention by the Commissioner.

26.13 Enforcement by the System Arbitrator.
(b) The System Arbitrator may find a Circumvention has occurred based on direct or circumstantial evidence, including without limitation, evidence that an SPC or any provision of an SPC cannot reasonably be explained in the absence of conduct prohibited by this Article 26. The investigation and findings of the Investigator pursuant to Section 26.10 shall be fully admissible in any proceeding before the System Arbitrator under this Section 26.13.
(c) In the event that the System Arbitrator finds that a Circumvention has been committed by a Player or Player Actor, the System Arbitrator may impose any or all of the following penalties and/or remedies set forth below. In the event that the System Arbitrator finds that a Circumvention has been committed by a Club or a Club Actor, the Commissioner may impose any or all of the following penalties and/or remedies set forth below:
(i) Impose a fine of up to $5 million in the case of a Circumvention by a Club or Club Actor, but in no circumstances shall such fine be less than $1 million against any Club or Club Actor if such party is found to have violated Article 50 of this Agreement. If such a fine is assessed against a Club (except in the case of a financial reporting violation), that Club's Payroll Room shall also be reduced by such amount for the following League Year, and if such reduction of the Club's Payroll Room renders the Club out of compliance with the Payroll Range (i.e., the Club does not have sufficient Payroll Room to accommodate its Player commitments comprising Club Salary) for such following League Year, then the Club must take such steps as are necessary (e.g. Assignment, Buy-Out, Waivers, etc.) and as are permitted by this Agreement to ensure that the Club will be in compliance with Article 50 of this Agreement upon commencement of the following League Year;
(ii) Impose a fine against a Player of up to the lesser of $1 million or twenty-five (25%) percent of a Player's Paragraph 1 Salary in the case of a Circumvention by a Player or Player Actor, but in no circumstances shall such fine be below the lesser of $250,000 or twenty-five (25%) percent of the Player's Paragraph 1 Salary. Notwithstanding the $1 million limitation set forth above, any additional amounts by which the Player has been unjustly enriched due to the Circumvention shall be ordered to be disgorged;
(iii) Direct a Club to forfeit draft picks (the number, placement, and League Year of which shall be determined in the Commissioner's sole discretion);
(iv) Declare a forfeiture of any NHL Game(s) determined to have been affected by a Circumvention;
(v) Direct a Club to disclose and report to the Independent Accountants all information required by this Agreement, including, without limitation, by the provisions of Article 50;
(vi) Void any SPC, or any extension of an SPC, between any Player and any Club when both the Player or Player Actor and the Club or Club Actor are found to have committed such a violation with respect to such SPC or extension; and
(vii) Suspend any Club employee, Player, or Certified Agent involved in such a violation for a period of time determined in the sole discretion of the Commissioner, the System Arbitrator, or the NHLPA, respectively.

If it appears that there's a "wink-wink" agreement by the two sides to preserve cap space by suspending the player until later in the season [thus giving the team more cap space than they would have had if the player had been playing], it's a potential Circumvention - and Burke, Niedermayer, the team, and anyone else who knew about the arrangement would be in very big trouble as a result. The League doesn't need hard, cold evidence - the presence of circumstancial evidence, the "something rotten happened here, even if we don't have all the pieces to prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt" approach, is enough to determine that a Circumvention happened ... and it's incredibly likely that the penalties for such would be incredibly harsh. Burke would receive a substantial fine from the league and be suspended for who knows how long, the Ducks could have to forfeit games played while Niedermayer was "suspended", draft picks could be yanked, and any fine assessed against the team would be dead cap space the following year.

In short ... any team who tries going this route is risking a really stiff penalty from the League if questions arise and there's no good explanation.

The lack of news is crimping my drinking plans.

Either I get to drink myself into a drunken stupor in celebration of the retiring of Scott Niedermayer, or I get to drink myself into a drunken stupor in mourning of his return to the NHL and my division.

Come on news, I'm thirsty.
Anybody could get hurt by the playoffs anyways, you're making the playoffs either way. Nothing to get all drunk about. ;)

This is ridiculous. If he pulls a Roger Clemens and sits out the first part of the season I lose all respect for the guy. If he is tired after 3 months off, then he Nieds to retire. I don't care how long he has been playing. Training camp starts on Monday. Are you showing up Scott or not? Or do you Nied more time to think if over? It really isn't that difficult of a decision. If he can't cut it physically or doesn't want to put the strain on his body, then make the decision.

Drop a few mydol Scott and give everyone the answer you primmadonna. I am sick of athletes acting like they are Divas. I don't really think that about Scott but with his actions in this saga I do.

They aren't over the cap so I doubt that they'd have Niedermayer sit out the season to get "under budget."

They aren't over the salary cap, but they are over the $42-$45 million budget that the owners supposedly were willing to spend.

They aren't over the salary cap, but they are over the $42-$45 million budget that the owners supposedly were willing to spend.

Why you'd be willing to spend up to $8 million under the salary cap is obsurd.

This is ridiculous. If he pulls a Roger Clemens and sits out the first part of the season I lose all respect for the guy. If he is tired after 3 months off, then he Nieds to retire. I don't care how long he has been playing. Training camp starts on Monday. Are you showing up Scott or not? Or do you Nied more time to think if over? It really isn't that difficult of a decision. If he can't cut it physically or doesn't want to put the strain on his body, then make the decision.

Drop a few mydol Scott and give everyone the answer you primmadonna. I am sick of athletes acting like they are Divas. I don't really think that about Scott but with his actions in this saga I do.
I SEEZ WUT U DID THAR! CLEVAR! :handclap::yo:

They aren't over the salary cap, but they are over the $42-$45 million budget that the owners supposedly were willing to spend.Henry has probably already raised his budget and if he hasn't then big whoop it's 4 million. He's still has another 2 billion to lose.

wtb update

Henry has probably already raised his budget and if he hasn't then big whoop it's 4 million. He's still has another 2 billion to lose.

2 billion!?

2 billion!?

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/54/biz_06rich400_Henry-Samueli_KUE6.html

He said the same **** we already knew.

http://ducks.nhl.com/team/app/?service=page&page=NewsPage&articleid=336700

"Scott Niedermayer spoke to reporters for 30 minutes today at the Ducks practice facility, Anaheim ICE, confirming what he told reporters yesterday: that he is still undecided on retirement, but he will definitely be late to training camp should he decide to return."

If that's it, I'm stabbing someone today.

im speechless

*** is that about?

what a waste

Wow. What a dipsh*t.

"I've come to waste 30 minutes of your time about my indecisiveness to announce that I'm still indecisive."

http://http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/54/biz_06rich400_Henry-Samueli_KUE6.html

Can you correct the link? You have "http://" listed twice and I can't access it.

They aren't over the salary cap, but they are over the $42-$45 million budget that the owners supposedly were willing to spend.

Henry can afford it. It's not like he doesn't have the extra money.

I'm still waiting for Adam Brady to update something before I pass judgment.

Can you correct the link? You have "http://" listed twice and I can't access it.

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/54/biz_06rich400_Henry-Samueli_KUE6.html

When I fixed it it linked to wikipedia. Hopefully it works.

Can you correct the link? You have "http://" listed twice and I can't access it.fixed, sorry about that.

From TSN:

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=217708&hubname=nhl

With four Stanley Cups, an Olympic gold medal, a Memorial Cup, the World Cup of Hockey title and gold at both the World and World Junior Championships, winning has seemingly come easy for Scott Niedermayer.

Making a decision on his playing career has certainly not.

The Anaheim Ducks' captain met with the media on Thursday, saying he has not yet decided on retirement, and will definitely be late to training camp should he decide to return. The Ducks being training camp next Tuesday.

Niedermayer told reporters that he solicited for advice from Hall of Famer Pat LaFontaine, as well as former New Jersey Devils teammates Scott Stevens and Ken Daneyko. The future Hall of Fame defenceman added that he was not out of shape, but was not in hockey shape and is at least a month away from returning to form.

God...who the $%$% cares at this point? Seriously...I'll roll with Schnieder...let's go.

what a crock make up his damn mind already. and your ppl that say hes been playing hockey for so long and its a tough decision but guess what the sport of hockey is a business. now i wouldnt care if he took likes long if he wasnt under contract but he is. its disrespectful to his team and the fans. how can a team prepare for next season not knowing if your captian and best player will be playing or not. plus that frees up almost 7 million dollars (not that they would spend it anyways) either s*** or get off the pot

I love Scotty N as much as the next guy... but this would really piss me off if I were a die hard ducks fan. He's really dicking you guys around.

If Scotty wants the Ducks (his team) to repeat, he should play the whole season. It's arrogance to assume that the Ducks will contend again and be sitting pretty in January or February...especially without him. Yeah, the Duck probably will be cruising right along at that point, but it's still really arrogant. Respect the journey of the season that your teammates are about to undertake or stay home.

Scotty could have gone out a champ: now he's either going to go out as a vacillating weenie or as a repeating champ with a great big asterisk.

what a crock make up his damn mind already. and your ppl that say hes been playing hockey for so long and its a tough decision but guess what the sport of hockey is a business. now i wouldnt care if he took likes long if he wasnt under contract but he is. its disrespectful to his team and the fans. how can a team prepare for next season not knowing if your captian and best player will be playing or not. plus that frees up almost 7 million dollars (not that they would spend it anyways) either s*** or get off the pot

He was going to retire in July. Burke said hold on Neids, don't make your decision so soon, take a few months to decide. If Burke would have pushed for a decision Neids would have retired.

Burke wanted Neidermayer to take him time to come to a decision and the pay off for Burke is Neids may return.

He was going to retire in July. Burke said hold on Neids, don't make your decision so soon, take a few months to decide. If Burke would have pushed for a decision Neids would have retired.

Burke wanted Neidermayer to take him time to come to a decision and the pay off for Burke is Neids may return.
That's a myth that somebody floated as a possibility, and now is taken as fact. Funny how that works.

That's a myth that somebody floated as a possibility, and now is taken as fact. Funny how that works.

You may be right.

Because around July 1st, I seem to remember TSN saying that it was people close to Niedermayer, such as his agent, family, and friends, that told him to hold off on retiring because he may have second thoughts. I don't think it was Burke who told him to hold off.

That's a myth that somebody floated as a possibility, and now is taken as fact. Funny how that works.

Don't tell him he'll defend him till the day he dies.

That's a myth that somebody floated as a possibility, and now is taken as fact. Funny how that works.

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/Anaheim/2007/06/19/4273204-cp.html

No problem, says Anaheim GM Brian Burke - the Ducks can wait for him.

"I think there's a misperception out there that this is somehow inconveniencing us. And it's not," Burke told The Canadian Press on Wednesday. "We want this player to return. The phone call we don't want is that he's going to retire. The fact he's undecided and this might stretch into the start of the year, this is not a crisis mode for us.

"This is good news. Because it means he hasn't made the one phone call we don't want him to make."

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/Anaheim/2007/06/19/4273204-cp.html
lol

Uh huh. And....?

lol

Uh huh. And....?

You miss the quote there by Burke.

I think I am going to side with Burke on this one.

My god but you're stupid.

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/Anaheim/2007/06/19/4273204-cp.html

What is Burke supposed to say? Niedermayer has put a gun to his head, and Burke has no choice but to walk on eggshells so as not to say anything that might upset Niedermayer.

Burke needs to be cordial and accepting of the situation in order to increase the likelihood that Niedermayer will come back. If Burke revealed his true feelings, then Niedermayer might say "screw it". And Niedermayer saying "screw it" isn't preferable from a Ducks standpoint, so Burke has to put on a phony front and a happy face to the media.

Privately though, I can't help but think Burke is pissed off about the whole thing.

My god but you're stupid.

Because I showed you how wrong you are.

Burke does not seem to mind scotty taking his time to make his decision, Burke knows if he pushes it, Neids retires, he does not push there is a chance he gets Neids to return.

Burke is a smart GM. Just in case you missed the quote here it is again.

No problem, says Anaheim GM Brian Burke - the Ducks can wait for him.

