Prospect Info: Phantoms (AHL), Reading Royals (ECHL), NCAA, Jrs., Int'l, etc. [Mid-April Edition]

[tnfrs]

You don't play hardball with a player you think may be a cornerstone of your team for 10 years and sour relations before he even plays for you.
Burning one year of the ELC isn't a big deal, if he's the player you hope he'll be, you'll be signing him to a big long-term deal in a few seasons in any case.

that makes sense ya but lets say we didnt have room on the roster, we wouldnt lose him to the ether if we convinced him to sign his elc to start the next season. Im just saying it might not be the worst idea if Danny can pull it off

 

[CutOnDime97]

 

[TheKingPin]

im just wondering if theres a way danny can bring him up without burning a year, it would be good asset management to explore every option it was more thinking out loud than me saying thats what will happen

But why would Cutter want to do that at all given where he was drafted and preformed since? He is under our control so to speak, but the guy already hold the effective control, sitting out of development camp.

He seems to score the same way. He will be a 30+ goal scorer which is great - but we still need a 1C and a 2C up front

 

[tnfrs]

But why would Cutter want to do that at all given where he was drafted and preformed since? He is under our control so to speak, but the guy already hold the effective control, sitting out of development camp.

He seems to score the same way. He will be a 30+ goal scorer which is great - but we still need a 1C and a 2C up front

if cutter signs and burns a year he gets paid for whatever games he plays so i get theres the immediate benefit but then hes also getting his next contract based on only 2 years of performance instead of 3, so theres some inherent risk to burning a year. and its not unusual for highly drafted players to not burn a year coming from ncaa, JVR didnt burn a year for example, it might be happening more now or we hear about it more now because theres more college guys coming these days but not every team is in a rush to get them into their lineups, and we shouldnt be either

 

[FLYguy3911]

Insert George Costanza meme.

 

[tnfrs]

nice entry by hagens

 

[mr4tno]

Because it's SOP for top prospects, they're not going to risk injury without a corresponding benefit.
Lesser talents are happy for the opportunity to showcase their talents, top prospects know they have a starting job waiting for them.

Agreed. The Flyers are going to eat a year no doubt. Christ, they could not even get him to come to devlopment camp (I know he had "reasons"). Why would he do them a favor. Let's face it, the Flyers are not an organization that players are going to do favors for. They are no longer a premier organization......

 

[Maurice of Orange]

Missed this one from yesterday, Phantoms adding ECHL defensemen.

 

[deadhead]

Missed this one from yesterday, Phantoms adding ECHL defensemen.

Who will probably end up in the ECHL as potential injury callups.

 

[PDX Flyer]

Insert George Costanza meme.

It’s not a lie if you believe it

 

[Mickey the mouse]

that makes sense ya but lets say we didnt have room on the roster, we wouldnt lose him to the ether if we convinced him to sign his elc to start the next season. Im just saying it might not be the worst idea if Danny can pull it off

THis will NEVER HAPPEN

When his NCAA season is over he will join the Flyers or go back to College

ZERO chance he signs ATO and starts his elc following year.

 

[Mickey the mouse]

if cutter signs and burns a year he gets paid for whatever games he plays so i get theres the immediate benefit but then hes also getting his next contract based on only 2 years of performance instead of 3, so theres some inherent risk to burning a year. and its not unusual for highly drafted players to not burn a year coming from ncaa, JVR didnt burn a year for example, it might be happening more now or we hear about it more now because theres more college guys coming these days but not every team is in a rush to get them into their lineups, and we shouldnt be either

Not true

There are loopholes which I actually found out about from an NHL Asst GM this past March at NCAA Tournament that a team can pay a player coming in on elc more than 1 or 2 games salary

I have no idea how it works but it's done

 

[tnfrs]

Not true

There are loopholes which I actually found out about from an NHL Asst GM this past March at NCAA Tournament that a team can pay a player coming in on elc more than 1 or 2 games salary

I have no idea how it works but it's done

signing bonuses probably, its not a loophole. you cant pay a player more than whats in the contract theyve signed. you can sign them to an ATO though, since its an AHL contract theres no salary cap on the per diem you give them, and then they sign their ELC to start the next year. But thats apparently bad juju to the GMs here who wanna do everything the same as the last guy and burn years away. but i bet you thats what he was trying to explain to you.

 

[Mickey the mouse]

signing bonuses probably, its not a loophole. you cant pay a player more than whats in the contract theyve signed. you can sign them to an ATO though, since its an AHL contract theres no salary cap on the per diem you give them, and then they sign their ELC to start the next year. But thats apparently bad juju to the GMs here who wanna do everything the same as the last guy and burn years away. but i bet you thats what he was trying to explain to you.

Wrong

ELC signing bonus is capped at 95k per CBA

Maybe some type of performance bonus .... Game played , TOI, ????/

I don't have the answer but I know it happens

 

[tnfrs]

Wrong

ELC signing bonus is capped at 95k per CBA

Maybe some type of performance bonus .... Game played , TOI, ????/

I don't have the answer but I know it happens

im sure youll figure it out

 

[deadhead]

Flyers don't have cash flow issues, they don't have cap issues the next few years, it would be stupid to quibble over an ELC year with a key prospect - the agent would just be more intransigent in the future, because a hostile relationship had been established.

 

[Curufinwe]

Please stop obsessing over this thing that is never going to happen with a top prospect like Gauthier. No one was worried here when York burned the first year of his ELC. And do you think Wild fans are mad Boldy burned his first year without playing an NHL game?

