Friedman: Marian Hossa will not play in 2017-18; Career in jeopardy

Thordic

StraightOuttaConklin
Jul 12, 2006
3,013
722
Yes but why cant anyone understand...maybe its worth it to him to struggle through it for 5 million but not for 1 million..

If you had a job that physically hurt you wouldnt it make a difference if you made minimum wage or 35 bucks an hour.

Which is fine - but then he should retire. If he can still physically play, but just doesn't want to endure for $1 million a year, then that's not LTIR.
 

Curufinwe

Registered User
Feb 28, 2013
55,772
42,831
Which is fine - but then he should retire. If he can still physically play, but just doesn't want to endure for $1 million a year, then that's not LTIR.

Thanks for the expert opinion on pain and symptom management, Doc. :rolleyes:
 

Uncle Scrooge

Hockey Bettor
Nov 14, 2011
13,546
8,133
Helsinki
Which is fine - but then he should retire. If he can still physically play, but just doesn't want to endure for $1 million a year, then that's not LTIR.

Exactly.

LTIR should be for players who still want to play but physically can't. Or got hurt so bad playing the game that it affects their every day life, at which point you can't blame them for collecting paychecks. That's what it's there for. Instead it's become this tool to avoid cap issues.

Even if this condition he has is true, he allegedly just played a full season with it. Full season! And then at the end of it he says he enjoyed playing and wants to come back. IF he and the Hawks management truly wanted to find a working solution, they could always try different things, equipment, medication, resting him between games. Whatever it is.

Instead they're saying "it's not worth it anymore". That's cool. Then retire. Oh wait. Cap penalties. LTIR please!

It's so plain obvious, this whole thing is a farce. Props for them trying it, and probably succeeding. Im just sad Hossa didn't get the proper farewell season he deserved.
 

Curufinwe

Registered User
Feb 28, 2013
55,772
42,831
People who have no idea what pain or side effects Hossa would have to "endure" to play this season are in no position to tell him what he should do.
 

Uncle Scrooge

Hockey Bettor
Nov 14, 2011
13,546
8,133
Helsinki
People who have no idea what pain or side effects Hossa would have to "endure" to play this season are in no position to tell him what he should do.

Nobody is telling Hossa what he should do. There's not a single person here who has a problem with Hossa not playing next season.

Make the Hawks suffer their cap penalties and everybody (except Chicago) will be happy.

FWIW: I don't necessarily agree with the cap penalties. Whatever they did with Hossa's contract was allowed at the time. However, if the league hands out a penalty and then we never see them enforced, credibility of the NHL takes a hit each time it happens and ultimately it won't be good for the league. Stuff like this has to stop at some point so might as well start now.

What happens when Zetterberg wants to retire? Luongo? What will we see then?
 
Last edited:

Starat327

Top .01% OnlyHands
Sponsor
May 8, 2011
37,651
74,725
Philadelphia, Pa
People who have no idea what pain or side effects Hossa would have to "endure" to play this season are in no position to tell him what he should do.

I don't think anyone is saying Hossa should or shouldnt do something. You may be reading a little too literally.

LTIR was created for injuries which prohibit players from physically playing the game of hockey.

In the scenario being discussed, Hossa is making the determination that playing hockey for $1m a year is not worth it (i dont know if thats his thought process or not, no one does).

If that is the case, and he physically can play (as evidenced by his ability to play last season), then he should not be LTIR eligible. What he does from there is his business, but if he can physically play the game, but doesnt want to because its not 'worth' it to him, LTIR should not be an option.

That is all anyone is saying. No one logical is claiming to understand his pain/ailments/injury/whatever you want to call it.
 

CPHawksFan

That's Hockey Baby!!
Jun 17, 2011
3,947
96
Crown Point, IN
Nobody is telling Hossa what he should do. There's not a single person here who has a problem with Hossa not playing next season.

Make the Hawks suffer their cap penalties and everybody (except Chicago) will be happy.

FWIW: I don't necessarily agree with the cap penalties. Whatever they did with Hossa's contract was allowed at the time. However, if the league hands out a penalty and then we never see them enforced, credibility of the NHL takes a hit each time it happens and ultimately it won't be good for the league. Stuff like this has to stop at some point so might as well start now.

What happens when Zetterberg wants to retire? Luongo? What will we see then?

The league lost credibility when they allowed these kinds of contracts to be signed in the first place, and then realized they screwed up and came up with the whole cap recapture penalty after the fact.
 

Starat327

Top .01% OnlyHands
Sponsor
May 8, 2011
37,651
74,725
Philadelphia, Pa
The league lost credibility when they allowed these kinds of contracts to be signed in the first place, and then realized they screwed up and came up with the whole cap recapture penalty after the fact.