"I think there's a misperception out there that this is somehow inconveniencing us. And it's not," Burke told The Canadian Press on Wednesday. "We want this player to return. The phone call we don't want is that he's going to retire. The fact he's undecided and this might stretch into the start of the year, this is not a crisis mode for us.

"This is good news. Because it means he hasn't made the one phone call we don't want him to make."

Lets ignore the facts though and bash Scotty. :shakehead

Burke does not seem to mind scotty taking his time to make his decision, Burke knows if he pushes it, Neids retires, he does not push there is a chance he gets Neids to return.


Which basically translates to: Niedermayer is holding a gun to the teams head, and I have no choice but to cooperate with him or else he might pull the trigger and blow up the team. So maybe if I cooperate with him, he will spare us.

Which basically translates to: Niedermayer is holding a gun to the teams head, and I have no choice but to cooperate with him or else he might pull the trigger and blow up the team. So maybe if I cooperate with him, he will spare us.

If Burke did not want Neidermeyer back he could have said in July we will be going in a different direction, you can retire.

He saved cap space for the possibility of the best defenseman in the NHL returning. He signed a replacement for Neids in case Neids did decide to retire.

Burke covered everything. He played it well.

If Burke did not want Neidermeyer back he could have said in July we will be going in a different direction, you can retire.

He saved cap space for the possibility of the best defenseman in the NHL returning. He signed a replacement for Neids in case Neids did decide to retire.

Burke covered everything. He played it well.

Burke wants Niedermayer back. Absolutely. But that doesn't mean he likes what Niedermayer is doing. He is more than likely pissed off about it. But he has to pretend as though he is not pissed off, so as to increase the likelihood that Niedermayer stays.

In my opinion, Niedermayer is taking advantage of Burke, because he knows Burke wants him back. He is stringing Burke along because he knows Burke will take it. He knows that he can do just about anything he wants to do right now, and the Ducks will wait on him hand and foot. Not necessarily because they enjoy getting controlled, but because they have no preferable alternative.

It is similar to getting mugged. If a mugger approached you, gun in hand, and asked you for your wallet, then you would do it. If they asked you to eat dirt off of the ground, then you would do it. If they asked you to eat your own excrement, then you would do it. But you wouldn't be doing these things because you enjoyed doing them. You would be doing them because you didn't really have a choice. You don't do what the mugger wants, and you find your head blown off.

This is similar to the Ducks situation right now. If they don't do what Niedermayer wants, then he pulls the trigger and damages the team. So they have to put up with his games, so that maybe he won't pull the trigger on retirement and won't damage the team.

Burke wants Niedermayer back. Absolutely. But that doesn't mean he likes what Niedermayer is doing. He is more than likely pissed off about it. But he has to pretend as though he is not pissed off, so as to increase the likelihood that Niedermayer stays.

In my opinion, Niedermayer is taking advantage of Burke, because he knows Burke wants him back. He is stringing Burke along because he knows Burke will take it. He knows that he can do just about anything he wants to do right now, and the Ducks will wait on him hand and foot. Not necessarily because they enjoy getting controlled, but because they have no preferable alternative.

It is similar to getting mugged. If a mugger approached you, gun in hand, and asked you for your wallet, then you would do it. If they asked you to eat dirt off of the ground, then you would do it. If they asked you to eat your own excrement, then you would do it. But you wouldn't be doing these things because you enjoyed doing them. You would be doing them because you didn't really have a choice. You don't do what the mugger wants, and you find your head blown off.

This is similar to the Ducks situation right now. If they don't do what Niedermayer wants, then he pulls the trigger and damages the team. So they have to put up with his games, so that maybe he won't pull the trigger on retirement and won't damage the team.
You're wasting your time. He's a wind-up toy.

That's a myth that somebody floated as a possibility, and now is taken as fact. Funny how that works.http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/Anaheim/2007/06/19/4273204-cp.html

You sure got back to him. :help:

What an odd situation. Why not come back for one year and then decide..I mean why spend your whole life deciding when he could be playing and deciding as he goes..instead he's going to decide and then show up late...talk about a nut job.

Just play until you decide otherwise....

whats the point of a press conference just to say "yeah, i have no idea"

whats the point of a press conference just to say "yeah, i have no idea"

http://completesports.blogspot.com/2006/04/brett-favre-still-undecided-everyone.html

:naughty:

whats the point of a press conference just to say "yeah, i have no idea"

Hey, there's 300 posts a day here asking for his decision, imagine how it must be for him. Everybody wants to know where he's at, he just told everybody he doesn't know yet. He made it official that he wouldn't be there for camp - he probably didn't want to just not show up without warning the press.

If I didn't know better, I'd say Niedermayer has been seduced by the California lifestyle and turned into an media attention *****. He's just as bad as Brett Favre or Roger Clemens with their eternal "I might retire.....but I might not.....but I could.....press conference next week and I just might tell you.....but probably not".

is that press conference still happening?

If I didn't know better, I'd say Niedermayer has been seduced by the California lifestyle and turned into an media attention *****. He's just as bad as Brett Favre or Roger Clemens with their eternal "I might retire.....but I might not.....but I could.....press conference next week and I just might tell you.....but probably not".

agree completely. he's turning into a diva like favre and clemens. :D

This is ridiculous. If he pulls a Roger Clemens and sits out the first part of the season I lose all respect for the guy. If he is tired after 3 months off, then he Nieds to retire. I don't care how long he has been playing. Training camp starts on Monday. Are you showing up Scott or not? Or do you Nied more time to think if over? It really isn't that difficult of a decision. If he can't cut it physically or doesn't want to put the strain on his body, then make the decision.

Drop a few mydol Scott and give everyone the answer you primmadonna. I am sick of athletes acting like they are Divas. I don't really think that about Scott but with his actions in this saga I do.
You forgot Niedamonth-er (or Niedamonthormore).

Does is really matter?

If he retires or not, the Ducks have the toughest team in the league (when healthy.)

is that press conference still happening?

It already happened, and nothing more was said other than what we have known pretty much all summer. He still doesn't know what he wants to do.

I'm getting a little bit tired of the whole "I might retire/well, maybe not" stuff. I understand it's a big decision and all, but come on. Training camp is right around the corner, it'd be nice to know what his status is.

It already happened, and nothing more was said other than what we have known pretty much all summer. He still doesn't know what he wants to do.

I'm getting a little bit tired of the whole "I might retire/well, maybe not" stuff. I understand it's a big decision and all, but come on. Training camp is right around the corner, it'd be nice to know what his status is.

blah...I'm getting bored on this story.

honestly what could possibly change withen the next couple weeks that would change his decision. he knows what he gets if he retires he knows what he gets if he stays. just delaying the fact is pointless. he knows what hes gonna do he probably just doesnt want to face the fact

Seriously.. somebody take a look between Scott's legs and make sure he still has an outtie. He had a friggin press conference to say I am undecided? Next time he should hold a press conference to say he'll be holding a press conference. Completely unnecessary and screams "I want attention".

I can't wait until he shows up on the View or Oprah and Oprah or Barbara Walters have to convince him to keep playing.

If he isn't in "hockey" shape for training camp then he is either retiring or pulling the Roger Clemens routing except he is actually under contract which makes it worse in my opinion. If that lazy ******* shows up in December/January, it'll be a joke.

Maybe he is pregnant and that might violate terms of his contract so he's deciding whether or not to keep the baby?

Oh and doesn't he know there are countless fantasy managers waiting on his decision. He seriously Nieds to get his act together or I am not drafting him.

Tough decision for sure, but would it have been so hard to inform the the team to put out a notice on this "supposed" update? They can address media online, in print, or on the radio in no time... was a personal news conference necessary?

As another poster has mentioned, I think the California lifestyle has caught on to Nieds.

You sure got back to him. :help:
Can anyone unnastand the words that are coming out of my mouf?

That's fine. You can lose respect for him because you're ignorant to the situation. I'm sure he'll lose sleep over it.

I'm ignorant to the situation?? First of all jackass I said losing respect was probably not the best thing to say about 5 posts down. 2nd of all, this is getting ridiculous.. It's not like he's only had a week to decide or anything. Is it to much to ask to make a decision in a couple of months? The team is being very generous to Scotty because he earned it, but when they say take your time, it doesn't mean you have to wait tell the season starts to decide on a decision that has a BIG effect on the team. If someone is ignorant to the situation it's you. I like Scotty as much as the next guy, but come on it's time to make a decision. I don't want him to become the Roger Clemmons of Hockey.

So what does teemu do now?

I just don't get it. If I were a Ducks fan, I'd be a bit upset. Make a decision already. He's had all summer to decide whether or not he's going to retire...yet he holds a conference today to say he's still not sure. WTF?

Very, very odd.

On my side, i still think that Niedermayer will announce that he's back after the London trip.

I also think that this is the end for Teemu :(

Scott Niedermayer will soon find out he is no good at anything else....and will have about 50 yrs left to sit on his butt.....

then he'll come back....right now his ego is feeling good....

My god but you're stupid.

I laughed at this and the following rebuttal for a good 5 minutes. I still think it's funny. What is fuhr talking about????? hahahaha.

I'm ignorant to the situation?? First of all jackass I said losing respect was probably not the best thing to say about 5 posts down. 2nd of all, this is getting ridiculous.. It's not like he's only had a week to decide or anything. Is it to much to ask to make a decision in a couple of months? The team is being very generous to Scotty because he earned it, but when they say take your time, it doesn't mean you have to wait tell the season starts to decide on a decision that has a BIG effect on the team. If someone is ignorant to the situation it's you. I like Scotty as much as the next guy, but come on it's time to make a decision. I don't want him to become the Roger Clemmons of Hockey.

Panties in a bunch?

What an odd situation. Why not come back for one year and then decide..I mean why spend your whole life deciding when he could be playing and deciding as he goes..instead he's going to decide and then show up late...talk about a nut job.

Just play until you decide otherwise....

But then he misses his chance to dick with us.

If I was a Ducks fan I would be peeved at Niedermayer. Retiring from hockey is a big decision, but he had most of June, all of July, all of August and in early September he still hasn't made up his mind. I think that Niedermayer still has alot of hockey left in him and if it's that hard of a decision why not come back, he has all season to decide whether to retire or not. I know that Burke gave him the time to think about it, but I don't think it is fair to the team and his teammates to keep them hanging and waiting so close to the start of the season.

As fustrating as waiting can be, at least he's telling the truth and not pull a Roenick. Ya know... retire and then one whole year later come back. I think only fantasy owners are fed up. Burkie has made moves in case Scotty and Teemu don't return. In my mind, Scotty is retired. But if he decides to come back, then OMFG no one can score on this team! Pronger, Scotty, Beauch, Schnieder... and O'Donnell on the blue line. You're kidding right?

Anyhow, Scotty is about four weeks away from being in any playing form (that's what he reported). So I say give him that time. And should he want to return, then i'm all for it. Scotty's won everything and then some. Let him feel his way through and see if he still wants to be in the hunt. If he isn't mentally, then why forego it?

On my side, i still think that Niedermayer will announce that he's back after the London trip.

I also think that this is the end for Teemu :(

if he will be back after 2 london games in line up, he will lose some respect-if not lot of respect from my side

Hard to beleive this guy is the captain of your team. For two reasons, if he decideds to retire he is ****ing the team over by not making a decision and getting this headache out of the way. And 2, if he does come back he is ****ing the team over by deciding to not come to training campo and being out of shape, as he stated.

Hard to beleive this guy is the captaion of your team. For two reasons, if he decideds to retire he is ****ignt he team over by not making a decisiona nd getting this headache out of the way. And 2, is he does come back he is ****ing the team over by deciding to not come to training campo and being out of shape, as he stated.

Do the chickens have large talons?

If I was a Ducks fan, I'd be absolutely livid at Neidermeyer and Selanne. However, as an Oilers fan, I can only say that you're lucky that your team isn't in nearly as bad shape as mine is. :(

Do the chickens have large talons?

Nope they got clipped at the end of Napoleon Dynamite.

if he will be back after 2 london games in line up, he will lose some respect-if not lot of respect from my side

I am sure he can not sleep at night because of it.

