Joffery Lupul denies failing Physical. Says the Leafs "cheat, and everyone lets them"

[Legion34]

I don't really see how Lupul failing a medical could constitute malpractice or whatever. Whenever the guy plays NHL hockey his body reacts by getting hurt for long periods of time. Seems like a pretty simple conclusion you could come to as a doctor to say he's not fit to play.

And what is "fit to play". Anyone who can hold a stick and doesn't have an immediate life threatening condition?

Is there a specific rule or standard? tons of players still want to play (doan) etc but just don't get contracts ..... so they leave. They can still play but not well enough.

Are the leafs expected to prop lupul on the bench weekend at bernies style for the year?

 

[dubey]

And what is "fit to play". Anyone who can hold a stick and doesn't have an immediate life threatening condition?

Is there a specific rule or standard? tons of players still want to play (doan) etc but just don't get contracts ..... so they leave. They can still play but not well enough.

Are the leafs expected to prop lupul on the bench weekend at bernies style for the year?

I guess whatever the guys that spent 8 years in med school say it is

 

[Squiffy]

Well this is it right? Can Lupul play hockey?

Probably.

Can a doctor legitimately stand up and say, "This man has a historical and ongoing medical condition that he risks aggravating in potentially permanently life altering fashion should the wrong thing happen while playing, and as an organization we are not prepared to allow him to take that risk.".

Probably.

Which one is right? Both, probably.

Does the second scenario constitute a snubbing of the rules, a "cap circumvention as I keep reading?

No, definitely not, it's a legit defendable position.

If another team wants to assume that hypothetical risk than that's up to them. It's not black and white, hurt or not hurt. It's grey and no amount of legislative CBA'ing can change that, they've done what they can. There are mechanisms in place. The only way to go much further is to hold team caps responsible for injuries, and that's just unreasonable. It is what it is, every league, whatever rules, eventually rich teams have some kind of edge. You do your best to minimize it.

Done and done

 

[Leafblooded]

Well this is it right? Can Lupul play hockey?

Probably.

Can a doctor legitimately stand up and say, "This man has a historical and ongoing medical condition that he risks aggravating in potentially permanently life altering fashion should the wrong thing happen while playing, and as an organization we are not prepared to allow him to take that risk.".

Probably.

Which one is right? Both, probably.

Does the second scenario constitute a snubbing of the rules, a "cap circumvention as I keep reading?

No, definitely not, it's a legit defendable position.

If another team wants to assume that hypothetical risk than that's up to them. It's not black and white, hurt or not hurt. It's grey and no amount of legislative CBA'ing can change that, they've done what they can. There are mechanisms in place. The only way to go much further is to hold team caps responsible for injuries, and that's just unreasonable. It is what it is, every league, whatever rules, eventually rich teams have some kind of edge. You do your best to minimize it.

Done and done

This and this. Sucks for Loops though, he had some good times.

 

[BoredBrandonPridham]

If teams were restricted to paying 50% of their franchises HRR it would ensure cost certainty.

So the league would have a cap of 50% of revenue, and each team would be able to pay their own payroll.

Might even encourage proper accounting for HRR if you knew you weren't getting handouts from the rich.

Then small market teams can't attract marquee players. They have cost certainty but the odds are stacked significantly against them, no?

 

[BoredBrandonPridham]

I understand what you're saying, but you make it sound like the cap as structured is preventing cap circumvention. That's not true. The Leafs (and other teams) are actively circumventing the cap with players like Lupul, Horton (who they took on to get rid of Clarkson) and Robidas buried on injured reserve.

The 50/50 deal and the escrow payments already ensure cost certainty. Allowing the Leafs to buy out Lupul's deal with no cap penalty allows Lupul to try and resume his career and the Leafs have more money to spend on other players (which they're doing anyway). It doesn't have any impact on the 50/50 split, except to raise the amount the players are getting (which the owners claw back through the escrow). If the Leafs were able to buy out Lupul with no cap penalty, they money remains in the system and at the end of the year if it turns out the players' percentage exceeded 50%, it would be clawed back from all the players through the escrow.

