HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie
Notices

The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

Expansion Draft Rules, Alignment & Schedule Matrix for Las Vegas

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-17-2016, 09:11 AM
  #26
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 67,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 100 Third Graders View Post
Gillies is exempt too as he will only be in his second professional season by either definition.
Very confusing as Cap Friendly lists 14-15 as his first year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveG View Post
Any word on if ATOs/PTOs count toward the year count for this? IE: if someone had played a few games with an AHL team after their college season was done but their professional contract didn't begin until the next season?
Depends on # of games played (to accumulate experience). Most likely those guys will not play enough of those "extra" games to add another year of experience.

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2016, 11:18 AM
  #27
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 18,406
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveG View Post
Any word on if ATOs/PTOs count toward the year count for this? IE: if someone had played a few games with an AHL team after their college season was done but their professional contract didn't begin until the next season?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
Very confusing as Cap Friendly lists 14-15 as his first year.



Depends on # of games played (to accumulate experience). Most likely those guys will not play enough of those "extra" games to add another year of experience.
AHL PTO's should not count as they don't in any of the CBA experience definitions. Gillies for example had a year burn on his ELC, but never played a single game that season. Then did not play 10 games in the AHL the following season.

Where its a bit unclear to me is what criteria they're going to use for "first- and second-year professionals". It's not a definition that exists in the CBA. The closest definitions I've seen are in 10.2 for RFA's and 9.1 for ELC slides. Those two definitions aren't completely in sync, for example:

- Age 19 late birthday signee could burn a year off their ELC, but not play the 10+ NHL games required to accumulate a professional year.
- Age 20+ players could burn a year on their ELC but not accumulate a professional year as well.

In the case of Jon Gillies, even though he's burned two years off his ELC, per CBA 10.2 he has zero years of professional experience.

mouser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2016, 11:24 AM
  #28
Semyon Vezinamov
Mulan Szechuan Sauce
 
Semyon Vezinamov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: United States
Country: United States
Posts: 1,439
vCash: 500
Any idea how much transparency there will be with regards to the protected/exposed lists from each team?

I could see that being public for entertainment value and because it may leak anyways and I could see it being kept secret because of the player's feelings (possible bad situation with their team) if they are left exposed.

Semyon Vezinamov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2016, 11:28 AM
  #29
BattleBorn
Global Moderator
Dead Dove-Do Not Eat
 
BattleBorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Carr.187 Km9
Country: Puerto Rico
Posts: 5,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Semyon Vezinamov View Post
Any idea how much transparency there will be with regards to the protected/exposed lists from each team?

I could see that being public for entertainment value and because it may leak anyways and I could see it being kept secret because of the player's feelings (possible bad situation with their team) if they are left exposed.
I'm guessing we're not going to see the protected/unprotected lists. It just seems like an awful situation for the unprotected guys that aren't chosen by Las Vegas, and there's going to be a lot of those.

Plus, there might be a few well paid players that are left out there for contract reasons and I doubt teams want those players to know they were left unprotected. The team has still got to work with these guys after the expansion draft.

BattleBorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2016, 01:34 PM
  #30
Mike Jones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BattleBorn View Post
I'm guessing we're not going to see the protected/unprotected lists. It just seems like an awful situation for the unprotected guys that aren't chosen by Las Vegas, and there's going to be a lot of those.

Plus, there might be a few well paid players that are left out there for contract reasons and I doubt teams want those players to know they were left unprotected. The team has still got to work with these guys after the expansion draft.
I remember the protected/available lists being made public back when Atlanta came into the league.

I can't see players being hurt by finding out they've been exposed to expansion. I don't think it would be all that difficult for them to figure out who's in and who's available to LV.

Here's a chart from the Atlanta draft: http://historicalhockey.blogspot.ca/...ion-draft.html

I'm hoping something similar is made available prior to the 2017 draft.

Mike Jones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2016, 01:39 PM
  #31
BattleBorn
Global Moderator
Dead Dove-Do Not Eat
 
BattleBorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Carr.187 Km9
Country: Puerto Rico
Posts: 5,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Jones View Post
I remember the protected/available lists being made public back when Atlanta came into the league.

I can't see players being hurt by finding out they've been exposed to expansion. I don't think it would be all that difficult for them to figure out who's in and who's available to LV.
I guess. The lists are only really necessary (and only really truly exist) for the three days between June 17th and the 20th. Perhaps they could come out after the roster is announced on the 21st, I just don't see the need. It really serves no purpose other than the inform the fans/create debate.

BattleBorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2016, 01:48 PM
  #32
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 67,774
vCash: 500
While there does not seem to be any stipulation in the released rules (to date) of public announcement of exposed players, there could be a lot of speculation if there are "future consideration" trades as to who is being protected from the exposed list.

I would imagine that all players must be informed before any list they are on is made public.