The decision to retire is a big one, and deserves some time to mull over. However, there is a thing called "analysis paralysis".
At some point, you’ve got to pick a direction. List the pros and cons and make a decision.
What’s the old adage – s**t or get off the pot. It seems to apply in this case.

I am sure he can not sleep at night because of it.

Of course he can, he's an egomaniac.

If I was a Ducks fan, I'd be absolutely livid at Neidermeyer and Selanne. However, as an Oilers fan, I can only say that you're lucky that your team isn't in nearly as bad shape as mine is. :(

Umm, we have a Stanley Cup, largely because of both of these guys. Getting "livid" is quite a bit of overreaction at this point. It's annoying, but I don't hate on two old guys taking their time deciding on retirement. The season hasn't started yet anyway, so it's not really this big ordeal everyone is making it out to be.

I am sure he can not sleep at night because of it.

yeah I know, we europeans are not fans, just you NA are only and true fans and NHL is just for NA

To be honest at this point I don't care either way. If they both or one come back that's cool. If not, whatever, this is still a playoff team and once you get there is when the real season starts anyhoo.

yeah I know, we europeans are not fans, just you NA are only and true fans and NHL is just for NA

Well if he does not want to go to London, there is nothing that can really be done.

It's not that big of a deal.

Well if he does not want to go to London, there is nothing that can really be done.

It's not that big of a deal.

it is to someone who has never had the opportunity to see him play in person. I feel for the Europeans on the board, I love going to Ducks games and I wish that Niedermayer would be there in London so they could see him play too.

Europeans had a chance to see Scotty in Turino. Oh ya thats right Scotty *****ed out on that too.

Of course he can, he's an egomaniac.
He's a maniac, egomaniac on the fence.
And he's stalling like he's never stalled on defense.

Europeans had a chance to see Scotty in Turino. Oh ya thats right Scotty *****ed out on that too.

Uh, are you serious? He had knee surgery during the Olympics, so that he wouldn't miss any time with the Ducks. You call that *****ing out? I call that being a team player.

***** about the things that deserve to be *****ed about. Don't try to create an issue where there isn't one, pal.

If I was a Ducks fan, I'd be absolutely livid at Neidermeyer and Selanne. However, as an Oilers fan, I can only say that you're lucky that your team isn't in nearly as bad shape as mine is. :(

Niedermayer, fine...Selanne's a UFA, his responsibility is to his family, and his family alone.

Yeah, I don't think anyone's upset with Teemu. Nieds is a weird, unlikeable hermit, and is really throwing a monkey wrench into everything, so...

Yeah, I don't think anyone's upset with Teemu. Nieds is a weird, unlikeable hermit, and is really throwing a monkey wrench into everything, so...

Agreed. This is why Teemu has been signing one year deals rather than 4 year deals he is not sure he can commit too. That shows much more class.

Hard to beleive this guy is the captain of your team. For two reasons, if he decideds to retire he is ****ing the team over by not making a decision and getting this headache out of the way. And 2, if he does come back he is ****ing the team over by deciding to not come to training campo and being out of shape, as he stated.
yeah what a horrible captain just leads this team two the WCF and wins a cup in two years..

it is to someone who has never had the opportunity to see him play in person. I feel for the Europeans on the board, I love going to Ducks games and I wish that Niedermayer would be there in London so they could see him play too.
If he's not ready to play why should he go? he went into the off season certain he would retire so obviously he's not going to train the same way. He is not obligated to anyone but himself here and if you guys want to pin blame start with Burke, he told him to take his time, he's the one that has continued to put no time tables on this and if Scott doesn't know for sure why should he just say yes or no? It would be more of a disservice to everyone if he returned and halfway through realized his heart wasn't in it.

It seems obvious that he will come back around January to help the team cap wise. They cant say it because its collusion and against the rules.

Scotty got you guys a cup and the first team in SoCal to bring home the hockey championship.

Stop whining already.

If he's not ready to play why should he go? he went into the off season certain he would retire so obviously he's not going to train the same way. He is not obligated to anyone but himself here and if you guys want to pin blame start with Burke, he told him to take his time, he's the one that has continued to put no time tables on this and if Scott doesn't know for sure why should he just say yes or no? It would be more of a disservice to everyone if he returned and halfway through realized his heart wasn't in it.

your response has nothing to do with what I was talking about, why even quote me?

It seems obvious that he will come back around January to help the team cap wise. They cant say it because its collusion and against the rules.


No player is willing to be the team's biyatch like that.

There are many players I would rather 'sit out and suspend' than Niedermayer. He is worth his cap hit much more than say, Marchant, Bertuzzi, Schnider etc...

Scotty got you guys a cup and the first team in SoCal to bring home the hockey championship.

Stop whining already.
Instead of doing all that pesky typing, why don't you just say "a-duhhh" and stop pretending to have any kind of higher intelligence?

Failing that, maybe you could read the thread and post an original thought.

No player is willing to be the team's biyatch like that.

There are many players I would rather 'sit out and suspend' than Niedermayer. He is worth his cap hit much more than say, Marchant, Bertuzzi, Schnider etc...

He is the Captain and he has the largest contract. Maybe he wants to help the team. Maybe this is what is needed to afford Teemu?

That doesn't make any sense. Can you figure out why?

No player is willing to be the team's biyatch like that.

There are many players I would rather 'sit out and suspend' than Niedermayer. He is worth his cap hit much more than say, Marchant, Bertuzzi, Schnider etc...

My feelings as well. With all this conspiracy crap going around, it's something I've really thought a bit about.

I'd go a step further and say that $6.75 is less than he's worth. He brings so many intangibles to the table.

That doesn't make any sense. Can you figure out why?

I sure cant.

Then ask yourself what the reason we can't afford Teemu is.

As a Sharks fan I hope he retires, but as HOCKEY fan (which is more improtant), I hope he comes back for another year.

I was being sarcastic.

Delete your post Sharks fan so mine makes sense.

That doesn't make any sense. Can you figure out why?

I was actualy asking a question. Hence the question mark at the end of my statement. There was no sarcasm intended.

Panties in a bunch?

nope just defending myself against someone criticizing me for giving my opinion. Forgive me for thinking that it's time for Nieds to make a decision. I don't care what anyone says, it's time for a decision...

It seems obvious that he will come back around January to help the team cap wise. They cant say it because its collusion and against the rules.
I'm pretty sure this isn't true, but if it were it certainly would be an interesting rebuttal to the "he's so selfish and greedy for attention" accusations.

But why would any player be willing to forfeit 2-3 million dollars like that? Very few people are that generous. Not to mention the fact that when he does come back he may be rusty and it might actually disrupt whatever team chemistry we had by then. I'm pretty sure the team would want him back the whole season.

He is the Captain and he has the largest contract. Maybe he wants to help the team. Maybe this is what is needed to afford Teemu?

Let's see...

1. He's the captain. They're supposed to play. (I also doubt he will still be captain at the start of the season. I'd expect Pronger to have the C)
2. He's the best player on the team. Kinda helps to have the best player on the team actually play. Would Pittsburgh be better off sitting and 'suspending' Crosby because they were over the cap? Would Washington be better sitting Ovy? Why don't the Ducks just do it with Pronger too? Why not? It makes so much apparent sense...
3. Assuming that suspending Nieds IS the tactic, there are (like I said) many players on the team i'd rather sit than him.


The truth is that Nieds is really indecisive, and if you ask me, he's just plain exhausted. That's it. He's not had a long off-season for a while and he's had two nagging leg injuries two years in a row.

Burke is simply giving him a lot of time. Too much time. He's even letting him skip training camp for cryin out loud! This isn't some 'trick'. Niedermayer playing >>>>>> him not playing


The Ducks will lose games... They don't have the forward depth to roll over teams like they did last year. They need every dman they can get, especially world class ones.

I think that we'll still tend to dominate 5 on 5, just based on the size of our players and the system. Schneider's not Nieds, but he can headman the puck well enough.

I think the big difference will be in our special teams. Nieds was amazing on the pk, and Teemu's 25 power play goals have simply evaporated from the lineup. That's where we'll start to lose some points I think.

scotty accomplished everything he wanted to. i mean NHL probably wont be the same without him but he's only human. he wants to watch his kids grow up while he still can. i understand that it might be frustrating to us that he hasnt made up his mind, but if the team can give him time then so should we.

-princess duckling. :]]

Let's see...

1. He's the captain. They're supposed to play. (I also doubt he will still be captain at the start of the season. I'd expect Pronger to have the C)
2. He's the best player on the team. Kinda helps to have the best player on the team actually play. Would Pittsburgh be better off sitting and 'suspending' Crosby because they were over the cap? Would Washington be better sitting Ovy? Why don't the Ducks just do it with Pronger too? Why not? It makes so much apparent sense...
3. Assuming that suspending Nieds IS the tactic, there are (like I said) many players on the team i'd rather sit than him.


The truth is that Nieds is really indecisive, and if you ask me, he's just plain exhausted. That's it. He's not had a long off-season for a while and he's had two nagging leg injuries two years in a row.

Burke is simply giving him a lot of time. Too much time. He's even letting him skip training camp for cryin out loud! This isn't some 'trick'. Niedermayer playing >>>>>> him not playing


The Ducks will lose games... They don't have the forward depth to roll over teams like they did last year. They need every dman they can get, especially world class ones.

Who was playing that role of Captain when Scott was either suspended or injured, Lyons, I don't think they had a captain when that occurred, they had 3 A's, much like Portland went through last year after electing Konopka as the C, then was dealt, they then went to Kent Huskins after a few weeks before his eventual recall and Kent remained in Anaheim the balance of the season.

Captaincies among hockey teams are largely a ceremonial position anyway. The players elect who gets the letters.

There are many players I would rather 'sit out and suspend' than Niedermayer. He is worth his cap hit much more than say, Marchant, Bertuzzi, Schnider etc...


3. Assuming that suspending Nieds IS the tactic, there are (like I said) many players on the team i'd rather sit than him.


That is all very true. However, you are missing one key point: What if the players you mentioned, or any other players for that matter, aren't willing to sit out and miss some of their paycheque?

For example, Schneider signed as a UFA for about $5.75 million. And he probably could have gotten similar amounts of money from other teams. I doubt very seriously Schneider would be willing to sit for any length of time, as this would decrease the $5.75 million he signed for. He could have taken that $5.75 million elsewhere if he knew the Ducks weren't going to actually give him all of that money. Schneider is probably the most illogical player to suspend on the entire roster. Suspending him to save salary cap space, and forcing him to lose out on money three months after signing him as a UFA, would be worse than trading him. And that is saying something, considering how horrible it is from a business ethics standpoint to trade a UFA three months after signing them. Suspending Schneider is about the most unrealistic thing possible.

Ditto for Bertuzzi and his $4.0 million. Everything I said about Schneider equally applies to Bertuzzi.

As for Marchant....Well, I seriously doubt he would be willing to sit and lose pay. Nor should he be willing to. Why should he accept being the scapegoat for the team's salary cap woes? He would prefer to be traded rather than sit out and lose pay. And the Ducks would be better off trading him than sitting him out and forcing him to lose pay, because imagine how much of a cancer he could be once coming back from a forced unpaid vacation (ie. a layoff)? Besides, he doesn't make nearly enough money for it to make any kind of difference on the salary cap situation were he to sit out half the season.

And besides, if the Ducks were to suspend any of these three guys, it would be BLATANTLY OBVIOUS what they were doing. It would be BLATANTLY OBVIOUS that they were trying to circumvent the salary cap. What other logical or believable explanation would they have for suspending these players? Everyone would know that it is a BLATANTLY OBVIOUS attempt to circumvent the salary cap. And circumventing the salary cap carries stiff penalties.

With Niedermayer though, there is more of a gray-area. They could suspend him, and not have it be blatantly obvious what is going on, considering it is common knowledge that Niedermayer is uncertain about his future.