Minnesota Wild Sign Matt Boldy to ELC, Burn First Year - The Hockey Writers NHL News Latest News, Analysis & More

The Minnesota Wild have signed Matt Boldy to an ELC contract and will burn the first year of his deal as a result.

thehockeywriters.com

 

[tnfrs]

Please stop obsessing over this thing that is never going to happen with a top prospect like Gauthier. No one was worried here when York burned the first year of his ELC. And do you think Wild fans are mad Boldy burned his first year without playing an NHL game?

Minnesota Wild Sign Matt Boldy to ELC, Burn First Year - The Hockey Writers NHL News Latest News, Analysis & More

The Minnesota Wild have signed Matt Boldy to an ELC contract and will burn the first year of his deal as a result.

thehockeywriters.com

i was just wondering what the options were, i know its happened and happens with prospects it doesnt happen with every college age prospect, farabee didnt burn a year, jvr didnt a burn a year, so its not like its a for sure thing. now i know more about ATOs than I did yesterday tho so I consider that a huge victory

 

[deadhead]

i was just wondering what the options were, i know its happened and happens with prospects it doesnt happen with every college age prospect, farabee didnt burn a year, jvr didnt a burn a year, so its not like its a for sure thing. now i know more about ATOs than I did yesterday tho so I consider that a huge victory

Farabee started in the NHL at 19.

 

[tnfrs]

Farabee started in the NHL at 19.

sure but he could have signed after his college season ended no?

 

[mr4tno]

Not true

There are loopholes which I actually found out about from an NHL Asst GM this past March at NCAA Tournament that a team can pay a player coming in on elc more than 1 or 2 games salary

I have no idea how it works but it's done

It is only a loophole if the player also agrees to it. Do you think his agent is going around saying "please find a way for Cutter to play and not burn a year, pretty please"

 

[FromOyVey2Matvei]

that makes sense ya but lets say we didnt have room on the roster, we wouldnt lose him to the ether if we convinced him to sign his elc to start the next season. Im just saying it might not be the worst idea if Danny can pull it off

Signing a player to an ELC doesn't make him count against your active roster. He needs to be active to do that. A player on an ELC could be in the AHL. He's still on an ELC. Roster space won't be an issue.

It wouldn't be the worst idea if Danny could convince Morgan Frost to sign to a 7 year deal for league minimum salary either... but that has about as much of a chance of happening as Danny has of convincing Cutter that waiting to sign his ELC so that he has to wait 3 years instead of 2 to get his 2nd deal is "in his best interest".

You don't mess with players' money. Especially when you believe a player might be a franchise cornerstone. If you do right by a player early on when their salary cap hit is negligible, that's how you get them to show some loyalty to your organization and maybe give you a discount down the line when you're actually competing for something and every cap dollar matters.

 

[tnfrs]

Signing a player to an ELC doesn't make him count against your active roster. He needs to be active to do that. A player on an ELC could be in the AHL. He's still on an ELC. Roster space won't be an issue.

It wouldn't be the worst idea if Danny could convince Morgan Frost to sign to a 7 year deal for league minimum salary either... but that has about as much of a chance of happening as Danny has of convincing Cutter that waiting to sign his ELC so that he has to wait 3 years instead of 2 to get his 2nd deal is "in his best interest".

You don't mess with players' money. Especially when you believe a player might be a franchise cornerstone. If you do right by a player early on when their salary cap hit is negligible, that's how you get them to show some loyalty to your organization and maybe give you a discount down the line when you're actually competing for something and every cap dollar matters.

morgan frost would have easier time making a deal now if he had 3 full years of NHL experience to support his case for more $$$, so it might not be in Cutter's best interest to only have 2 years of experience playing for a rebuilding team when he signs his 2nd contract, i think people might be getting overly excited about seeing him play in the show

 

[FromOyVey2Matvei]

morgan frost would have easier time making a deal now if he had 3 full years of NHL experience to support his case for more $$$, so it might not be in Cutter's best interest to only have 2 years of experience playing for a rebuilding team when he signs his 2nd contract, i think people might be getting overly excited about seeing him play in the show

Listen, I get it.... admitting you're wrong is tough but now you're just saying stupid stuff for the sake of arguing. There is no way that Frost would be better off being under an ELC for another year, because:
A. He'd be making less money this year than he will actually make once the deal is agreed upon
B. He would still be an RFA in the exact same situation when that 3rd year expired.

If Frost wants to be on himself, he can just say "I'm only accepting a bridge deal". He'll make more money on his bridge deal than he would've on the 3rd year of his ELC and he's still in line for a long term deal when the bridge expires.

The only situation where a player is better off not burning a year off his ELC is if he's a total bust and he won't get a 2nd contract.

 

[tnfrs]

Listen, I get it.... admitting you're wrong is tough but now you're just saying stupid stuff for the sake of arguing. There is no way that Frost would be better off being under an ELC for another year, because:
A. He'd be making less money this year than he will actually make once the deal is agreed upon
B. He would still be an RFA in the exact same situation when that 3rd year expired.

If Frost wants to be on himself, he can just say "I'm only accepting a bridge deal". He'll make more money on his bridge deal than he would've on the 3rd year of his ELC and he's still in line for a long term deal when the bridge expires.

The only situation where a player is better off not burning a year off his ELC is if he's a total bust and he won't get a 2nd contract.

i dont think you do get it. and now youre just being combative for no reason. you chose to reply to me, and if you disagree with my reply thats fine you can state your case about morgan frost and be on your way instead youre just rude. players burning a year is far less common than playing out the 3 years.

and i dont care about frost, you brought him up i was just using your example it wasnt an invitation to have another cyclical argument. i understand your position on cutter gauthier now, thanks