• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Jersey Wing

Henrik Zetterberg has Retired

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Yes I know. The thread title says Z has retired. He hasn't. He's going onto LTIR.

Oh gotcha ;)

But he has retired, just not officially I guess. They've announced he'll never play again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Yes I know. The thread title says Z has retired. He hasn't. He's going onto LTIR.

I was poking fun at you. I think everyone here knows what's up, so, to me, "retirement" versus "LTIR" is kinda splitting hairs. *shrug*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dabura said:

I was poking fun at you. I think everyone here knows what's up, so, to me, "retirement" versus "LTIR" is kinda splitting hairs. *shrug*

The language concerns me. "Retired"' screws the team because of the recapture penalty in the new CBA. Being put on LTIR allows the team the cap relief. It may be splitting hairs to us, but I think the league might feel differently. Pretend like you're having a current events discussion with a snowflake...it's kinda like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

The language concerns me. "Retired"' screws the team because of the recapture penalty in the new CBA. Being put on LTIR allows the team the cap relief. It may be splitting hairs to us, but I think the league might feel differently. Pretend like you're having a current events discussion with a snowflake...it's kinda like that.

Wait, I'm confused. What's concerning? Are we concerned about the title of this thread being incorrect/misleading? Because I think that's splitting hairs. Or are we concerned about the league being unhappy with the situation? If we're concerned about the league being unhappy...they can pound sand. They've never tried to bring the hammer down on an LTIRement case before and I can't imagine they'd break tradition for this one.

Or are we concerned that Zetterberg is actually straight-up retiring, rather than going into LTIRement? As far as I'm aware, he's going the LITRement path and no one in the organization or in the media has said otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

The language concerns me. "Retired"' screws the team because of the recapture penalty in the new CBA. Being put on LTIR allows the team the cap relief. It may be splitting hairs to us, but I think the league might feel differently. Pretend like you're having a current events discussion with a snowflake...it's kinda like that.

******* millennial Bettmans!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Dabura said:

Wait, I'm confused. What's concerning? Are we concerned about the title of this thread being incorrect/misleading? Because I think that's splitting hairs. Or are we concerned about the league being unhappy with the situation? If we're concerned about the league being unhappy...they can pound sand. They've never tried to bring the hammer down on an LTIRement case before and I can't imagine they'd break tradition for this one.

Or are we concerned that Zetterberg is actually straight-up retiring, rather than going into LTIRement? As far as I'm aware, he's going the LITRement path and no one in the organization or in the media has said otherwise.

Admittedly I was concerned when I first saw the thread title because I thought that Z was officially retiring, which would have been a huge problem. Upon reading the article, I felt better about it.

What does concern me still is the role the league will take. We joke repeatedly about Franzens LTIRetirement, and Prongers before that, and then Hossas. But it would seem that Z's was the contract that seemed to implement the stricter rules and penalties under the new CBA. It was even admitted publicly that his contract was intentionally structured to circumvent the cap under the old CBA. I just think that Z and the team need to be careful when it comes to the terminologies used when discussing the end of his career. I don't want this situation to become the one where Bettman decides to finally set an example when it comes to skirting the rules.

Just be careful is all I am saying.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weird how the LTIR works. I go to capfriendly.com, use the Armchair GM mode to make a team. I place Z on LTIR 1st, then Franzen, it gives me an available cap of $1.14M, I place Franzen on LTIR 1st, then Z and it gives me an available cap of $5.4M. Obviously Holland will do it in the right order or he won't be able to promote but ONE player from GR.

Then, after I promote Zadina, Ras and Hronek I am left with $2.8M. BUT if I promote them FIRST then LTIR Z and Franzen, in that order, I am left with $3.6M cap......so crazy! If I promote them first and only LTIR Z, I am at $0 cap space, so I don't even have to put Franzen on LTIR to be compliant. Strange rules!

And yes, I am using LTIR PRO Mode.