Niedermayer is in the best and most sensible position to sit out half the year, while he "contemplates" his future. Niedermayer is the most logical one to pull this tactic with. The Ducks could pretend as though they do not know what is going on, all the while Niedermayer takes half a season to "decide" what he wants to do. This would create the salary cap room to re-sign Selanne, without having to move out any of the core from the 2007 Stanley Cup Championship team. You then go into the playoffs with all of the components from last year's team, plus Schneider, and are primed for a repeat.

And yes, Niedermayer would lose out on half of his salary. But you know something? He obviously wasn't too torn up about missing out on money if he was considering retirement in the first place. On July 1st, he was almost ready to throw away the $13.5 million left on his contract by retiring. So I really do not think money is as big of an issue with him in these circumstances as it is with the players discussed above. If he was about ready to throw away $13.5 million on July 1st so that he could spend more time with his family, then isn't it logical to believe that he would consider throwing away $3.5 million from October-January so that he could spend plenty of time with his family before the stretch run and playoffs?

Niedermayer is, by far, the best target to use in order to pull off this tactic.

Well, then how much of this cap space are they really saving? Besides the amount that they have to hold open for his return, (~6mil) what is the benefit? How much $ over how much time to they actually gain? I don't know the specifics, but it totally doesn't seem worth it.

Well, then how much of this cap space are they really saving? Besides the amount that they have to hold open for his return, (~6mil) what is the benefit? How much $ over how much time to they actually gain? I don't know the specifics, but it totally doesn't seem worth it.

They are currently at about $48.9 million, with Niedermayer on the books and without Selanne on the books. That leaves them with $1.4 million in salary cap space. Letting Niedermayer sit for any length of time would increase this salary cap space. The longer they let him sit, the more salary cap space they gain.

They could allow him to skip half a season (41 games), and gain $3.375 million of salary cap relief, since $3.375 million is 1/2 of Niedermayer's salary cap hit.

Then they take that $3.375 million, and add it to the $1.4 million of salary cap space they currently have.

This would mean they would have $4.775 million of salary cap space for Selanne, and maybe even a trade deadline pick-up as well.

They re-sign Selanne to a contract worth about $3.0 million (say $1.5 million base + $1.5 million bonus which wouldn't count against the salary cap). This would still leave them with about $3.275 million in salary cap space for a possible trade deadline pick-up or for replacement players due to injuries.

After Selanne, their total salary cap hit for the season would be approximately $47.0 million. And, of course, any trade deadline pick-up would add to this salary cap hit.

Basically:

$48.9 million (currently) - $6.75 million (Niedermayer) = $42.15 million. Or $8.15 million under the salary cap.

They can let Niedermayer sit for half the season. This would reduce his salary cap hit to $3.375 million. And yes, they need to hold salary cap room for suspended players. But they only need to hold open the amount of room that is equivalent to the player's salary cap hit for the remainder of the season. In this scenario, Niedermayer would take up $3.375 million for the remainder of the season. And they will have held open $8.15 million room. So there would be no issues.

Then they re-active Niedermayer, and his $3.375 million starts counting against the salary cap. This would raise the team's total salary cap hit to $45.525 million.

That still would leave $4.775 million for Selanne, and/or anybody else.

lol

For ****'s sake.

lol

For ****'s sake.

Puck guy pretty much summed I what I was saying earlier and you insulted me on....whats your problem?

I just didnt get into detail because I did not know all the specifics and he did.

That is all very true. However, you are missing one key point: What if the players you mentioned, or any other players for that matter, aren't willing to sit out and miss some of their paycheque?

For example, Schneider signed as a UFA for about $5.75 million. And he probably could have gotten similar amounts of money from other teams. I doubt very seriously Schneider would be willing to sit for any length of time, as this would decrease the $5.75 million he signed for. He could have taken that $5.75 million elsewhere if he knew the Ducks weren't going to actually give him all of that money. Schneider is probably the most illogical player to suspend on the entire roster. Suspending him to save salary cap space, and forcing him to lose out on money three months after signing him as a UFA, would be worse than trading him. And that is saying something, considering how horrible it is from a business ethics standpoint to trade a UFA three months after signing them. Suspending Schneider is about the most unrealistic thing possible.

Ditto for Bertuzzi and his $4.0 million. Everything I said about Schneider equally applies to Bertuzzi.

As for Marchant....Well, I seriously doubt he would be willing to sit and lose pay. Nor should he be willing to. Why should he accept being the scapegoat for the team's salary cap woes? He would prefer to be traded rather than sit out and lose pay. And the Ducks would be better off trading him than sitting him out and forcing him to lose pay, because imagine how much of a cancer he could be once coming back from a forced unpaid vacation (ie. a layoff)? Besides, he doesn't make nearly enough money for it to make any kind of difference on the salary cap situation were he to sit out half the season.

And besides, if the Ducks were to suspend any of these three guys, it would be BLATANTLY OBVIOUS what they were doing. It would be BLATANTLY OBVIOUS that they were trying to circumvent the salary cap. What other logical or believable explanation would they have for suspending these players? Everyone would know that it is a BLATANTLY OBVIOUS attempt to circumvent the salary cap. And circumventing the salary cap carries stiff penalties.

With Niedermayer though, there is more of a gray-area. They could suspend him, and not have it be blatantly obvious what is going on, considering it is common knowledge that Niedermayer is uncertain about his future.

Niedermayer is in the best and most sensible position to sit out half the year, while he "contemplates" his future. Niedermayer is the most logical one to pull this tactic with. The Ducks could pretend as though they do not know what is going on, all the while Niedermayer takes half a season to "decide" what he wants to do. This would create the salary cap room to re-sign Selanne, without having to move out any of the core from the 2007 Stanley Cup Championship team. You then go into the playoffs with all of the components from last year's team, plus Schneider, and are primed for a repeat.

And yes, Niedermayer would lose out on half of his salary. But you know something? He obviously wasn't too torn up about missing out on money if he was considering retirement in the first place. On July 1st, he was almost ready to throw away the $13.5 million left on his contract by retiring. So I really do not think money is as big of an issue with him in these circumstances as it is with the players discussed above. If he was about ready to throw away $13.5 million on July 1st so that he could spend more time with his family, then isn't it logical to believe that he would consider throwing away $3.5 million from October-January so that he could spend plenty of time with his family before the stretch run and playoffs?

Niedermayer is, by far, the best target to use in order to pull off this tactic.

Well put, great post, and thank you.

That is all very true. However, you are missing one key point: What if the players you mentioned, or any other players for that matter, aren't willing to sit out and miss some of their paycheque?

For example, Schneider signed as a UFA for about $5.75 million. And he probably could have gotten similar amounts of money from other teams. I doubt very seriously Schneider would be willing to sit for any length of time, as this would decrease the $5.75 million he signed for. He could have taken that $5.75 million elsewhere if he knew the Ducks weren't going to actually give him all of that money. Schneider is probably the most illogical player to suspend on the entire roster. Suspending him to save salary cap space, and forcing him to lose out on money three months after signing him as a UFA, would be worse than trading him. And that is saying something, considering how horrible it is from a business ethics standpoint to trade a UFA three months after signing them. Suspending Schneider is about the most unrealistic thing possible.

Ditto for Bertuzzi and his $4.0 million. Everything I said about Schneider equally applies to Bertuzzi.

As for Marchant....Well, I seriously doubt he would be willing to sit and lose pay. Nor should he be willing to. Why should he accept being the scapegoat for the team's salary cap woes? He would prefer to be traded rather than sit out and lose pay. And the Ducks would be better off trading him than sitting him out and forcing him to lose pay, because imagine how much of a cancer he could be once coming back from a forced unpaid vacation (ie. a layoff)? Besides, he doesn't make nearly enough money for it to make any kind of difference on the salary cap situation were he to sit out half the season.

So then after all that, why would Niedermayer be willing to be the scapegoat? And pay or no pay, if Niedermayer is returning it's because he has the fire to play and compete again, do you think he'd accept sitting out for half the season?

Your idea makes some sense from the organization's financial standpoint, but zero sense from the player's point of view. And I don't even think it makes that much sense from the team's standpoint, then we have to play half the season without our best player? And who knows how much longer it takes him to get back to form? How good will he be able to play having missed training camp and learning whatever wrinkles we put into the system this year? And how would the midseason addition of a huge piece affect the rest of the team, in terms of chemistry and adjusting to new, smaller roles?

So then after all that, why would Niedermayer be willing to be the scapegoat? And pay or no pay, if Niedermayer is returning it's because he has the fire to play and compete again, do you think he'd accept sitting out for half the season?

Your idea makes some sense from the organization's financial standpoint, but zero sense from the player's point of view. And I don't even think it makes that much sense from the team's standpoint, then we have to play half the season without our best player? And who knows how much longer it takes him to get back to form? How good will he be able to play having missed training camp and learning whatever wrinkles we put into the system this year? And how would the midseason addition of a huge piece affect the rest of the team, in terms of chemistry and adjusting to new, smaller roles?

It makes sense from the players standpoint too. It seems that both Neidermayer and Selanne both want some time off.

It seems like Nieds still loves the game and doesnt absolutely want to leave yet. But a good break to clear his head and fully heal everything is what he probably wants. He forfeits half the salary and comes back ready to win his cup again.

And as far as his training to keep up....Its Scott Niedermayer. He will get himself ready, and if he doesnt he's still damn good.

Jeez can't eveyrone here see that this is only a ploy to get out of exceeding the cap. Temmu will be back and thus Scott has a "timely" retirement PC where he says he has no idea of whether he will or will not keep playing. thus once Burke frees up some cap space he will instantly be back in the lineup.

and next year he comes back 3/4 way into season or just playoffs???

Jeez can't eveyrone here see that this is only a ploy to get out of exceeding the cap. Temmu will be back and thus Scott has a "timely" retirement PC where he says he has no idea of whether he will or will not keep playing. thus once Burke frees up some cap space he will instantly be back in the lineup.

if that was the case why allow the transaction of not matching the Penner offer sheet, if that was deemed legal under the CBA, THEN why shouldn't this be allowed?

Teemu may not want to return and had he retired it wouldn't be an issue, in fact it's not an issue since there's no way to know if Teemu wants to play again, what is there left for either player to accomplish after last year?

How is Scott's situation any different from Mark Bell's personal issues which the League indefinitely suspended him under the same Rule provision, Toronto has to do that as Burke is required to do. how is that a circumvention if that rule applies in both cases.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/allan_muir/09/08/niedermayer.retirement/index.html

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/allan_muir/09/08/niedermayer.retirement/index.html

Great article. Pretty much says what a lot of us have been saying all along, myself included.

Great article. Pretty much says what a lot of us have been saying all along, myself included.

Actually, "a lot of us" have been throwing childish tantrums, calling Nieds a primma donna, selfish, an egomaniac and a nut job, and demanding he make his decision quicker for the fans' sake. Muir managed to leave out the personal jabs and made a very smart, reasoned argument that he should make his decision for his teammates' and Burke's sake, and no one else. Thats why he gets paid for his musings, and we're (thankfully) confined to HFboards.

Either Scott Niedermayer is planning on pulling a Roger Clemens by showing up after Christmas, or we need to re-evaluate the notion he's one of the game's great leaders.

http://calsun.canoe.ca/Sports/Columnists/Francis_Eric/2007/09/10/4483646-sun.html

Eric Francis of the Calgary Sun provides a sensible argument on what's going on with Niedermayer.

http://calsun.canoe.ca/Sports/Columnists/Francis_Eric/2007/09/10/4483646-sun.html

Eric Francis of the Calgary Sun provides a sensible argument on what's going on with Niedermayer.

Is that sarcasm? Or no?

Is that sarcasm? Or no?

What do you mean? I think it's an interesting theory to look at and it does make sense. It seems rather misguided to think that Niedermayer would suddenly turn prima-donna and not care about the team he captains. If he wanted out, he would be out. The idea that he just doesn't want to play a full season and so Burke and Niedermayer have worked out some sort of compromise holds as much water as any other idea.

James Mirtle weighs in

If Niedermayer wants to sit for 30 or 40 games, simply come out and say so, and allow the Ducks to plan accordingly.