And your Phaneuf scenario is happening to some degree, although not as dramatically as a first rounder. There have been examples of teams taking on cap ballast salary in exchange for a draft pick.

And I believe the most recent CBA prevents teams from front-loading contracts to spread out the cap hit. I'm not familiar with the percentages, but the annual value of the deal has to remain within a certain percentage over the lifetime of the contract.

I really don't see any downside to making the change.

The 50/50 split is guaranteed through escrow.
Players get the money they are owed.
Teams can rid themselves of players and contracts they don't want.
Players like Lupul can try and revive their career elsewhere.

I never said it was a perfect system -- that doesn't exist. But allowing penalty-free buyouts makes it significantly worse, as I showed in the examples.

Aside from that, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[BoredBrandonPridham]

It's really simple: allowing buyouts without cap hits results in the other players losing a larger % of their paychecks to escrow.

A good illustration is 2014-15 when nearly $38m was spent on cap-free compliance buyouts. With the 50/50 HRR split that season it meant that players who would have lost 11% of their paychecks to escrow instead lost 13% of those paychecks.

If the buyout salary was removed from the "cap pool" though and just a direct "penalty" on the team, then I don't think it would affect escrow would it? That money wouldn't be weighted on the 50% of player's share (there's a good chance I'm way out of my depth here...)

Besides, escrow is really just to ensure players don't spend money that isn't theirs. A larger escrow payment isn't necessarily a player making less money at the end of the year/season.

 

[4thline]

Well this is it right? Can Lupul play hockey?

Probably.

Can a doctor legitimately stand up and say, "This man has a historical and ongoing medical condition that he risks aggravating in potentially permanently life altering fashion should the wrong thing happen while playing, and as an organization we are not prepared to allow him to take that risk.".

Probably.

Which one is right? Both, probably.

Does the second scenario constitute a snubbing of the rules, a "cap circumvention as I keep reading?

No, definitely not, it's a legit defendable position.

If another team wants to assume that hypothetical risk than that's up to them. It's not black and white, hurt or not hurt. It's grey and no amount of legislative CBA'ing can change that, they've done what they can. There are mechanisms in place. The only way to go much further is to hold team caps responsible for injuries, and that's just unreasonable. It is what it is, every league, whatever rules, eventually rich teams have some kind of edge. You do your best to minimize it.

Done and done

Well said. Lupul is just bitter that the team doesn't judge him to be worth the hassle of special considerations and him "playing through it"

 

[Stephen]

Cap loopholes work in a number of ways. Big market teams like the Leafs try to underwrite their bad contracts with injured reserve clauses and small market teams like the Coyotes pretend to spend to the cap by loading up on insured and injured/retired veteran contracts so they don't have to spend the same operating budget as required.

 

[Legion34]

I guess whatever the guys that spent 8 years in med school say it is

Except it's obviously not. Or else he wouldn't be able to grieve it

 

[HoweHullOrr]

Are you really suggesting that a MD compromise his/her professional ethics for money?

Yes sadly it happens. In my profession (engineering) it happens. Can't tell if your post was serious though.

 

[thewave]

Routinely injured in my eyes means the team is acting in the best interest of his long term health. This is the kind of guy that would say the league is responsible for his health issues 20 years from now because they knew he had problems and kept pushing him to play.

 

[Longshot]

It's really simple: allowing buyouts without cap hits results in the other players losing a larger % of their paychecks to escrow.

A good illustration is 2014-15 when nearly $38m was spent on cap-free compliance buyouts. With the 50/50 HRR split that season it meant that players who would have lost 11% of their paychecks to escrow instead lost 13% of those paychecks.

Definitely true. And that would be a downside for the players.

But the upside would be more "current year" spending and it would open up cap space to spend on players that might not be able to get a job in the free agent market. For example, Roman Polak would likely have a contract with the Leafs right now if they didn't have Horton and Lupul taking up a bunch of space. And that's just a Leafs example. Every year there are multiple veteran players who can't get deals because teams don't have the space to commit.

One way to mitigate the financial issue would be to limit the players released in this fashion to a single year deal with a new team at the minimum.

My guess is it's not a big enough issue for the owners and PA to bargain over in the future. I mean, how many Lupul/Horton type situations are out there in the league right now?