...and then gave teams the opportunity to get out of them to avoid any chance they'd be faced with the issue.
 

ChiHawks10

Registered User
Jul 7, 2009
28,101
21,428
Chicago 'Burbs
...and then gave teams the opportunity to get out of them to avoid any chance they'd be faced with the issue.

Yeah, but that's a moot point. Because the NHL had to compensate for coming up with the cap recapture penalty out of the blue after the deals were already signed and approved by the league. They're essentially giving teams a free pass because of their own ridiculous decision to penalize teams after the fact, despite their own league/people approving the deals prior.
 

CloutierForVezina

Registered User
May 13, 2009
5,353
1,246
Edmonton, Alberta
The real farce is the cap recapture applying to deals that were done before the rule existed. The CBA outlines everything about how contracts will work. The Hawks, and other teams signed contracts that worked under those rules and that were approved by the NHL. Then the NHL, after the fact, changes the rules to apply to deals already signed. It's a complete joke.

Trust me, I don't disagree with you.

I've been very vocally against retroactively punishing teams for contracts with rules brought in long after the ink was dry, and I've specifically been very against the stupid ass formula they use which screws everything up after a player has been traded.

With that said, the NHL has stubbornly gone forward with the cap recapture penalty and trying to circumvent is not the answer IMO.

I don't have all the details and will gladly change my tune if something big is revealed, but this whole situation looks and smells fishy. The timing is just too good for this to suddenly be an issue on a 20+ year career once his salary drops to $1M and his team badly needs LTIR space.
 

Starat327

Top .01% OnlyHands
Sponsor
May 8, 2011
37,651
74,725
Philadelphia, Pa
Yeah, but that's a moot point. Because the NHL had to compensate for coming up with the cap recapture penalty out of the blue after the deals were already signed and approved by the league. They're essentially giving teams a free pass because of their own ridiculous decision to penalize teams after the fact, despite their own league/people approving the deals prior.

and the hawks decided that using his long term, 'fake' cap hit contract was in their best interest, so they didn't use it on him.

Now, the situation exists where you may have to face those penalties. You don't get to have it both ways. You were given an out and chose not to use it (I wouldnt have either. Ill take 3 cups and deal with the consequences later as well).
 

ChiHawks10

Registered User
Jul 7, 2009
28,101
21,428
Chicago 'Burbs
Trust me, I don't disagree with you.

I've been very vocally against retroactively punishing teams for contracts with rules brought in long after the ink was dry, and I've specifically been very against the stupid ass formula they use which screws everything up after a player has been traded.

With that said, the NHL has stubbornly gone forward with the cap recapture penalty and trying to circumvent is not the answer IMO.

I don't have all the details and will gladly change my tune if something big is revealed, but this whole situation looks and smells fishy. The timing is just too good for this to suddenly be an issue on a 20+ year career once his salary drops to $1M and his team badly needs LTIR space.

I don't think anyone denies that the timing is fishy, including Hawks fans. But, at the same time... things get progressively worse over time, do they not? Particularly with some kind of degenerative disorder.

Cancer, for example? If not caught in time, spreads, and gets progressively worse. MS is another. Alzheimer's. The lists go on and on with things that progressively get worse until they're completely unmanageable. Including things that develop at any point in time in your life.

Is it so hard to think that it's just coincidence that it has gotten progressively worse/detrimental to his health and life moving forward, that he decided now was the time? I mean, from everything I've read on it... it's been a long-documented issue by the Hawks organization, with a long history of medical information regarding it, going so far as to release that he has blood tests done every few weeks because of it.

I think the length the Hawks org has gone to in order to give as much information as possible to the public is actually them doing the NHL a solid, and shows that they're trying to be very transparent about it...
 

Uncle Scrooge

Hockey Bettor
Nov 14, 2011
13,546
8,133
Helsinki
and the hawks decided that using his long term, 'fake' cap hit contract was in their best interest, so they didn't use it on him.

Now, the situation exists where you may have to face those penalties. You don't get to have it both ways. You were given an out and chose not to use it (I wouldnt have either. Ill take 3 cups and deal with the consequences later as well).

Can't blame them for trying, i'd do the same thing.

If the NHL allows it, it's their fault.
 

ChiHawks10

Registered User
Jul 7, 2009
28,101
21,428
Chicago 'Burbs
and the hawks decided that using his long term, 'fake' cap hit contract was in their best interest, so they didn't use it on him.

Now, the situation exists where you may have to face those penalties. You don't get to have it both ways. You were given an out and chose not to use it (I wouldnt have either. Ill take 3 cups and deal with the consequences later as well).

I think you're misunderstanding. The LTIR designation given to numerous players on these types of contracts IS the free pass I'm talking about.
 

