[News] Hossa won't play 2017/18 due to side effects of skin condition meds

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Locke

The thing is hes still playing and playing well on a team that isnt up against the cap.

Florida is not Chicago.

He is signed until he is 43, he probably falls off a cliff as early as this year.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

He is signed until he is 43, he probably falls off a cliff as early as this year.

Again, its Florida. Does it matter?

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Locke

Again, its Florida. Does it matter?

Well they have the 9th highest cap in the NHL and around 2M more in space than Chicago to play with so yes, I think it does.

[Machiavelli]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

First of all stop saying "illness". It's a skin condition. It's likely similar to eczema which is something thousands of people live with every day. Any doctor can observe a rash and say "yes he's got a skin condition" the grey area is if this skin condition really prohibits him from playing and a doctor probably can't come to that conclusion properly as all he can form as a conclusion is that "yes it could be uncomfortable". All I can say is in a world where a guy like Theo Fleury can play with Crohn's disease, Bryan Bickel with MS, a few with cancer, diabetes, it's very dubious that a skin condition could be too difficult to play through. The fact he decided it was too difficult to play through when his salary dropped to $1 million is also very dubious. I get that a lot of you like the player and think he's above this but like I said before when he signed this contract in the beginning he never planned on playing after this contract dropped to $1 million and he and the Hawks had plenty of time to plan for this. Still a great player and a great career but it's a just a shame about the tainted ending.

Unless you have access to his medical file (and have the appropriate medical knowledge to intepret it), you have no way of knowing this (even if the timing/implications seem suspicious)

[Party Elephant]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Next lock out will probably see the last few massively front loaded contracts finally disappear due to another round of compliance buy outs.

Just a guess but that's what I see happening in two more seasons. Contracts of Luongo, Weber, Suter, Parise and this Hossa contract will probably all disappear. Can't think of any others left over.

Crosby, Ovechkin?

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Party Elephant

Crosby, Ovechkin?

Nope.

Ovechkin's deal still pays him a salary of $10 million right to the last year where he will only be 34.

Crosby's contract dips at the end, but still pays him $3 million per over the last 3 years where he's 34, 35 and 36 years old.

[Old Yeller]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Can't wait until we here how Luongo has developed something like chronic diarrhea so he can sit on LTIR with no cap implications.

Agreed,



LTIR for diarrheaitis gets Vancouver out of a world hurt.

[East Coast Flame]

Originally Posted by Old Yeller

Agreed,



LTIR for diarrheaitis gets Vancouver out of a world hurt.

There is like zero chance they will have to pay that. Same with Nashville and Weber.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Party Elephant

Crosby, Ovechkin?

Nope.

But Keith is another candidate. Still has 5 years left at 4.5, 3.5, 2.7, 2.1 and 1.5 left on his contract and he's about to turn 35.

If they opt out of the CBA earlier, Zetterberg has 3.5, 1, 1 left on his deal.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

It is clear that Hossa is actually unable to play.

You forgot to put quotes around "unable"... c'mon, he magically developed a skin condition that entirely "coincidentally" happened to require that he spend the rest of the contract on LTIR right when he hit the cheap "cheater" years at the end of the deal? Riiiiiight. If you believe that I've got a bridge in New Jersey I'd like to sell you"

He can play he just doesn't want to, the Hawks don't want to take the cap hit penalty, and the NHL doesn't want to punish them.

The 'Hawks are cap evaders, no if/and/or/buts about it... they're cheaters. They're just getting away with it is all.

[pseudoreality]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Exactly. Remember when the Flames had to dress a short roster because they lost players to injury too late in the season to put them on LTIR? (A player had to miss 10 regular-season games to qualify, and Robyn Regehr, as I recall, suffered a season-ending injury with 9 games remaining.) If the LTIR cap exemption were removed, every team at every time of the season would be in danger of having to do just that.

I think they have some way to deal with that type of situation in the current CBA. As you pointed out above, LTIR still didn't help the Flames then. If you really want to keep LTIR, make any overages apply to the next year's cap. This will help in emergencies, but stop teams from cheating the cap. Also, players on LTIR should not be eligible for a trade.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

He is signed until he is 43, he probably falls off a cliff as early as this year.

Well that’s a reach, he was dominant this season.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Machiavelli

Unless you have access to his medical file (and have the appropriate medical knowledge to intepret it), you have no way of knowing this (even if the timing/implications seem suspicious)

Thousands of players have played in the NHL. Do you think Hossa is the first guy in the history of the league to have a skin condition? Obviously he's not but is it not very suspicious that he's the first to have to retire especially given the circumstances of his contract? You have players that have played through Crohn's disease, diabetes, colitis, even MS. Yet Hossa managed to play his entire career issue free until the earnings of his long term contract dropped to $1 million per season due to a skin condition of all things. It's just way too convenient.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Thousands of players have played in the NHL. Do you think Hossa is the first guy in the history of the league to have a skin condition? Obviously he's not but is it not very suspicious that he's the first to have to retire especially given the circumstances of his contract? You have players that have played through Crohn's disease, diabetes, colitis, even MS. Yet Hossa managed to play his entire career issue free until the earnings of his long term contract dropped to $1 million per season due to a skin condition of all things. It's just way too convenient.