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2016, 03:31 PM
  #33
Mike Jones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BattleBorn View Post
I guess. The lists are only really necessary (and only really truly exist) for the three days between June 17th and the 20th. Perhaps they could come out after the roster is announced on the 21st, I just don't see the need. It really serves no purpose other than the inform the fans/create debate.
It helps create interest. Isn't that a whole part of building the brand? Or something like that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
I would imagine that all players must be informed before any list they are on is made public.
I think this would be a courtesy to the players so that they're not surprised when they're chosen. Players would probably appreciate the heads up.

Mike Jones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2016, 03:32 PM
  #34
BattleBorn
Global Moderator
Dead Dove-Do Not Eat
 
BattleBorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Carr.187 Km9
Country: Puerto Rico
Posts: 5,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Jones View Post
It helps create interest. Isn't that a whole part of building the brand? Or something like that?
For hockey geeks like ourselves, sure. I don't know you need to build it with us, though.

I imagine 85% of NHL fans outside of Las Vegas wouldn't have more than a passing interest.

BattleBorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2016, 09:26 AM
  #35
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 67,774
vCash: 500
http://www.torontosun.com/2016/07/16...th-brett-cecil

Speculation on whether players like Toronto's Horton on LTIR need to be protected in expansion draft, or just won't get selected if exposed.

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2016, 10:01 AM
  #36
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
http://www.torontosun.com/2016/07/16...th-brett-cecil

Speculation on whether players like Toronto's Horton on LTIR need to be protected in expansion draft, or just won't get selected if exposed.
I thought the original documentation said they were exempt? Or maybe they just didn't count towards the exposure requirements? Such as every team must expose 1 D with 60 games this year or 70 over the past 2?

patnyrnyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2016, 02:13 PM
  #37
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 67,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by patnyrnyg View Post
I thought the original documentation said they were exempt? Or maybe they just didn't count towards the exposure requirements? Such as every team must expose 1 D with 60 games this year or 70 over the past 2?
It's 40/70 for one D and two F exposed


And nothing explicit in rules FAQ released on LTIR.

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2016, 09:20 AM
  #38
Fourier
Registered User
 
Fourier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,475
vCash: 500
Any word on the inclusion of a restriction preventing LV from trading back one of the chosen players to the team he was picked from. This was mentioned multiple times I believe but I don't see it in the rules unless I missed something.

Fourier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2016, 12:23 PM
  #39
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(o)ϵ
Posts: 36,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourier View Post
Any word on the inclusion of a restriction preventing LV from trading back one of the chosen players to the team he was picked from. This was mentioned multiple times I believe but I don't see it in the rules unless I missed something.
I think there is a one year moratorium.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2016, 12:58 PM
  #40
Mike Jones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourier View Post
Any word on the inclusion of a restriction preventing LV from trading back one of the chosen players to the team he was picked from. This was mentioned multiple times I believe but I don't see it in the rules unless I missed something.
Why would that be a bad thing? Once the player is selected Vegas should be able to do a deal with whomever they want.

Mike Jones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2016, 11:41 AM
  #41
Teemu
Meatball Enthusiast
 
Teemu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Palatine
Country: United States
Posts: 24,335
vCash: 470


Last edited by Teemu: 07-25-2016 at 11:57 AM.
Teemu is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2016, 05:06 PM
  #42
Fourier
Registered User
 
Fourier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I think there is a one year moratorium.
That was what I thought as well but only for trading a player back to their own team. I am assuming there are no restrictions on trades to others. BUt I can't find it anywhere in the posted rules.

Fourier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2016, 05:35 PM
  #43
Preds33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 8,989
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teemu View Post

Clarification out today. The following players are not exempt:

William Carrier (BUF)
Emile Poirier and Hunter Shinkaruk (CGY)
Ryan Hartman (CHI)
Anthony Mantha (DET)
Jonathan-Ismel Diaby (NSH)
Ryan Pulock (NYI)
Kerby Rychel (TOR)
Not sure about the others, but Diaby is pretty much a bust at this point.

Preds33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2016, 05:45 PM
  #44
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(o)ϵ
Posts: 36,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourier View Post
That was what I thought as well but only for trading a player back to their own team. I am assuming there are no restrictions on trades to others. BUt I can't find it anywhere in the posted rules.
I'm pretty sure the restriction is just to the original team.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2016, 06:22 PM
  #45
boredmale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 32,697
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teemu View Post
Well this sucks for the Islanders. it most likely means we will have to protect 8 and a goalie and end up losing Nelson or Lee

boredmale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2016, 04:05 PM
  #46
KarIgo87
Rider on the Storm
 
KarIgo87's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Moscow
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 253
vCash: 500
I have some questions. Maybe it's stupid and I've just missed something but anyway: what's the situation with RFA's and UFA's?

1. Do you have to protect your RFA/UFA's if you want to keep them? Or they are exempt?

2. If they are not exempt do you have to make a Qualifying Offer to your RFA before the Expansion Draft in order to protect him? Or the other way around? I'm confused.

3. What will be the deadline for Qualifying Offer to RFAs - June 25th as usual or the Expansion Draft? Because if it's the Expansion Draft and you failed to make a QO to them before it then your RFAs become UFAs automatically during a draft, right?