Except the CBA doesn't allow that arrangement. Or, by extension, Niedermayer to give the Ducks any indication of his intentions.


http://mirtle.blogspot.com/2007/09/niedermayers-needs.html

James Mirtle weighs in




http://mirtle.blogspot.com/2007/09/niedermayers-needs.html

Burke is a genius. Im waiting for his statue to be built in front of the pond...it could replace the Wild Wing.

Burke is a genius. Im waiting for his statue to be built in front of the pond...it could replace the Wild Wing.

At this point, I'm really believing this is what is happening. Scott is not allowed to come out and say he's skipping part of the season for salary cap reasons, so he's doing his best acting job to say he's delaying his decision. At the same time he's saving salary cap, he's resting up and he'll be able to kick ass for the last half of the season on an even better team than he played on last year (assuming Teemu returns too).

i don't think there is anything underhanded about Scott. he is a real straight shooter. I don't think there is any possibility he would purposely undermine the nhl cba and violate the rules.

He just isn't that kind of guy.

Even if delaying public announcement to sit out were intentional, I still don't see how that would be cap circumvention. And what the big fuss is about.

The cap is the sum of salaries of the players you're playing on your roster. If Niedermayer only plays half the season we should only pay him for half the season. It's not like we're paying him the full season's salary and having only half count on the cap.

Maybe a case could be made that he should be on the LTIR and we should still be paying him but be allowed to exceed the cap because of it. But this is the worst I can see it construed. If he's tired, either physically or mentally, and doesn't want to play at the start of the season, that's essentially an injury.

None of this seems like circumvention to me.

At this point, I'm really believing this is what is happening. Scott is not allowed to come out and say he's skipping part of the season for salary cap reasons, so he's doing his best acting job to say he's delaying his decision. At the same time he's saving salary cap, he's resting up and he'll be able to kick ass for the last half of the season on an even better team than he played on last year (assuming Teemu returns too).

Davey, Every time I see your avatar I want to eat that damn pancake! That thing looks DELICIOUS! Like the best pancake ever.

Even if delaying public announcement to sit out were intentional, I still don't see how that would be cap circumvention. And what the big fuss is about.

The cap is the sum of salaries of the players you're playing on your roster. If Niedermayer only plays half the season we should only pay him for half the season. It's not like we're paying him the full season's salary and having only half count on the cap.

Maybe a case could be made that he should be on the LTIR and we should still be paying him but be allowed to exceed the cap because of it. But this is the worst I can see it construed. If he's tired, either physically or mentally, and doesn't want to play at the start of the season, that's essentially an injury.

None of this seems like circumvention to me.

if Burke actually knows if and when Niedermayer plans to return, they wouldnt have to pay him full amount. but full cap would be applied.

Even if delaying public announcement to sit out were intentional, I still don't see how that would be cap circumvention. And what the big fuss is about.

None of this seems like circumvention to me.

I'm not even entirely sure if 'circumvention' is the right word, but there's a CBA-related reason that Burke's citing as his reason he and Niedermayer can't simply agree upon and announce a date for the player's return.

I don't think anyone has a problem with Niedermayer sitting out, but the position it puts Burke and the Ducks in is definitely not ideal.

Burke has a conference call tomorrow afternoon, so hopefully the question will be put out there.

I'm not even entirely sure if 'circumvention' is the right word, but there's a CBA-related reason that Burke's citing as his reason he and Niedermayer can't simply agree upon and announce a date for the player's return.

I don't think anyone has a problem with Niedermayer sitting out, but the position it puts Burke and the Ducks in is definitely not ideal.

Burke has a conference call tomorrow afternoon, so hopefully the question will be put out there.

where did you hear this? and could it be that Scotty is going to camp after all?

None of this seems like circumvention to me.

I would tend to agree with you, but there's one little thing: if Burke knows that Niedermayer will come back in january, and if he (and the team) agrees with this decision, isn't it a total cheat to suspend the guy for doing so?! :badidea:

I would tend to agree with you, but there's one little thing: if Burke knows that Niedermayer will come back in january, and if he (and the team) agrees with this decision, isn't it a total cheat to suspend the guy for doing so?! :badidea:

Yup. People raved about how Lou paid a first to get rid of Malahkov and kept Matvichuk out all season so he could save him for the playoffs, but, Burke might instead rest Scott Niedermayer for half a season, which will allow Selanne to play, and not really cost the team anything at all, other than possibly some first half wins. Not giving up any first round picks, and he didn't even make any mistakes in the first place(signing Schneider was far from a mistake).

You can put it on the board, if this is what he's doing, Burke is the best GM in the cap era in all facets. Only a guy like him could build a super-team like this, if that is the case. As for the cheating part, yeah, it is, but then again, it's really only cheating if you get caught. And, there's almost no way to prove Burke asked Niedermayer to do anything.

Yup. People raved about how Lou paid a first to get rid of Malahkov and kept Matvichuk out all season so he could save him for the playoffs, but, Burke might instead rest Scott Niedermayer for half a season, which will allow Selanne to play, and not really cost the team anything at all, other than possibly some first half wins. Not giving up any first round picks, and he didn't even make any mistakes in the first place(signing Schneider was far from a mistake).

You can put it on the board, if this is what he's doing, Burke is the best GM in the cap era in all facets. Only a guy like him could build a super-team like this, if that is the case. As for the cheating part, yeah, it is, but then again, it's really only cheating if you get caught. And, there's almost no way to prove Burke asked Niedermayer to do anything.

Stan, your new username is pure brilliance. Just thought I should add that. ;)

And I agree with you. S. Nieds will be suspended and there will not be a penalty for it. (pretty sure anyway).

Stan, your new username is pure brilliance. Just thought I should add that. ;)

And I agree with you. S. Nieds will be suspended and there will not be a penalty for it. (pretty sure anyway).

Yeah, I knew/heard about Superbad a fair bit before the commercials became mainstream and whatnot, and I knew right away McLovin would be huge, so I decided to grab it while it was still available.

Yeah, I knew/heard about Superbad a fair bit before the commercials became mainstream and whatnot, and I knew right away McLovin would be huge, so I decided to grab it while it was still available.

by far the best character in that movie. Mclovin rules.

While I don't think the theory being posed here about a more rested and cap friendly Niedermeyer return at mid-season to the Ducks is an intentional gambit, I do think it's blatantly unfair and could set a dangerous precedent. Older star players could sit out a half-season, avoiding the wear and tear on their bodies and return fresh for the playoff run with only half the cap and salary hit. Whether intentional or not, I think this situation should be outlawed by the NHL or at least, apply the entire cap hit to the balance of whatever games the player plays in. In other words, the Ducks would be forced to absorb the full $6.75 M cap hit of Niedermeyer over the remaining games no matter when he decides to return, making it nearly impossible to absorb the contract and stay under the cap.

On a separate but related note, I think it was foolish on the part of both Burke and Niedermeyer to agree to provide such an extended time for Scott to make his retirement decision. His decision should have been made one way or the other before the FA signing period started so that the team (which paid him $7 million last year and is under contract for 2 more years) could make personnel decisions accordingly. If Scotty wanted to retire early, he should have thought about that before signing a long term contract. He's a classy guy, but this is a very unclassy move on his part to string the team along.

I honestly don't give a **** at this point about Scotty ****ing Niedermayer.

While I don't think the theory being posed here about a more rested and cap friendly Niedermeyer return at mid-season to the Ducks is an intentional gambit, I do think it's blatantly unfair and could set a dangerous precedent. Older star players could sit out a half-season, avoiding the wear and tear on their bodies and return fresh for the playoff run with only half the cap and salary hit. Whether intentional or not, I think this situation should be outlawed by the NHL or at least, apply the entire cap hit to the balance of whatever games the player plays in. In other words, the Ducks would be forced to absorb the full $6.75 M cap hit of Niedermeyer over the remaining games no matter when he decides to return, making it nearly impossible to absorb the contract and stay under the cap.

On a separate but related note, I think it was foolish on the part of both Burke and Niedermeyer to agree to provide such an extended time for Scott to make his retirement decision. His decision should have been made one way or the other before the FA signing period started so that the team (which paid him $7 million last year and is under contract for 2 more years) could make personnel decisions accordingly. If Scotty wanted to retire early, he should have thought about that before signing a long term contract. He's a classy guy, but this is a very unclassy move on his part to string the team along.

Agreed. Well said.

I would tend to agree with you, but there's one little thing: if Burke knows that Niedermayer will come back in january, and if he (and the team) agrees with this decision, isn't it a total cheat to suspend the guy for doing so?! :badidea:

No, it's still not a cheat in my mind. Niedermayer's not playing, why should we pay for services he's not fulfulling? So suspension makes perfect sense

While I don't think the theory being posed here about a more rested and cap friendly Niedermeyer return at mid-season to the Ducks is an intentional gambit, I do think it's blatantly unfair and could set a dangerous precedent. Older star players could sit out a half-season, avoiding the wear and tear on their bodies and return fresh for the playoff run with only half the cap and salary hit. Whether intentional or not, I think this situation should be outlawed by the NHL or at least, apply the entire cap hit to the balance of whatever games the player plays in. In other words, the Ducks would be forced to absorb the full $6.75 M cap hit of Niedermeyer over the remaining games no matter when he decides to return, making it nearly impossible to absorb the contract and stay under the cap.

Bold 1: If older star players don't want to play the whole season and are worried about the cap hit, they could just sign for half the contract and only play half the season. I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. But if they did sit out half the season and were suspended and thus paid half the salary because of it, what exactly is so dangerous about this? And how is it unfair? If the team is willing to only have the player for half the year, why can't they? And if he's such a big star, who's saying the team will even make the playoffs without him for half the season? Isn't there some rumors that Forsberg might do just that?

Bold 2: We're already under cap. There's no issue whatsoever unless we want to sign Selanne as well as retain Niedermayer. Or add somebody big. And if Niedermayer is worth 6.75 million for one full season, shouldn't we pay him half the salary for playing half of it? It makes perfect sense.

The cap is counted daily. All salaries are counted that way. When a player is traded, you only count the fraction of the season where he's on your team. So we only count the fraction of the season where Niedermayer's on our team. It's not like we'd have paid over 50 million sum total throughout the year. Even if the total salaries ends up over 50 million, it's because the amount over was paid by another team (trade) or wasn't paid because Niedermayer wasn't playing and was suspended.

No, it's still not a cheat in my mind. Niedermayer's not playing, why should we pay for services he's not fulfulling? So suspension makes perfect sense

I think suspension is a way of protecting teams against players that would be messing with them (by not coming to camp when they should have, for example). But if the player is on an allowed vacation, suspension just feels weird (and is, IMO, a cheat). Why wouldn't the Kings suspend Cloutier and get rid of his salary? Or, well, you know the clause that says a multi-year contract to an older player will count against the cap whether or not he plays? Why not just suspend him?

Bold 1: If older star players don't want to play the whole season and are worried about the cap hit, they could just sign for half the contract and only play half the season. I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. But if they did sit out half the season and were suspended and thus paid half the salary because of it, what exactly is so dangerous about this? And how is it unfair? If the team is willing to only have the player for half the year, why can't they? And if he's such a big star, who's saying the team will even make the playoffs without him for half the season? Isn't there some rumors that Forsberg might do just that?

The danger in this is that a team could stock up on FA's to fill out the team roster to be competitive for the first half of a season and then bring in their rested star players for the final regular season push and the playoffs thus creating a competitive imbalance by effectively circumventing the salary cap. Foresberg's situation is a bit different from Niedermeyer in that he's a Free Agent so if he get's signed mid-season, there is no implicit salary cap circumvention. Although the signing team still benefits from having a fresher, well rested player.

Bold 2: We're already under cap. There's no issue whatsoever unless we want to sign Selanne as well as retain Niedermayer. Or add somebody big. And if Niedermayer is worth 6.75 million for one full season, shouldn't we pay him half the salary for playing half of it? It makes perfect sense.