 

[HoweHullOrr]

Routinely injured in my eyes means the team is acting in the best interest of his long term health. This is the kind of guy that would say the league is responsible for his health issues 20 years from now because they knew he had problems and kept pushing him to play.

How does anyone here know what Cowen might do in the future? Do we go to such lengths because the morality issue is bothersome for us?

 

[WTFMAN99]

There was something that came out last night around the time of the game that said the team had dirt on Lupul or something. Basically claiming the team was effectively blackmailing Lupul.

I can only imagine the consequences for the journalist who claimed that. It's not above Lou to just restrict the person's access to the team. The team definitely doesn't tolerate drama the way past regimes did.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

Well this is it right? Can Lupul play hockey?

Probably.

Can a doctor legitimately stand up and say, "This man has a historical and ongoing medical condition that he risks aggravating in potentially permanently life altering fashion should the wrong thing happen while playing, and as an organization we are not prepared to allow him to take that risk.".

Probably.

What were Lupul's injuries? I forget.

Do we know that the criteria that is being defined above is actually what the doctors are using as their criteria to say he can't be medically cleared?

I could see this being a legit criteria to use for certain kinds of injuries (like concussions or back problems perhaps), but not all injuries.

The fact that there is no news about the injuries that Lupul has doesn't help and generates a little more curiosity here I'd think.

 

[mouser]

If the buyout salary was removed from the "cap pool" though and just a direct "penalty" on the team, then I don't think it would affect escrow would it? That money wouldn't be weighted on the 50% of player's share (there's a good chance I'm way out of my depth here...)

If you remove buyout payments from the pool then you're disconnecting the 50/50 split of HRR. e.g. using my 2014-15 example that would result in the players getting 51% and owners 49%.

As we saw in the 2012-13 lockout there's no sign the owners will flex on that hard split. The PA introduced all sorts of proposals with a soft split where the players could get more then 50% which were shot down.

Besides, escrow is really just to ensure players don't spend money that isn't theirs. A larger escrow payment isn't necessarily a player making less money at the end of the year/season.

The figures I was quoting were final net loss of salary via escrow. A higher escrow withholding rate doesn't guarantee the players lose more money in the end, but that's usually how it works. They're not losing more because the withholding is higher, the withholding is higher because the league projects a larger imbalance between player compensation and the 50/50 HRR split the players receive.

Historically the escrow withholding rates in the season have been 5-10% higher (absolute) then the final escrow disbursement %. So if escrow withholding for example is set at 18% for a season, the players will likely end up forfeiting 8-13% of the paychecks when the final HRR/escrow tally is completed.

 

[BackPassChampions]

There was something that came out last night around the time of the game that said the team had dirt on Lupul or something. Basically claiming the team was effectively blackmailing Lupul.

I can only imagine the consequences for the journalist who claimed that. It's not above Lou to just restrict the person's access to the team. The team definitely doesn't tolerate drama the way past regimes did.

Interesting that you mention this. I missed this. Can you elaborate on the context which they were speaking about having dirt on Lupul?

I've heard a couple times, and as well as people at work mentioning Lupul likes coke, which is why a couple years ago the NHL met with the Leafs regarding coke issues in the NHL.(Not sure if they talked about Lupul though). Apparently, Lupul was influencing others (ex:Kadri) to do coke and party etc. Shanahan and Lou don't like it plus he's always hurt. Word is management told Lupul to shut up, take the pay, we'll keep your cocaine issue quiet. This is all speculation but interesting that they mentioned this last night.

I'm also sure the doctors wouldn't risk their integrity and professional license to lie about Lupuls health. Lupul has back problems period. Back issues in the NHL Doesn't fly well. He will never play again.

 

[The Apologist]

and see theoretically this is where I think the PA fails their own. THEY should be thinking about the middle class - and they don't. in this whole "drive up salaries for everyone" THEY aren't thinking what that does to an entire tier. GMs shouldn't think about it. (imo).

Kinda sounds like society as a whole right now.

 

[LeafSteel]

So, even if he passes the physical, does he really think he would be able to win a roster spot on this hyper-competitive team?

I would have liked to see Lupul play for Babcock, and he was a very effective player for us when he was healthy, but this stunt of his left him looking bad. Even if he's healthy, seems like he would be coming in with an entitled attitude, which may very well be why Babcock and Lou don't want him around.

He's a UFA next year, free to sign with anyone, but I find it very unlikely he would win a job anywhere near a top 6 role, and lucky to make even $1mil. I see a PTO, if that.

I wish him well, but he royally pooched himself.

 

[WTFMAN99]

Interesting that you mention this. I missed this. Can you elaborate on the context which they were speaking about having dirt on Lupul?

I've heard a couple times, and as well as people at work mentioning Lupul likes coke, which is why a couple years ago the NHL met with the Leafs regarding coke issues in the NHL.(Not sure if they talked about Lupul though). Apparently, Lupul was influencing others (ex:Kadri) to do coke and party etc. Shanahan and Lou don't like it plus he's always hurt. Word is management told Lupul to shut up, take the pay, we'll keep your cocaine issue quiet. This is all speculation but interesting that they mentioned this last night.

I'm also sure the doctors wouldn't risk their integrity and professional license to lie about Lupuls health. Lupul has back problems period. Back issues in the NHL Doesn't fly well. He will never play again.

Unfortunately the network at work restricts my use of twitter and I'm all outta data. I think Travis Yost posted/retweeted it last night. Purely going by memory here but this doesn't surprise me.

Also not surprised Kadri had a much better year last year getting away from Lupul. No wonder his shooting % went up! He could see straight lol.

 

[nsleaf]

Unfortunately the network at work restricts my use of twitter and I'm all outta data. I think Travis Yost posted/retweeted it last night. Purely going by memory here but this doesn't surprise me.

Also not surprised Kadri had a much better year last year getting away from Lupul. No wonder his shooting % went up! He could see straight lol.

Did he fail a drug test? If not this is nothing but sensational speculation. Now you are suggesting Kadri as well?

 

[Vexed]

Unfortunately the network at work restricts my use of twitter and I'm all outta data. I think Travis Yost posted/retweeted it last night. Purely going by memory here but this doesn't surprise me.

Also not surprised Kadri had a much better year last year getting away from Lupul. No wonder his shooting % went up! He could see straight lol.

Yost retweeted it but its from the Steve Simmons piece so take it as you will. Yost says he's heard the same rumours as other people have but doesn't elude to what those rumours are. Canadian media have a pretty decent track record of not spilling personal issues like you would see in the US

http://m.torontosun.com/2017/09/18/...-lupul--and-theres-nothing-he-can-do-about-it

 

[WTFMAN99]

Did he fail a drug test? If not this is nothing but sensational speculation. Now you are suggesting Kadri as well?

I didn't but it sounds like what the other poster was saying if you read it that Lupul may have been a negative influence on Kadri.

In regards to the drug test, someone can feel free to correct me if I am wrong but they do not test for coke or care about it but I may be wrong.

Yost retweeted it but its from the Steve Simmons piece so take it as you will. Yost says he's heard the same rumours as other people have but doesn't elude to what those rumours are. Canadian media have a pretty decent track record of not spilling personal issues like you would see in the US

http://m.torontosun.com/2017/09/18/...-lupul--and-theres-nothing-he-can-do-about-it

A few people apparently have "heard about it" - there is certainly a lot of smoke there. I for one am not typically interested in this gossip stuff.

I'll just be happy if Lupul shuts his lip for the rest of the year and we can then move on.

 

[81Leafs50]

this is what it all comes down to.

If he was getting ready to play hockey at any point in time, he would have posted some exercise content on social media, much like Roman Polak coming back from that horrific leg injury.

But Lupul has not posted anything.

Hockey insiders have said on the radio, I heard it myself, that in hockey circles in the offseason in regards to skates, working out, skills camps, etc not one single sole has seen Lupul anywhere getting ready for the season.

SO, its obvious that he would show up to camp and fail his physical.

this **** storm is brought on mostly by the market, cause losers probably message Lupul on the daily about how he is made of glass or that hes just collecting money and living life or something else along those lines and he has had enough.

this is a non issue.