The Flyers Played This Well

In the beaten to death category, ridiculously long term contracts to take advantage of a gigantic loophole in the CBA is probably at the top. I’m not going to go into detail on those, as I already have in the linked post. Several GMs, including Brian Burke, have called for an end to these contracts. While some of these contracts have been to lock up home grown talent for their entire careers, there are others that are clear cases of adding on years to lower the cap hit (Hossa, Pronger).

The Flyers, who signed Chris Pronger to that ridiculously long deal, say they understand the risk involved and expect Pronger to play until he is 42. GM Paul Holmgren is saying all the right things. But let’s analyze the exact verbiage of the CBA Section 50.2, c (iv), which is the section on the 35+ contracts:

All Player Salary and Bonuses earned in a League Year by a Player who is in the second or later year of a multi-year SPC (Standard Player’s Contract) which was signed when the Player was age 35 or older (as of June 30 prior to the League Year in which the SPC is to be effective)… shall count towards the calculation of the Actual Club Salary… .

I bolded the word signed for emphasis on the exact wording of the clause. Any competent lawyer will argue that since the Pronger deal was signed prior to his 35th birthday, that the Flyers will not be on the hook for the remaining $4.92 million cap hit should he retire before the contract expires. Paul Holmgren can say anything he wants now, but the truth of the matter is that the verbiage of the CBA allows for them to fight it, and in all likelihood win.

The wording of the clause leaves this ginormous loophole that teams are getting very smart and creative about. Even the Rangers circumvented this clause by signing Naslund to his multi year deal a few weeks before he turned 35. I wouldn’t call what GMs are doing shady (pending review of the Hossa deal in Chicago), but it is worth some investigation, and they should be acknowledged for their creativity at least.

For fun, let’s change the wording of the clause, changing the words was signed to becomes effective. This makes the verbiage much clearer and eliminates the loop hole:

All Player Salary and Bonuses earned in a League Year by a Player who is in the second or later year of a multi-year SPC (Standard Player’s Contract) which becomes effective when the Player was age 35 or older (as of June 30 prior to the League Year in which the SPC is to be effective)… shall count towards the calculation of the Actual Club Salary… .

This simple change means that any contract (or extension, since extensions are essentially new contracts) that takes effect after a player turns 35 are subject to the 35+ rule. I don’t have a law degree, but I do know that the wording of a contract (or in this case, CBA) does play a significant role in how a court of law interprets them. Signed means when the pen meets the paper. Effective means the first day the contract is in place. These points are critical when evaluating the 35+ clause.

Paul Holmgren is playing this perfectly. He is saying exactly what the league wants to hear, that he is “adhering” to the rules set forth by the CBA and will not fight a cap hit when Pronger retires before the end of his contract. But, when Pronger retires, the Flyers will fight to have his $4.92 million cap hit removed.

I guarantee it.