The cap is counted daily. All salaries are counted that way. When a player is traded, you only count the fraction of the season where he's on your team. So we only count the fraction of the season where Niedermayer's on our team. It's not like we'd have paid over 50 million sum total throughout the year. Even if the total salaries ends up over 50 million, it's because the amount over was paid by another team (trade) or wasn't paid because Niedermayer wasn't playing and was suspended.

This is exactly my point. There is no cap penalty for re-instating a player mid-season. If Niedermeyer's 6.75 million cap hit was divided by the number of regular season games remaining from the point of his return instead of averaged over the entire 82 game season, his cap hit would most likely be prohibitive for the Ducks. In my mind, this is a clear circumvention of the salary cap rules which were put in place to create a more level playing field. If left unchecked, this could open up a Pandora's Box where NHL teams could effectively stockpile a reserve set of players for the Cup run. The NHL season is a grinding war. To have players return late in the season to enjoy the spoils of that war without having to fight the battle seems blatantly unfair to me.

I think suspension is a way of protecting teams against players that would be messing with them (by not coming to camp when they should have, for example). But if the player is on an allowed vacation, suspension just feels weird (and is, IMO, a cheat). Why wouldn't the Kings suspend Cloutier and get rid of his salary? Or, well, you know the clause that says a multi-year contract to an older player will count against the cap whether or not he plays? Why not just suspend him?

I would suspect if the team suspends a player without merit then the NHLPA would be involved. From what I understand, Niedermayer is also not being paid. Every day that he sits out, he is forfeiting thousands of dollars. Sneaking him money or anything else under the table would definitely be cap circumvention and I'm sure the league is keeping watch to make sure that doesn't happen, but as it stands, Niedermayer is surrendering what could be millions of dollars to take some time off (or perhaps to never come back).

If a team like the Kings wanted to suspend Cloutier so they aren't tied to his contract, I would assume that Cloutier and the NHLPA would file some sort of grievance to get his money. In this case, Niedermayer is willingly giving up that money. One can't assume other players in less favourable situations (such as Cloutier or an older-player on a multi-year deal) would be so generous.

To comment on some other views in this thread:
Other then the cap relief (which I think is fair considering the Ducks are going without the player), I fail to see how Anaheim "benefits" from missing a player of Niedermayer's caliber from the lineup. Regardless of whether or not Niedermayer rejoins the team in a month, during the stretch run, in the playoffs, or at all, the Ducks that begin the season are a weaker team without him in the lineup. I don't really see how Niedermayer sitting out is doing Anaheim much of a favour.

One can't assume other players in less favourable situations (such as Cloutier or an older-player on a multi-year deal) would be so generous.

So basically, you're saying that if it was the case, if an older player with a multi year contract was "generous" enough to sit 78 games and only be paid for 4, it would be ok to suspend him and get rid of his salary?

I sure don't agree with that, that's pure circumvention of the older players on multiyear deals rule in the CBA and that wouldn't be accepted.

So basically, you're saying that if it was the case, if an older player with a multi year contract was "generous" enough to sit 78 games and only be paid for 4, it would be ok to suspend him and get rid of his salary?

I sure don't agree with that, that's pure circumvention of the older players on multiyear deals rule in the CBA and that wouldn't be accepted.

Look on the flip side of the coin. If a player (regardless of who) decides they don't want to play for a particular organization/coach/etc a particular year, should the team be penalized for that? Think of the Yashin situation, they weren't paying him (rightfully so). You're proposing that if something like that were to occur again, the team being victimized would not only be without the talents of that player in their lineup, but also potentially be held financially hand-cuffed to replace that player because of the cap.

I would support a deadline of sorts, as in saying at a certain point in the season, any player who has been suspended by their team since the beginning of the year cannot be eligible to return. Something similar to the clear-day roster for the AHL or along those lines.

But I don't think there's any way to distinguish a situation like Niedermayer's (where he might return) from a situation like Yashin's (where he didn't return). At least not to the extent that a rule can be made to cover it.

I think suspension is a way of protecting teams against players that would be messing with them (by not coming to camp when they should have, for example). But if the player is on an allowed vacation, suspension just feels weird (and is, IMO, a cheat). Why wouldn't the Kings suspend Cloutier and get rid of his salary? Or, well, you know the clause that says a multi-year contract to an older player will count against the cap whether or not he plays? Why not just suspend him?
Sure, the Kings are free to suspend Cloutier... if he doesn't show up. But what incentive would Cloutier have to not show up? He wants his money, and he wants to play. So he's going to show up and he's going to get paid. If they suspend him for no reason, you can bet they'll be sued by the player's union.

The Kings are free to place him on waivers and send him down to the AHL. And they get cap relief through that. They could even get pay relief through that, if he refuses to go to the AHL and thus gets suspended. If the Kings wanted the cap relief that badly, it can get done. But they probably won't do that because it'd look horrible to the other players, and good luck getting playrs to sign with you in the future.

The danger in this is that a team could stock up on FA's to fill out the team roster to be competitive for the first half of a season and then bring in their rested star players for the final regular season push and the playoffs thus creating a competitive imbalance by effectively circumventing the salary cap. Foresberg's situation is a bit different from Niedermeyer in that he's a Free Agent so if he get's signed mid-season, there is no implicit salary cap circumvention. Although the signing team still benefits from having a fresher, well rested player.

How many star players would be willing to do this? Players play for two reasons, the money and the fact that they love playing the game. Sitting out gets them neither of these things. Furthermore, who says the player even gets into the playoffs? It's very possible that they sit out half the season, get paid half the salary, and end up with nothing to show for it. This is not going to happen very often.

This is exactly my point. There is no cap penalty for re-instating a player mid-season. If Niedermeyer's 6.75 million cap hit was divided by the number of regular season games remaining from the point of his return instead of averaged over the entire 82 game season, his cap hit would most likely be prohibitive for the Ducks. In my mind, this is a clear circumvention of the salary cap rules which were put in place to create a more level playing field. If left unchecked, this could open up a Pandora's Box where NHL teams could effectively stockpile a reserve set of players for the Cup run. The NHL season is a grinding war. To have players return late in the season to enjoy the spoils of that war without having to fight the battle seems blatantly unfair to me.

There's no circumvention here. The Ducks will not have paid more than 50 million dollars.

I get the feeling I'm not being clear. Let's have an example with easy numbers. Say hockey is a 2 player sport, with a season that lasts 4 days and a cap of $4. That means you can pay 4 dollars for the whole season. So you could sign two $2 players. But say you have a $3 player (Tres) and a $2 player (Dos). That means Tres gets 75 cents each day, and Dos gets 50 cents. Now Tres only wants to play half the season, 2 days and is suspended for the other 2 because he didn't show up. Dos plays the whole season. And to fill in for Tres, the team signs a 50 cent player (Medio) who only plays 2 games but counts for all 4 because he's a healthy scratch.

So in the whole season we have Tres play 2 days ($1.50), Dos plays 4 games ($2), and Medio play two, but count for all 4 ($.50). In sum the team pays exactly the cap, $4 (1.5+2+.5 = 4). If you sum up the players "salaries," then 3+2+0.5=5.5 is over the cap. But they have not circumvented the cap, 4 dollars have been paid and they fit in the cap.

Now I do admit this is a little funny concerning the playoffs. Because if the team makes the playoffs they have a 5.5 dollar team. But the current rules are that the playoffs don't count, so there's no circumvention there. And that's intentional, players are paid for the regular season (the only game that's guaranteed to be played, otherwise players on losing teams would be shafted). This same rule allows teams to "exceed the cap" with trade deadline players. Perhaps it's a little unfair, but it was designed this way intentionally. It may be something to change next CBA, but it's perfectly legal now.

And the reason this won't become rampant is because players WILL have to leave following the season in order to comply with next year's cap. In my example, either Tres or Dos has to move to another team or someone has to take a paycut. And like I said earlier, teams aren't going to just "stockpile reserve players" because very few players will be willing to go along with that.

BTW I just want to add that I'm pretty sure this isn't the case with Niedermayer, I think he really just doesn't know. I just don't see enough benefit for him to do this. It is certainly an interesting academic issue though.

there is a real cause for concern as this sets a possible dangerous precedent. Lets say that Lombardi is thinking about buying out Cloutier but doesn't want the cap hit. His option is to send him to the minors.

Cloutier realizes his time in the nhl is pretty much done and he doesn't want to go to the minors. Lombardi forces him to "contemplate" retirement till after Christmas. Cloutier avoids a trip to the minors and Lombardi shaves a couple mill off his cap hit.

The NHLPA would not like this. The NHL would not like this. The CBA is quite clear (pointed out in this thread) that the appearance of circumvention would be punished.

The other thing that will make teams upset is that the NHL is a gate driven league. Every other owner is going to be pissed when Scott doesn't dress for the first half. Scott is a star and is a reward to other teams' season ticket holders who are trying to justify spending a few hundred bucks on a meaningless November tilt.

If Scott is seriously thinking about returning in January, then a whole can of worms is getting opened. Every other team is going to cry foul.

there is a real cause for concern as this sets a possible dangerous precedent. Lets say that Lombardi is thinking about buying out Cloutier but doesn't want the cap hit. His option is to send him to the minors.

Cloutier realizes his time in the nhl is pretty much done and he doesn't want to go to the minors. Lombardi forces him to "contemplate" retirement till after Christmas. Cloutier avoids a trip to the minors and Lombardi shaves a couple mill off his cap hit.

The NHLPA would not like this. The NHL would not like this. The CBA is quite clear (pointed out in this thread) that the appearance of circumvention would be punished.

In your scenario, Cloutier would be paid to go to the minors. If he simply "doesn't want to go" then that is grounds for suspension, which allows Los Angeles to avoid paying him and to avoid the cap hit. On the other side of the coin, Lombardi can't force him to contemplate retirement. The Kings can't weasel out of not paying Cloutier without getting the league and the PA involved. The rule stands as it does currently to prevent teams from not paying players when the team is not in a good situation to do so (ie to circumvent the cap). As long as Cloutier is in good standing with the organization, he should and will get paid, and the team should and will have that money counted toward their salary cap.

Having players who refuse reassignment to the minors still count against the cap is not a solution.


The other thing that will make teams upset is that the NHL is a gate driven league. Every other owner is going to be pissed when Scott doesn't dress for the first half. Scott is a star and is a reward to other teams' season ticket holders who are trying to justify spending a few hundred bucks on a meaningless November tilt.

If Scott is seriously thinking about returning in January, then a whole can of worms is getting opened. Every other team is going to cry foul.

This happened when Mario Lemieux decided to take an abbreviated schedule and sit out some games during his final seasons. And the same answer was given then as should be given now: "Too bad, so sad".

To comment on some other views in this thread:
Other then the cap relief (which I think is fair considering the Ducks are going without the player), I fail to see how Anaheim "benefits" from missing a player of Niedermayer's caliber from the lineup. Regardless of whether or not Niedermayer rejoins the team in a month, during the stretch run, in the playoffs, or at all, the Ducks that begin the season are a weaker team without him in the lineup. I don't really see how Niedermayer sitting out is doing Anaheim much of a favour.

I'll illustrate. Let's play a game of hypoteticals, starting with Niedermayer not considering retirement. That means Burke doesn't sign Schneider, because he doesn't feel a need to bolster what is probably the best D in the NHL as-is. Instead, Burke probably uses that 5.5M to bring in another top line quality forward to help replace Flash, assuming he still would sign Bertuzzi too (Bert alone isn't gonna replace Flash's offense, even if he regains his old top form). So in this alternate reality you get Niedermayer + Bert along with a high profile forward all season, with a little cap room to spare. Not bad.

Now let's compare that to what really happened, and what could yet come. Burke felt pretty strongly that Niedermayer might retire, so he made a play for Schneider on July 1. Burke also knew that he could afford both defensemen, but that would put him pretty close up against the cap. Now, it looks as if at least some Niedermayer's salary will be freed up, and possibly a large chunk, maybe even all of it. Guess what? Burke can either sign a forward from what's left on the market, or use some of those picks from Edmonton and trade for a forward, now or later. So in this scenario you get Schneider + Bert all season, plus a top line quality forward at some point, plus Niedermayer if/when he decides to play.