4. If your UFA is available for the Expansion Draft what would be the point for Las Vegas to pick him? I mean, take Kunitz. If Vegas picks him what's next? What his status is gonna be like? Still UFA? What rights would Las Vegas have for him? I mean, if he's still UFA then what stops him from signing with some other team? Maybe even Pens again. Or Vegas just should sign him before July 1st?

So it seems like either UFAs are not available at the Expansion Draft or it's just pointless for Vegas to pick them. They should wait July 1st like everybody else.

P.S. What should Pens do if they want to keep Pouliot and expose Kunitz?


Last edited by KarIgo87: 08-21-2016 at 04:29 PM.
KarIgo87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2016, 09:08 PM
  #47
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 67,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KarIgo87 View Post
I have some questions. Maybe it's stupid and I've just missed something but anyway: what's the situation with RFA's and UFA's?

1. Do you have to protect your RFA/UFA's if you want to keep them? Or they are exempt?
Yes. Players who are not exempt either have to be protected or are exposed.

Quote:
2. If they are not exempt do you have to make a Qualifying Offer to your RFA before the Expansion Draft in order to protect him? Or the other way around? I'm confused.

3. What will be the deadline for Qualifying Offer to RFAs - June 25th as usual or the Expansion Draft? Because if it's the Expansion Draft and you failed to make a QO to them before it then your RFAs become UFAs automatically during a draft, right?
Only pending RFAs that "have" to be exposed to meet the minimum number of players to be exposed by position and experience (and contract status) need to be qualified BEFORE the expansion draft. (So, if you have six pending RFAs that won't be protected, only the minimum have to be QO'd before expansion draft. The others do not have to be QO'd until the "Monday after entry draft" or 6/25, whichever is later.)

Quote:
4. If your UFA is available for the Expansion Draft what would be the point for Las Vegas to pick him? I mean, take Kunitz. If Vegas picks him what's next? What his status is gonna be like? Still UFA? What rights would Las Vegas have for him? I mean, if he's still UFA then what stops him from signing with some other team? Maybe even Pens again. Or Vegas just should sign him before July 1st?

So it seems like either UFAs are not available at the Expansion Draft or it's just pointless for Vegas to pick them. They should wait July 1st like everybody else.

P.S. What should Pens do if they want to keep Pouliot and expose Kunitz?
My take: The only reason to select a pending UFA is if you KNOW you can sign him before 7/1.

If Kunitz is under contract for 17-18 and meets the experience (40/70) games, and does not have a NMC, he can be exposed.


Last edited by LadyStanley: 08-21-2016 at 09:16 PM.
LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2016, 09:23 PM
  #48
KarIgo87
Rider on the Storm
 
KarIgo87's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Moscow
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 253
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
Only pending RFAs that "have" to be exposed to meet the minimum number of players to be exposed by position and experience (and contract status) need to be qualified BEFORE the expansion draft. (So, if you have six pending RFAs that won't be protected, only the minimum have to be QO'd before expansion draft. The others do not have to be QO'd until the "Monday after entry draft" or 6/25, whichever is later.)
Well, this part is still a little confusing for me but it's fine, I got what I wanted to know. Thanks!

Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
My take: The only reason to select a pending UFA is if you KNOW you can sign him before 7/1.
Yeah, you're absolutely right. Here's an interesting read about UFAs in the Expansion Draft.

Another question. In this rule:
Quote:
iii) One goaltender who is under contract in 2017-18 or will be a restricted free agent at the expiration of his current contract immediately prior to 2017-18. If the club elects to make a restricted free agent goaltender available in order to meet this requirement, that goaltender must have received his qualifying offer prior to the submission of the club's protected list.
Does that mean if Pens won't make a qualifying offer to Murray he will be unavailable? Sounds unrealistic

KarIgo87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2016, 09:38 PM
  #49
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 18,406
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KarIgo87 View Post
Another question. In this rule:

Does that mean if Pens won't make a qualifying offer to Murray he will be unavailable? Sounds unrealistic
Murray would still be available. That clause requires each team to make a goalie available in the expansion draft that meets the requirement. It does not mean any goalie who has not received a QO yet is off limits.

If the Penguins were to wait on making a QO to Murray then Vegas could still select him in the expansion draft and make the QO themselves before the QO deadline.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
My take: The only reason to select a pending UFA is if you KNOW you can sign him before 7/1.
Assuming the rules allow for it, one reason Vegas might select a limited number of UFA's to be is that they don't want to take on any of the available contracts from those teams.

mouser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2016, 10:20 PM
  #50
KarIgo87
Rider on the Storm
 
KarIgo87's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Moscow
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 253
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouser View Post
Murray would still be available. That clause requires each team to make a goalie available in the expansion draft that meets the requirement. It does not mean any goalie who has not received a QO yet is off limits.

If the Penguins were to wait on making a QO to Murray then Vegas could still select him in the expansion draft and make the QO themselves before the QO deadline.
Thanks, that's what I thought basically.

KarIgo87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:32 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.