Edited by LeftWinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Admittedly I was concerned when I first saw the thread title because I thought that Z was officially retiring, which would have been a huge problem. Upon reading the article, I felt better about it.

What does concern me still is the role the league will take. We joke repeatedly about Franzens LTIRetirement, and Prongers before that, and then Hossas. But it would seem that Z's was the contract that seemed to implement the stricter rules and penalties under the new CBA. It was even admitted publicly that his contract was intentionally structured to circumvent the cap under the old CBA. I just think that Z and the team need to be careful when it comes to the terminologies used when discussing the end of his career. I don't want this situation to become the one where Bettman decides to finally set an example when it comes to skirting the rules.

Just be careful is all I am saying.

I think they've given up on actually recapturing any penalty at this point.  I'm sure in the next cba they'll tie up loopholes on trading guys who will never play again... but... until then... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, e_prime said:

I think they've given up on actually recapturing any penalty at this point.  I'm sure in the next cba they'll tie up loopholes on trading guys who will never play again... but... until then... 

You're probably right about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Admittedly I was concerned when I first saw the thread title because I thought that Z was officially retiring, which would have been a huge problem. Upon reading the article, I felt better about it.

What does concern me still is the role the league will take. We joke repeatedly about Franzens LTIRetirement, and Prongers before that, and then Hossas. But it would seem that Z's was the contract that seemed to implement the stricter rules and penalties under the new CBA. It was even admitted publicly that his contract was intentionally structured to circumvent the cap under the old CBA. I just think that Z and the team need to be careful when it comes to the terminologies used when discussing the end of his career. I don't want this situation to become the one where Bettman decides to finally set an example when it comes to skirting the rules.

Just be careful is all I am saying.

Understandable. Personally, I really don't think Bettman pokes this hornets nest at this time, for a number of reasons. I'm guessing LTIRement will be addressed in the upcoming lockout.

I guess I'm just not sure why you seem to think we -- a few dozen fans on a non-corporate forum -- need to be careful about the wording. I'd like to think LGW.com has the power to shape NHL policy, but we ain't exactly 4chan.

Edited by Dabura

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, LeftWinger said:

Weird how the LTIR works. I go to capfriendly.com, use the Armchair GM mode to make a team. I place Z on LTIR 1st, then Franzen, it gives me an available cap of $1.14M, I place Franzen on LTIR 1st, then Z and it gives me an available cap of $5.4M. Obviously Holland will do it in the right order or he won't be able to promote but ONE player from GR.

Then, after I promote Zadina, Ras and Hronek I am left with $2.8M. BUT if I promote them FIRST then LTIR Z and Franzen, in that order, I am left with $3.6M cap......so crazy! If I promote them first and only LTIR Z, I am at $0 cap space, so I don't even have to put Franzen on LTIR to be compliant. Strange rules!

And yes, I am using LTIR PRO Mode.

I was noticing the weirdness as well. I'm not positive, but I don't think it's calculating the 2nd LTIR correctly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Buppy said:

I was noticing the weirdness as well. I'm not positive, but I don't think it's calculating the 2nd LTIR correctly. 

I honestly think the $5.4M is closer to being correct. Before they signed Larkin, that's about what they had by factoring in just Franzen's LTIR. Z and Larkin are pretty much a wash, so it should be somewhere in that range. I think what happens is they only use what they need. Even though Z and Franzen's cap equals almost $10M, if, let's say the three kids salary equals $3M, that's all the LTIR we'll show being used and it'll also still only show $0 in available cap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Dabura said:

Understandable. Personally, I really don't think Bettman pokes this hornets nest at this time, for a number of reasons. I'm guessing LTIRement will be addressed in the upcoming lockout.

I guess I'm just not sure why you seem to think we -- a few dozen fans on a non-corporate forum -- need to be careful about the wording. I'd like to think LGW.com has the power to shape NHL policy, but we ain't exactly 4chan.

I'm referring to Z and the organization when i talk about "language". LGWers can (and do) say whatever they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now