Clearly, in my mind, the second scenario works out better for you guys. You get the benefit of a third 5+ million dollar defenseman for the playoffs, and your D is still plenty strong to handle the first part of the season when Niedermayer won't be there. The intent to circumvent the cap isn't there, but the results sure are.

The only problem I see with a Niedermayer return is that he may miss hockey now with camp about to begin, but once he gets a taste of spending time with his kids and going to their functions like soccer games, baseball, school events, whatever, it will be harder for him to return. And let's face it in today’s sports to be successful you need to work out 5 to 6 days a week. Gretzky once said I used to work out 6 hours a day, now I work out 3 hours a week. It's hard to get back into it, but he's still young and hasn't had any severe injuries in his career, so you never now, but I doubt it.

there is a real cause for concern as this sets a possible dangerous precedent. Lets say that Lombardi is thinking about buying out Cloutier but doesn't want the cap hit. His option is to send him to the minors.

Cloutier realizes his time in the nhl is pretty much done and he doesn't want to go to the minors. Lombardi forces him to "contemplate" retirement till after Christmas. Cloutier avoids a trip to the minors and Lombardi shaves a couple mill off his cap hit.

The NHLPA would not like this. The NHL would not like this. The CBA is quite clear (pointed out in this thread) that the appearance of circumvention would be punished.

As Forbes said, there's nothing Lombardi can do to force Cloutier to contemplate retirement. And if Cloutier goes to the minors he still gets his 3 million or whatever. And he's off the cap. If he realizes his time is done he can either 1) accept that and play in the minors for 3 million or 2) choose he doesn't want the minors and retire from hockey. The NHLPA would be fine with this, one of their players gets the money he's been guaranteed. Or a choice to hang them up if he doesn't like the minors.
The other thing that will make teams upset is that the NHL is a gate driven league. Every other owner is going to be pissed when Scott doesn't dress for the first half. Scott is a star and is a reward to other teams' season ticket holders who are trying to justify spending a few hundred bucks on a meaningless November tilt.

If Scott is seriously thinking about returning in January, then a whole can of worms is getting opened. Every other team is going to cry foul.

The same owners who won't let every team in the Western Conference see stars like Crosby or Ovechkin? Somehow I doubt that's much of a concern.

I'll illustrate. Let's play a game of hypoteticals, starting with Niedermayer not considering retirement. That means Burke doesn't sign Schneider, because he doesn't feel a need to bolster what is probably the best D in the NHL as-is. Instead, Burke probably uses that 5.5M to bring in another top line quality forward to help replace Flash, assuming he still would sign Bertuzzi too (Bert alone isn't gonna replace Flash's offense, even if he regains his old top form). So in this alternate reality you get Niedermayer + Bert along with a high profile forward all season, with a little cap room to spare. Not bad.

Now let's compare that to what really happened, and what could yet come. Burke felt pretty strongly that Niedermayer might retire, so he made a play for Schneider on July 1. Burke also knew that he could afford both defensemen, but that would put him pretty close up against the cap. Now, it looks as if at least some Niedermayer's salary will be freed up, and possibly a large chunk, maybe even all of it. Guess what? Burke can either sign a forward from what's left on the market, or use some of those picks from Edmonton and trade for a forward, now or later. So in this scenario you get Schneider + Bert all season, plus a top line quality forward at some point, plus Niedermayer if/when he decides to play.

Clearly, in my mind, the second scenario works out better for you guys. You get the benefit of a third 5+ million dollar defenseman for the playoffs, and your D is still plenty strong to handle the first part of the season when Niedermayer won't be there. The intent to circumvent the cap isn't there, but the results sure are.

Right, but at the end of it, the Ducks are still not paying Niedermayer when he is not playing and therefore (in my mind) they should not suffer a penalty under the cap for a player who is not playing for them.

Right now, no one knows if Niedermayer will return. Does it look like he might? Yes, but just as quickly, three weeks ago, it looked like he was never going to step on the ice. It's impossible for the league to draw a line and make a rule about cap circumvention as they cannot know the player's intention (because frankly, the player has admitted to not knowing what he wants, himself).

If Niedermayer and Burke came out in a press conference all buddy-buddy and talked about how great it will be when #27 steps on the ice in February, then yes, that's wrong. However, they didn't and there's no solid evidence he's going to return. Unless the league finds otherwise, Anaheim is not (nor should they be) responsible for the cap hit of Niedermayer. At this point, he is a player refusing to play.

If a rule like what is being proposed in this thread existed, where a player refusing to play would still be considered in the salary cap equation, then a Yashin like situation could potentially ship-wreck a team.

Consider a franchise like Philadelphia, who according to NHLSCAP has 1.3 million in cap space. Say Joffrey Lupul decides he doesn't want to play for Hitchcock's defensive system and wants to spend his winter surfing in California instead. If you go by what is being proposed here, not only do the Flyers lose Lupul from the lineup, they still have his 2.3 million dollar cap hit on the books. That severely limits their ability to replace what he brings to the team. Basically, they suffer twice.

I'll illustrate. Let's play a game of hypoteticals, starting with Niedermayer not considering retirement. That means Burke doesn't sign Schneider, because he doesn't feel a need to bolster what is probably the best D in the NHL as-is. Instead, Burke probably uses that 5.5M to bring in another top line quality forward to help replace Flash, assuming he still would sign Bertuzzi too (Bert alone isn't gonna replace Flash's offense, even if he regains his old top form). So in this alternate reality you get Niedermayer + Bert along with a high profile forward all season, with a little cap room to spare. Not bad.

Now let's compare that to what really happened, and what could yet come. Burke felt pretty strongly that Niedermayer might retire, so he made a play for Schneider on July 1. Burke also knew that he could afford both defensemen, but that would put him pretty close up against the cap. Now, it looks as if at least some Niedermayer's salary will be freed up, and possibly a large chunk, maybe even all of it. Guess what? Burke can either sign a forward from what's left on the market, or use some of those picks from Edmonton and trade for a forward, now or later. So in this scenario you get Schneider + Bert all season, plus a top line quality forward at some point, plus Niedermayer if/when he decides to play.

Clearly, in my mind, the second scenario works out better for you guys. You get the benefit of a third 5+ million dollar defenseman for the playoffs, and your D is still plenty strong to handle the first part of the season when Niedermayer won't be there. The intent to circumvent the cap isn't there, but the results sure are.

The second scenario clearly works out better in the playoffs. Are we better off during the season? I'm not sure about that. Our D is plenty strong, but pretty much all of us are worried about our offense. In your two scenarios you're trading a half season of Niedermayer and half a season of random forward for full season of Schneider. For the regular season, that seems pretty much equal to me. Although I'd prefer the extra Niedermayer.

As Forbes said, there's nothing Lombardi can do to force Cloutier to contemplate retirement. And if Cloutier goes to the minors he still gets his 3 million or whatever. And he's off the cap. If he realizes his time is done he can either 1) accept that and play in the minors for 3 million or 2) choose he doesn't want the minors and retire from hockey. The NHLPA would be fine with this, one of their players gets the money he's been guaranteed. Or a choice to hang them up if he doesn't like the minors.


The same owners who won't let every team in the Western Conference see stars like Crosby or Ovechkin? Somehow I doubt that's much of a concern.

the advantage for Lombardi , in my scenario, is that he avoids paying Cloutier for 1/2 a year. His owners might have a budget that would not allow him to pay Cloutier in the minors. In this scenario, he uses the threat of minors to force Cloutier into "contemplating" retirement.

To the NHL, this is another loophole, to the NHLPA, this is a case of management forcing a player to forgo some of his money.

As for the NHL allowing star players to sit out games, this is a gate driven league and Scott is a big draw. He is one of the few players that justify ticket prices. If I am a Ducks season ticket holder, I demand he plays every game if he is healthy enough. If he is going to play 1/2 a season, I want a rebate on the other 1/2 of the games.

I think this whole conspiracy thing isn't really happening but, if it is, then Burke is playing a dangerous game.

the advantage for Lombardi , in my scenario, is that he avoids paying Cloutier for 1/2 a year. His owners might have a budget that would not allow him to pay Cloutier in the minors. In this scenario, he uses the threat of minors to force Cloutier into "contemplating" retirement.

To the NHL, this is another loophole, to the NHLPA, this is a case of management forcing a player to forgo some of his money.

I fail to see where Lombardi gets the leverage to force Cloutier to sit out. There is nothing Lombardi can legally do to force Cloutier to sit out and therefore be suspended by the team.

Would a regular NHL player probably be ashamed to be sent to the minors? Probably, but I would doubt that would make him willingly give up hundreds of thousands of dollars to sit at home and do nothing. If Cloutier was that afraid(?) of going to the minors, he could just retire.

Lombardi's choices are pretty point blank:
Doesn't want to suffer from Cloutier's cap hit? Fine, send him to the minors.
Cloutier refuses to report to the minors? Fine, suspend him and stop paying him.
Cloutier reports but Management doesn't want to pay his contract anymore? Tough luck, it's called a contract and there's two sides. Buy him out and suffer the cap hit appropriately or swallow the fact that he's cashing your cheques.


As for the NHL allowing star players to sit out games, this is a gate driven league and Scott is a big draw. He is one of the few players that justify ticket prices. If I am a Ducks season ticket holder, I demand he plays every game if he is healthy enough. If he is going to play 1/2 a season, I want a rebate on the other 1/2 of the games.


Should a Minnesota fan ask for a refund when Gaborik gets injured? What about an Ottawa fan ask for a refund last season when Redden took time off because his mother passed away? Maybe they should offer refunds if a player holds out? What if I bought tickets to see my favourite player and he then was traded before the game? Where is the line?
If a Ducks fan was that pissed about it, they can scalp the tickets. Scott Niedermayer isn't the Ducks and this situation has been progressing long enough that most ticket buyers should be aware that Niedermayer and Selanne aren't going to be there on the home opener. Punishing the team because some of their fans (or fans of other teams) have a myopic understanding of how the sport works is ridiculous.

the advantage for Lombardi , in my scenario, is that he avoids paying Cloutier for 1/2 a year. His owners might have a budget that would not allow him to pay Cloutier in the minors. In this scenario, he uses the threat of minors to force Cloutier into "contemplating" retirement.

To the NHL, this is another loophole, to the NHLPA, this is a case of management forcing a player to forgo some of his money.

As for the NHL allowing star players to sit out games, this is a gate driven league and Scott is a big draw. He is one of the few players that justify ticket prices. If I am a Ducks season ticket holder, I demand he plays every game if he is healthy enough. If he is going to play 1/2 a season, I want a rebate on the other 1/2 of the games.

I think this whole conspiracy thing isn't really happening but, if it is, then Burke is playing a dangerous game.
I don't doubt that Lombardi would love nothing than to do as you hypothesize. But my point is he has no power to force Cloutier to sit out. He can send Cloutier to the minors, and get cap space. But Lombardi has to pay Cloutier his full salary. How is that much of a threat for Cloutier to go along with this scheme?

If you're Cloutier and you want the money, play in the minors and get your millions. You might even be picked off waivers to play in the NHL (not likely, but it's possible). If you're Cloutier and you don't want to play in the minors, then retire. If you're Cloutier and you feel generous, and want some money and some vacation time, then you can agree to not report to the minors, only to return and get paid later. But there's nothing forcing you to do the last option. You have choices

And lI'm all for seeing the stars of the NHL. Which is why we should play all East coast teams at least once, if not once in each arena. But considering owners and GMs repeatedly refused to change the schedule, I'm pretty sure the loss of one star on a team that also has Pronger, and Giguere and McDonald if you count them, is pretty down there on the list of things to spur GMs or owners onto a crusade.

I dont see anything wrong with it from a salary cap perspective.

I just wonder wether hed be more likely to come back if the team struggled or if the team was going great guns?

The longer this thing goes the stranger it seems... So strange that a player would just sit out and not retire... hmmm....

Right, but at the end of it, the Ducks are still not paying Niedermayer when he is not playing and therefore (in my mind) they should not suffer a penalty under the cap for a player who is not playing for them.