Starat327

Top .01% OnlyHands
Sponsor
May 8, 2011
37,651
74,725
Philadelphia, Pa
Can't blame them for trying, i'd do the same thing.

If the NHL allows it, it's their fault.

Oh, i dont blame them for trying. Gotta do whats best for you.

I'm just saying that if what i discussed is true, and they end up getting the penalty, you can't claim its bs. The rule itself may be BS - and i agree it is, the way its structured currently - but doesnt change that its the rule.
 

ChiHawks10

Registered User
Jul 7, 2009
28,101
21,428
Chicago 'Burbs
Gotcha. If Hossa can not physically play hockey because of this, LTIR is a perfectly acceptable alternative, I agree.

That's all I'm saying. :thumbu:

I honestly wouldn't want the Hawks to fleece the NHL, and would be pissed at it too. But if he can't physically play, and I truly believe he can't... and they still try to screw over the Hawks... there's going to be an internal war between the NHL and NHLPA the likes of which we haven't seen before.

In the meantime, I welcome the extra cap money, and possibility of making moves. At the same time... Hossa is one of my favorite players of all time, and my favorite Hawk through this era. I'm gonna miss him playing badly, and the Hawks are going to miss him, badly. Such an absolute beast on the ice. I've never seen anyone do some of the things he does. This video just got shared on the Hawks board. So good at so many things...

 
Last edited:

Jozay

Registered User
Jul 9, 2012
14,647
10,587
Toronto
if the NHL has a problem, then they can investigate it.

Hawks are doing what they have to do to keep the team competitive, cant blame them.
 

Off Sides

Registered User
Sep 8, 2008
9,755
5,585
I don't think anyone denies that the timing is fishy, including Hawks fans. But, at the same time... things get progressively worse over time, do they not? Particularly with some kind of degenerative disorder.

Cancer, for example? If not caught in time, spreads, and gets progressively worse. MS is another. Alzheimer's. The lists go on and on with things that progressively get worse until they're completely unmanageable.

Is it so hard to think that it's just coincidence that it has gotten progressively worse/detrimental to his health and life moving forward, that he decided now was the time? I mean, from everything I've read on it... it's been a long-documented issue by the Hawks organization, with a long history of medical information regarding it, going so far as to release that he has blood tests done every few weeks because of it.

Which brings up the scenario where any player with any type of degenerative injury would be LTIR eligible.

Does that include back spasms? Any slightly misaligned disk could get worse by playing professional hockey? Shoulder or Knee injuries? Etc Do those player take medication for whatever ails them which may not really be good for them to be on constantly?

So if the NHL allows this with Hossa, why would any team not use this line of reasoning to just put pretty much any player onto LTIR once they wanted to?

I'm not saying the Hawks, Hossa or anyone is doing anything nefarious, I just don't know where this slippery slope ends. And I'm not being altruistic or anything, I'd like to know why the Rangers did not go this route with Girardi instead of a buyout, he must have a medical record about as thick as war and peace.
 

ChiHawks10

Registered User
Jul 7, 2009
28,101
21,428
Chicago 'Burbs
Which brings up the scenario where any player with any type of degenerative injury would be LTIR eligible.

Does that include back spasms? Any slightly misaligned disk could get worse by playing professional hockey? Shoulder or Knee injuries? Etc Do those player take medication for whatever ails them which may not really be good for them to be on constantly?

So if the NHL allows this with Hossa, why would any team not use this line of reasoning to just put pretty much any player onto LTIR once they wanted to?

I'm not saying the Hawks, Hossa or anyone is doing anything nefarious, I just don't know where this slippery slope ends. And I'm not being altruistic or anything, I'd like to know why the Rangers did not go this route with Girardi instead of a buyout, he must have a medical record about as thick as war and peace.

If a player is under contract, and has an injury that prevents them from playing the game, and fulfilling that contract, then yes, they can go on LTIR if the injury will keep them off the ice 24 days, or 10 games. This applies to all players, all teams, and all contracts in the NHL. It's not a matter of wanting to do it. It's a matter of the player not physically being ABLE to do it.

Take... Pronger for instance. Blurred vision/loss of vision. Does he want to play? Sure. Can he? No. He'd get destroyed/hurt worse.

Take Hossa. Do you think he wants to hang em up when he had a 26 goal season at 38 years old? And was probably the 2nd or 3rd best player on the Hawks all season? Very doubtful. He's in the kind of physical shape and has the fitness level to play well into his 40's, very similar to Jagr. But if he's physically unable to perform his duties under his contract, he's entitled to the LTIR designation. Which allows him to continue to collect his pay from his contract for his livelihood. It's the way things work. No different than you getting hurt at work and collecting short or long-term disability benefits, if part of your benefits package.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad