I don't think it puts the team in an awkward position. There is a CBA, and rules involved. If he hasn't been arrested, or charged with a crime, what right do they have to stop him from playing?

It's pretty simple, after they hold the press conference that they said Kane and his agent will have, there will be no further comment. If the reporters and beats want to press the issue with either Kane or his teammates, interview is over. I understand some of his teammates may not like that, but really they shouldn't impede on Kane's rights under the CBA because of that.
- MJL

That's all well and good but we know that's not how the media is going to handle it. You're going to have disgruntled people showing up to voice their opposition to him being there as well. Away games could get pretty damn messy as well.

Unfortunately innocent until proven guilty does not apply to the court of public opinion for a very large amount of people.

That already exists.
- MJL

Forgot to add that 35+ should not be a restriction.

That's all well and good but we know that's not how the media is going to handle it. You're going to have disgruntled people showing up to voice their opposition to him being there as well. Away games could get pretty damn messy as well.

Unfortunately innocent until proven guilty does not apply to the court of public opinion for a very large amount of people.
- hereticpride

Let them protest away. Shouldn't stop Kane from playing because others want to voice their opinion.

Forgot to add that 35+ should not be a restriction.
- hereticpride

35+ is a very reasonable and necessary rule.

Hexy should have signed Gagne so he could retire a Flyer...

Bye Voynov

Hey Michael Raffl.....no pressure with wearing #12 for this franchise.
- johndewar

Why would he feel pressure because of that?

Goof shouldnt be allowed to play.

Goof shouldnt be allowed to play.
- flyer_nutter

Why?

I don't think it puts the team in an awkward position. There is a CBA, and rules involved. If he hasn't been arrested, or charged with a crime, what right do they have to stop him from playing?

It's pretty simple, after they hold the press conference that they said Kane and his agent will have, there will be no further comment. If the reporters and beats want to press the issue with either Kane or his teammates, interview is over. I understand some of his teammates may not like that, but really they shouldn't impede on Kane's rights under the CBA because of that.
- MJL

What about the poor girl that has to see his smug face all over tv and the media circus this will become for her?

What about the poor girl that has to see his smug face all over tv and the media circus this will become for her?
- PhillaBully

Nobody will be putting a gun to her head to watch it. Until Kane is charged and convicted, he has a right to continue with his life.

35+ is a very reasonable and necessary rule.
- MJL

I don't think it's necessary now that contracts have limited terms and limited front loading.

Bye Voynov
- PhillySportsGuy

How stupid were those deadline rumors that Hextall was gonna trade for him?

How stupid were those deadline rumors that Hextall was gonna trade for him?
- Feanor

I don't think it's necessary now that contracts have limited terms and limited front loading.
- Feanor

I think it's less necessary with those rules, but a team could still sign a player to a multi year contract where a players salary would be higher that his cap hit for the first year, only to have that player retire, with the end result being that salary paid out and cap hit charged are not equal, skewering the 50/50 split.

I think it's simply about not wanting Richards anymore as a player, and still wanting Voynov.

For the record, if Voynov is not deported, I don't think the Kings should void his contract.
- MJL

This is definitely what it all boils down to

I think it's less necessary, but a team could still sign a player to a multi year contract where a players salary would be higher that his cap hit for the first year, only to have that player retire, with the end result being that salary paid out and cap hit charged are not equal, skewering the 50/50 split.
- MJL

If you sign a 34 year old guy to a 6 year contract, you know exactly what you're getting into. This is why the NHL implemented the rule, so teams couldn't woo a guy with tons of cash over two years and just say see ya for the last 4. I think it's necessary and you just have to be careful when signing an older player to a contract

If you sign a 34 year old guy to a 6 year contract, you know exactly what you're getting into. This is why the NHL implemented the rule, so teams couldn't woo a guy with tons of cash over two years and just say see ya for the last 4. I think it's necessary and you just have to be careful when signing an older player to a contract
- funmaster18

Your point is correct, just that the player would have to be 35 by June 1 of the first contract year I believe. If he was 34 when the deal is signed, it's not a 35+ deal.

Your point is correct, just that the player would have to be 35 by June 1 of the first contract year I believe. If he was 34 when the deal is signed, it's not a 35+ deal.
- MJL

not if the contract was an extension that didn't kick in until 35

not if the contract was an extension that didn't kick in until 35
- funmaster18

If the player turns 35 prior to June 30th, the year the contract takes effect, it's a 35+ deal if it's multi year. If he turns 35 after June 30th, it is not.

If the player turns 35 prior to June 30th, the year the contract takes effect, it's a 35+ deal if it's multi year. If he turns 35 after June 30th, it is not.
- MJL

Doesn't seem kind of stupid that you could sign a 34 year old to a 6 year deal and it's not under the 35 plus rule, but if you sign a 35 year old to a 2 year deal that it does?

Doesn't seem kind of stupid that you could sign a 34 year old to a 6 year deal and it's not under the 35 plus rule, but if you sign a 35 year old to a 2 year deal that it does?
- funmaster18

Other than being multi year, which is obviously more than one year, length of term doesn't matter. It's how old the player is on June 30th the year the deal starts. June 30th is technically the end of the previous season, with July 1, the start of the next season.

Other than being multi year, which is obviously more than one year, length of term doesn't matter. It's how old the player is on June 30th the year the deal starts. June 30th is technically the end of the previous season, with July 1, the start of the next season.
- MJL

I get that, but sign a guy at 34 to a long deal he can retire without cap penalty at 38, 39, 40 but a guy retiring at 36 on a two year deal causes a cap penalty. I guess the limiting of front loaded contracts help stem the issues with that, just seems weird to me.

I get that, but sign a guy at 34 to a long deal he can retire without cap penalty at 38, 39, 40 but a guy retiring at 36 on a two year deal causes a cap penalty. I guess the limiting of front loaded contracts help stem the issues with that, just seems weird to me.
- funmaster18

They had to pick some age, why they went with 35, not sure. I guess because they figured based on contract history, not many players sign long term deals at that age.

They had to pick some age, why they went with 35, not sure. I guess because they figured based on contract history, not many players sign long term deals at that age.
- MJL

I guess it was the simplest way to do it. Oh well, whatever. I'm just excited to actually watch flyer hockey again on Tuesday!