Right now, no one knows if Niedermayer will return. Does it look like he might? Yes, but just as quickly, three weeks ago, it looked like he was never going to step on the ice. It's impossible for the league to draw a line and make a rule about cap circumvention as they cannot know the player's intention (because frankly, the player has admitted to not knowing what he wants, himself).

If Niedermayer and Burke came out in a press conference all buddy-buddy and talked about how great it will be when #27 steps on the ice in February, then yes, that's wrong. However, they didn't and there's no solid evidence he's going to return. Unless the league finds otherwise, Anaheim is not (nor should they be) responsible for the cap hit of Niedermayer. At this point, he is a player refusing to play.

If a rule like what is being proposed in this thread existed, where a player refusing to play would still be considered in the salary cap equation, then a Yashin like situation could potentially ship-wreck a team.

Consider a franchise like Philadelphia, who according to NHLSCAP has 1.3 million in cap space. Say Joffrey Lupul decides he doesn't want to play for Hitchcock's defensive system and wants to spend his winter surfing in California instead. If you go by what is being proposed here, not only do the Flyers lose Lupul from the lineup, they still have his 2.3 million dollar cap hit on the books. That severely limits their ability to replace what he brings to the team. Basically, they suffer twice.

I agree that the proper way to plug the hole is not to penalize the team. Rather, the player should be penalized. My proposal to plug this hole is that if a player goes AWOL and is suspended for a set length of time (say something like 15 days, or 30 days tops) then there should be a second level of suspension. Let's call it expulsion. An expelled player would have their contract frozen, a year does not come off it at his team's option, and the player is barred from playing again that league year.

My issue isn't that the Ducks are suspending Niedermayer, or that they may use his salary to acquire a replacement player. My problem is if they acquire said player and later get the benefit of Niedermayer playing. That simply shouldn't be allowed to happen. My proposal would stop it, and make a player think long and hard before walking away.


The only problem I see with a Niedermayer return is that he may miss hockey now with camp about to begin, but once he gets a taste of spending time with his kids and going to their functions like soccer games, baseball, school events, whatever, it will be harder for him to return. And let's face it in today’s sports to be successful you need to work out 5 to 6 days a week. Gretzky once said I used to work out 6 hours a day, now I work out 3 hours a week. It's hard to get back into it, but he's still young and hasn't had any severe injuries in his career, so you never now, but I doubt it.

Well, remember that Niedermayer already had more than an entire solid year off with his family because of the lockout. So what he's experiencing now is not new, he already knows what being around the family 24/7/365 is like. If anything, having that year off and then coming back to play is the reason he doesn't want to do it anymore.

Did Scott go on Oprah yet? The View? Anybody know when that is scheduled?

So in the whole season we have Tres play 2 days ($1.50), Dos plays 4 games ($2), and Medio play two, but count for all 4 ($.50). In sum the team pays exactly the cap, $4 (1.5+2+.5 = 4). If you sum up the players "salaries," then 3+2+0.5=5.5 is over the cap. But they have not circumvented the cap, 4 dollars have been paid and

Nice example which again makes my point exactly. In your example, Tres is shelved for a half season but you only count the pro-rated portion of his salary as the cap hit (1.5 + 2 + .5) = 4. What I'm suggesting is that the NHL count the entire seasons cap hit to the team no matter when Tres returns (3 + 2 + 0.5) = 5.5. In other words, while the team may only pay out $4 they would have to absorb a cap hit of $5.5. If Tres came back at mid season (Game 3 in your example) with a per game allowable cap of $1, the per game cap numbers would be (.75 + .5 + .125 ) = 1.37. $1.37 is over the $1 cap by .37 meaning that either Tres is not allowed to play or Dos gets traded.

I agree that the proper way to plug the hole is not to penalize the team. Rather, the player should be penalized. My proposal to plug this hole is that if a player goes AWOL and is suspended for a set length of time (say something like 15 days, or 30 days tops) then there should be a second level of suspension. Let's call it expulsion. An expelled player would have their contract frozen, a year does not come off it at his team's option, and the player is barred from playing again that league year.

My issue isn't that the Ducks are suspending Niedermayer, or that they may use his salary to acquire a replacement player. My problem is if they acquire said player and later get the benefit of Niedermayer playing. That simply shouldn't be allowed to happen. My proposal would stop it, and make a player think long and hard before walking away.




Well, remember that Niedermayer already had more than an entire solid year off with his family because of the lockout. So what he's experiencing now is not new, he already knows what being around the family 24/7/365 is like. If anything, having that year off and then coming back to play is the reason he doesn't want to do it anymore.

I'd say Niedermayer already has 3.8 million reasons to think long and hard about walking away for half the season, no reason to add additional rules for something that I just don't see happening often, if at all.

And as to the having both Niedermayer and replacement player argument, see my reply to dburdick earlier about the 3 dollar and 2 dollar players. As long as they have the cap space to absorb the fraction of his salary for the games where he does play I see no real difference between this and only paying 1/4 of the salary of a trade deadline player. If you want to say "teams must NEVER have a salary above 50 million at any day," that's alright too, but it'd involve a new CBA and mean trade deadline players have to count for their full salary as well. But the current situation makes much more sense to me, it means the actual dollars paid each year never exceeds 50 million.

Your year off comment, by the way, is a great point. That year off probably really opened his eyes as to how his body feels without all the injuries, travel, and being away from the family. It probably does weight heavily into why he's even considering retirement.

Nice example which again makes my point exactly. In your example, Tres is shelved for a half season but you only count the pro-rated portion of his salary as the cap hit (1.5 + 2 + .5) = 4. What I'm suggesting is that the NHL count the entire seasons cap hit to the team no matter when Tres returns (3 + 2 + 0.5) = 5.5. In other words, while the team may only pay out $4 they would have to absorb a cap hit of $5.5. If Tres came back at mid season (Game 3 in your example) with a per game allowable cap of $1, the per game cap numbers would be (.75 + .5 + .125 ) = 1.37. $1.37 is over the $1 cap by .37 meaning that either Tres is not allowed to play or Dos gets traded.
Yeah I thought the example would be helpful. OK I get your point now. I thought you were saying that the cap currently is counted the way you describe here, not that it should be counted that way.

An argument could certainly be made to count the cap your way, but it seems to me that way doesn't work very well when you count things like bonuses and trades. How do you account for a bonus for a player that plays 70 games, especially after he misses his 13th game? How do you account for a deadline vet getting traded for a prospect (there would almost never be deadline trades then)? And then each and every day every team is going to have to make sure that the team they dress complies with the daily cap? With things like injuries and whatnot causing constant lineup shuffles?

And in the end, what's more important, that the team not spend more than $1 for each game or that it not spend more than $4 total? Especially when the way people put it is "there's a cap of 50 million" not "there's a daily cap of whatever 50 million/however many days the season is."

But regardless of which way the cap should be counted, it is counted in a pro-rated manner now. So until they change something with a new CBA, it seems perfectly legal to me.

By the way I want to amend my $4 cap example, it would be forbidden by the CBA as described, I forgot about the fact that the team has to save space for when the suspension ends. And in a "player suspended for not reporting" scenario that suspension could end immediately. Only if we explicitly said ahead of time "player is suspended for 2 days for failing a drug test (or something)" would we be allowed to do that.

Yeah I thought the example would be helpful. OK I get your point now. I thought you were saying that the cap currently is counted the way you describe here, not that it should be counted that way.

An argument could certainly be made to count the cap your way, but it seems to me that way doesn't work very well when you count things like bonuses and trades. How do you account for a bonus for a player that plays 70 games, especially after he misses his 13th game? How do you account for a deadline vet getting traded for a prospect (there would almost never be deadline trades then)? And then each and every day every team is going to have to make sure that the team they dress complies with the daily cap? With things like injuries and whatnot causing constant lineup shuffles?

What I was suggesting would only apply to players who are already under contract who decide for whatever reason not to play as in the case of Niedermayer. It would not apply to Selanne because he's not currently under contract so he's free to return without the cap hit penalty I described. Nor would it apply to any player which honors his contract at the start of the season. The idea here is to close a gapping loophole which could be intentionally or benignly exploited. If Niedermayer does decide to return mid-season or later, I think it's going to create an uproar throughout the league. He's really put himself, the team and the league in a bad spot which is a shame because he's truly one of the classiest guys in the NHL.

By the way I want to amend my $4 cap example, it would be forbidden by the CBA as described, I forgot about the fact that the team has to save space for when the suspension ends. And in a "player suspended for not reporting" scenario that suspension could end immediately. Only if we explicitly said ahead of time "player is suspended for 2 days for failing a drug test (or something)" would we be allowed to do that.

I read this on Spectors this morning. It pretty much confirms that there is no secret deal for Scott. I am glad because he is too good of a person to be involved with anything that would tarnish the NHL's relationship with the fans.

I read this on Spectors this morning. It pretty much confirms that there is no secret deal for Scott. I am glad because he is too good of a person to be involved with anything that would tarnish the NHL's relationship with the fans.
Well to play devil's advocate there could still be a secret deal involving Nieds if it meant signing a new player later in the season, say Teemu at the same time Scotty joins. In essence we aren't allowed to fill up a suspended player's salary, but his cap hit keeps decreasing with time missed and we could fill up that freed up space.

I still really don't see this being some sort of conspiracy though.

What I was suggesting would only apply to players who are already under contract who decide for whatever reason not to play as in the case of Niedermayer. It would not apply to Selanne because he's not currently under contract so he's free to return without the cap hit penalty I described. Nor would it apply to any player which honors his contract at the start of the season. The idea here is to close a gapping loophole which could be intentionally or benignly exploited. If Niedermayer does decide to return mid-season or later, I think it's going to create an uproar throughout the league. He's really put himself, the team and the league in a bad spot which is a shame because he's truly one of the classiest guys in the NHL.
Now that I was reminded of the fact that we have to keep Niedermayer's cap space open in the meantime, I'm even more sure there's no loophole to be fixed.

As things stand now, we have about 49 million committed in salaries. That's with Niedermayer coming back. That's the key point, Niedermayer can fit under the cap now if he wants to play. We are not allowed to exceed the cap counting Niedermayer's salary. In essence Niedermayer's salary is counting fully against the cap at the beginning of the season. Only with missed games does his cap hit go down, and then and only then can we fill up whatever space was freed. As an example, once he misses half the season, only then could we sign someone for 3.4 million dollars (perhaps with a listed salary of 6.8 million like Niedermayer but he's only paying half the season). How many free agents worth 6.8 million will be available halfway through the season? Or we could trade for someone making 6.8 million, again because half the season's gone and we'd freed up 3.4 million from Niedermayer not playing.

This cap space is freed up only because we lost Niedermayer's services, and is only freed up once we've lost Niedermayer's services.

The only advantage is that for the playoffs we have a better team than we could otherwise. For all the regular season games, we have a better team than we could have otherwise at the end only because we had a worse team than we could have had at the beginning. This same "advantage" also applies to midseason trades and signings, so it really isn't any more of an advantage than what any other team also has.

Now that I was reminded of the fact that we have to keep Niedermayer's cap space open in the meantime, I'm even more sure there's no loophole to be fixed.

I completely agree. In effect, the CBA rule which I wasn't aware of eliminates the ability to stockpile players while parking suspended players until a later date. Problem solved. Given the fact that Anaheim indeed has to carry Niedermayer's cap hit on the books, how likely is it that Selanne will be able to sign if he should decide to come back? Aren't the Ducks at $49 million now? Is it conceivable that Selanne would play for something like a $1 million plus bonuses?

I completely agree. In effect, the CBA rule which I wasn't aware of eliminates the ability to stockpile players while parking suspended players until a later date. Problem solved. Given the fact that Anaheim indeed has to carry Niedermayer's cap hit on the books, how likely is it that Selanne will be able to sign if he should decide to come back? Aren't the Ducks at $49 million now? Is it conceivable that Selanne would play for something like a $1 million plus bonuses?

If selanne really wanted to come back he would probably take whatever he could get.