I've got a complaint about the format which Gary Bettman has put forth in terms of injury substitution. What is supposed to happen is that if a player sits (while not on the IR) his salary goes against the cap. Now if a player is put on the IR list he is supposably deactivated for some amount of days, and his salary will be wiped from the books until he is reactivated. (Stop me if I'm wrong) There's two seperate scenarios where this could be a horrible position to put a general manager in. 1) You (GM) have a star player, who is making top dollar. Obviously you are not going to want to deactivate him for a lengthy period of time, so he sits. His salary will still count against the cap but now you're left with a rather large hole, one that will ultimately go unfilled, leaving his team hanging on for playoff contention. 2) You (GM) have a player that is injury plagued. He may bring alot to the table so a trade is made to acquire a player that will fill his hole. You put your player on the IR, make a trade, and fill the need temporarily. Now all of a sudden this player comes back and the general manager is expected to unload his newly acquired player for pennies on the dollar, all because of the cap. Because the original player is injury plagued, the general manager may have to repeat this cycle, and thus sacrifice quality players just to make it through the season. Yea the Flyers are hurting, but this CBA doesn't propose the most sensible solution. Is this cap really fair to the general manager who has his hands tied for 'league stability'? Is it fair to the players who are going to be traded more frequently than ever before? If anyone else has an honest solution to then fill me in, if you want to call me a whiner than go ahead I probably deserve it. Before you do flame me for whining, take a look at what's been going on in Philly. Nearly 300 man games lost to injury in 55 games, we're currently losing seven players a game, and have no logical replacement for our decimated defense. How many other posters wouldn't be on HF trying to think of a more logical solution for another one of Bettman's half baked ideas?