As someone who developed a skin condition in my 30s, which is definitely aggravated by hockey gear, I couldn’t imagine wearing it everyday for a job.

If you want to hate on the Hawks for catching a break here fine, I’m on board. But the guy has a skin condition (confirmed by NHL doctors following up on the claim), has had a nasty concussion, and won a few cups. If he doesn’t want to play through the pain anymore, he doesn’t have to play.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

If he doesn’t want to play through the pain anymore, he doesn’t have to play.

I don't think any of us have a problem with that but if he can't play he is retired and therefore the Hawks should not be able to LTIR him and have to pay the penalty.

[Galakanokis]

Why do people care so much about this? Hawks (along with others) did nothing wrong when they signed these contracts, they were well within the rules at the time. I find the fact that the NHL had to cover their asses with this stupid recapture penalty more disturbing than what is going on with Hossa. I think it unfairly punishes teams that signed valid, legal contracts.

And let's not forget the Flames were one of the first to do this and no one saw a problem with it back then.

[MisterJoji]

Originally Posted by Galakanokis

Why do people care so much about this? Hawks (along with others) did nothing wrong when they signed these contracts, they were well within the rules at the time. I find the fact that the NHL had to cover their asses with this stupid recapture penalty more disturbing than what is going on with Hossa. I think it unfairly punishes teams that signed valid, legal contracts.

And let's not forget the Flames were one of the first to do this and no one saw a problem with it back then.

Apples and oranges. Kipper’s contract had a steady decline in salary as he aged only dropping below 2 million in the very last year of his contract. 8.5 > 7.0 > 7.0 > 6.0 > 5.0 > 1.5. That is a far cry from Hossa’s which paid him almost 8 million per year from 2009 to 2016. Then getting half that in 2017 then only 1 million for the next 4 years. 7.9 x 7 years > 4.0 > 1.0 > 1.0 > 1.0 > 1.0. Definitely not the same.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Galakanokis

Why do people care so much about this? Hawks (along with others) did nothing wrong when they signed these contracts, they were well within the rules at the time. I find the fact that the NHL had to cover their asses with this stupid recapture penalty more disturbing than what is going on with Hossa. I think it unfairly punishes teams that signed valid, legal contracts.

And let's not forget the Flames were one of the first to do this and no one saw a problem with it back then.

Just tired of teams that used these contracts to their benefit to win cups like the Kings and Hawks and when the contracts no longer work in their favour they come up with these lame excuses to circumvent the cap. It's kind of CFL level bush league how the NHL puts out these rules but really don't want to enforce them on teams especially large market ones. No different than when the Devils got busted for the Kovalchuk contract but decided they would give them a 1st round pick back. Why would they do that? Because the owners really don't want to enforce penalties on themselves. This kind of crap would never fly in the NFL.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Just tired of teams that used these contracts to their benefit to win cups like the Kings and Hawks and when the contracts no longer work in their favour they come up with these lame excuses to circumvent the cap. It's kind of CFL level bush league how the NHL puts out these rules but really don't want to enforce them on teams especially large market ones. No different than when the Devils got busted for the Kovalchuk contract but decided they would give them a 1st round pick back. Why would they do that? Because the owners really don't want to enforce penalties on themselves. This kind of crap would never fly in the NFL.

But none of it was against the rules. They spent a year figuring out the cap rules and no one thought of this? It literally took me 10 minutes after reading the rules to think “ why wouldn’t teams just add a ton of minimum pay years at the end???”

[Galakanokis]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Just tired of teams that used these contracts to their benefit to win cups like the Kings and Hawks and when the contracts no longer work in their favour they come up with these lame excuses to circumvent the cap. It's kind of CFL level bush league how the NHL puts out these rules but really don't want to enforce them on teams especially large market ones. No different than when the Devils got busted for the Kovalchuk contract but decided they would give them a 1st round pick back. Why would they do that? Because the owners really don't want to enforce penalties on themselves. This kind of crap would never fly in the NFL.

But we wouldn't be complaining if the Flames were the beneficiary of these one of these contracts. And sure Kipper's deal was as extreme as some but it was still an effort to reduce the cap hit without worrying about that last year.

No one every expected Hossa or Luongo etc to play out these contracts. The fact that the league made teams come up with lame excuses is the issue, not the teams. I don't mind the new rules on contract length and structure but the recapture rule was idiotic the moment they thought it up.