Kipper won't agree to be traded

[rubecube]

For a city that loves itself some right-wing, free-market economics, it's kind of ironic to see all the butthurt over someone acting out of self-interest and individualism.

[undercoverbrother]

I am not a fan of his decision or position. There are plenty of lesser paid people/jobs that do this all the time.

I will say good for him for having the balls to say it. While I don't agree with it, at least the team knows where he/they stand.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Harvey's Tongue

Did you miss the part of the new CBA that punishes teams for backdiving contracts that had been signed under the previous CBA?

In addition to eliminating future back diving contracts, Gary wants to send GMs a message: don't try to circumvent the cap owners fought so hard for.

Originally Posted by kyuss275

There is no chance the flames will lose a pick if Kipper retires early. The NHL is not going to want to open that "can of worms". There are a lot of other contracts like Kippers out there and they are not going to want to ding all the teams for it. It will make the remaining front loaded contracts even harder to move then they are now. NHL and NHLPA do not need to go to war over this.

There is no can of worms to open.

The new CBA includes a clause to recapture salary cap. It applies to existing contracts of at least 7 years. Kipper's contract is only 6 years, therefore, the NHL cannot give any punishment if Kipper retires.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

He is honoring it, the contract has a provision allowing him to retire.

Aren't we talking two different things. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the retirement clause not affective until the last year of his contract?

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by fredr123

Oh, no doubt they will seize the opportunity to ponder and allege. I doubt they have the stones to go to Kipper or Feaster or King and get quotes from these guys point blank.

If he retires this off season, at the final press conference, Jermaine Franklin will ask a question like this "Miikka, did you know that when you signed this contract that it would be your last and that you would retire a year early?"

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Aren't we talking two different things. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the retirement clause not affective until the last year of his contract?

Any player can retire at any time, they won't get paid and they may have to give back their signing bonuses, but contracts apply to players that want to continue to be hockey players, once you decide not to play anymore, as we don't have indentured servitude, you're free to become a carpenter or move back to Finland.

[kyuss275]

Still amazed the flames organization has not said anything on this matter. Would have thought they would put out the fire whether it was true or not.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

Still amazed the flames organization has not said anything on this matter. Would have thought they would put out the fire whether it was true or not.

I think they are a little busy with the Iginla trade stuff.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

Still amazed the flames organization has not said anything on this matter. Would have thought they would put out the fire whether it was true or not.

Feaster and company are better served to just keep their head down and let the coming days speak for itself.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

Still amazed the flames organization has not said anything on this matter. Would have thought they would put out the fire whether it was true or not.

There is nothing the Flames could say that wouldn't be treated as a confirmation by the media, so why bother?

[868904]

That Kipper cap circumvention theory sounds about as easy to prove as Sather's Erixon tampering theory.

Nothing will come of it.

[browna]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

Still amazed the flames organization has not said anything on this matter. Would have thought they would put out the fire whether it was true or not.

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

I think they are a little busy with the Iginla trade stuff.

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Feaster and company are better served to just keep their head down and let the coming days speak for itself.

Also, you start replying to every 3rd hand rumor that may be right, partially right, or flat out wrong, you're going to get every "insider" bouncing rumors out there to look for a response from the Flames...and then no response means something more because it was never responded to.

Slippery slope.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Any player can retire at any time, they won't get paid and they may have to give back their signing bonuses, but contracts apply to players that want to continue to be hockey players, once you decide not to play anymore, as we don't have indentured servitude, you're free to become a carpenter or move back to Finland.

Yes I know that, thank you.

I was not clear. I did read his "declaration" as "you trade me I retire". I read it as you trade me I don't go and force your hand to suspend me (if the CBA allows, I don't know). I must viewing it differently, I have no issue with him retiring in his final year, if that is how the contract reads.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by JerzeeGirl

Why is this child any different than his first child?

Because Aaro was born in the summer and didn't arrive on the eve of his likely retirement? He had more incentive to keep playing then he has now. Given his career earnings it's entirely possible that he wants

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by 868904

That Kipper cap circumvention theory sounds about as easy to prove as Sather's Erixon tampering theory.

Nothing will come of it.

You just had a significant member of the organization at the time (Keenen) make a statement on the matter. It is easily enough to launch an investigation.

Heck, Gary could probably just call Darryl Sutter and ask him point blank. Knowing Darryl's current 'love' for the Flames org, he just might say something.

Not saying it will happen, but I don't think it can be brushed off with the ease that some are suggesting.

[Brannigans Law]

Kipper can retire all he likes but if he's traded and refuses to report he's screwing the Flames.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

I think they are a little busy with the Iginla trade stuff.

Really? How long would it take for Ken King or Feaster to send out an e-mail to media that says that it was not true?

[North East Goon]

We are basically the 2008 version of the Toronto Maple Leafs. They are just turning the corner now.

[Flame On]

It's pretty funny that people are arguing that it would be ok to move Kipper; from the Flames organization point of view, if he had a no trade clause. That somehow the team wouldn't have to honor that.
But he's not allowed to do what suits him at a moment in time.

And what's more, he can't stop the team. If they trade him, he retires and hands back 1.5 in cap space to the flames as an added bonus.

[Ped]

Originally Posted by Harvey's Tongue

Did you miss the part of the new CBA that punishes teams for backdiving contracts that had been signed under the previous CBA?

In addition to eliminating future back diving contracts, Gary wants to send GMs a message: don't try to circumvent the cap owners fought so hard for.

Except that Kipper's contract was signed under the old CBA and will not be used as a message about circumventing this one.

Which it doesn't anyway.