Vegas about to circumvent cap again? UPD: Mark Stone back practicing.

[Vegas07]

A regular season slump doesn’t mean much when the goal is the Cup. Sorry not buying that argument, the Knights have proven they can win without their Star players. They also have reinforcements coming in from the TDL just around the around. So this momentary lapse in roster strength is just that, momentary and temporary. A lapse in roster strength that can be easilly absorbed by a still-strong team that’s already banked lots of points to make the playoffs.

No what it is, is that Fans invest time and passion in this sport. And all they expect is a FAIR shot to win. That is a basic expectation of all fans following a sport. Who wants to invest in a rigged sport? No one.

Is it really a “momentary” lapse when the team has been struggling for almost 3 months now? The team shot out of the gate in the beginning, winning 11 out of 12 games and getting points in every game. Since then, the team has lost most of its games and has a goal differential of -4 after the hot start. Vancouver has gone way ahead of us and Edmonton and LA are close to passing us.

And that -4 point differential was with Mark Stone playing. Now he will be out a long time. There is a potential for the team to collapse without him. This is NOT a strong team, definitely not with all these injuries.

This Knights team has not proven it can win without star players. Sure last years team could do it. They played well defensively so they could win even when they struggled to score. But the defense is trash now. And the lines are screwed up with too many AHL players. When that happens it is tough to win WITH your star players. Without the star players, I’d be really surprised to see the team win.

I wouldn’t say the team has banked “lots of points.” Our record and position in the standings isn’t that impressive. It’s not like we are way ahead of the rest of the division like Vancouver is.

Actually the fans I seen complaining here do say this sport is rigged and do complain about unfairness a lot, not just with cap issues but also the referees. Every postseason here I see complaining about the refs and complaining about teams going over the cap.

 

[TheNumber4]

Is it really a “momentary” lapse when the team has been struggling for almost 3 months now? The team shot out of the gate in the beginning, winning 11 out of 12 games and getting points in every game. Since then, the team has lost most of its games and has a goal differential of -4 after the hot start. Vancouver has gone way ahead of us and Edmonton and LA are close to passing us.

And that -4 point differential was with Mark Stone playing. Now he will be out a long time. There is a potential for the team to collapse without him. This is NOT a strong team, definitely not with all these injuries.

This Knights team has not proven it can win without star players. Sure last years team could do it. They played well defensively so they could win even when they struggled to score. But the defense is trash now. And the lines are screwed up with too many AHL players. When that happens it is tough to win WITH your star players. Without the star players, I’d be really surprised to see the team win.

I wouldn’t say the team has banked “lots of points.” Our record and position in the standings isn’t that impressive. It’s not like we are way ahead of the rest of the division like Vancouver is.

Actually the fans I seen complaining here do say this sport is rigged and do complain about unfairness a lot, not just with cap issues but also the referees. Every postseason here I see complaining about the refs and complaining about teams going over the cap.

And in that time they've dropped how many spots in the Pacific standings in that time? 0? K, cause that's all that really matters. They know or atleast can make a good bet that they can stay good enough (doesn't have to be great) to hold a playoff spot. And if anything the mediocrity of the team would put more pressure on the McCrimmon to find a cheat to improve the team. If they are actually as mediocre as you say they are. And here's the beauty with these over exaggerated injuries, at any point in time they could just had them back if it really came down them being out of playoffs altogether.

Also Hill has held the fort for the most part until recently so that's something McCrimmon could be banking on too, if the defence really has been as bad as you say it.

Yes, fans do complain about. Shows you how much integrity and competence this League has. Even life long players and coaches can't figure out how reffing in this clown show League works. Alot of them question the consistency of it but don't have the balls to outright call out the quality or integrity of a ref cause they would 1. Be Fined. and 2. Don't Want to be a Pariah in this League that doesn't ever get another job. Fans em masse, saying something should give you an indicator.

 

[Vegas07]

And in that time they've dropped how many spots in the Pacific standings in that time? 0? K, cause that's all that really matters. They know or atleast can make a good bet that they can stay good enough (doesn't have to be great) to hold a playoff spot. And if anything the mediocrity of the team would put more pressure on the McCrimmon to find a cheat to improve the team. If they are actually as mediocre as you say they are. And here's the beauty with these over exaggerated injuries, at any point in time they could just had them back if it really came down them being out of playoffs altogether.

Also Hill has held the fort for the most part until recently so that's something McCrimmon could be banking on too, if the defence really has been as bad as you say it.

Yes, fans do complain about. Shows you how much integrity and competence this League has. Even life long players and coaches can't figure out how reffing in this clown show League works. Alot of them question the consistency of it but don't have the balls to outright call out the quality or integrity of a ref cause they would 1. Be Fined. and 2. Don't Want to be a Pariah in this League that doesn't ever get another job. Fans em masse, saying something should give you an indicator.

They dropped 1 spot but I think it’s about to be 3. I hope you’re right though and hope the team stays in 2nd.

And it’s really obvious why the team isn’t lower in the standings. The team had a great October and started off November with 2 wins. The team is lucky they got those points (going 3-0 in shootouts helps), because they need them.

We are the October champions, and the champions of 2023. That’s great, but we haven’t done anything in 2024.

I’m not sure where the team is now. It was mediocre with the team captain playing. Now he is out for a while. I think any Knights fan would be foolish not to be concerned.

Some injured players came back in 2022 and the team shocked fans when it collapsed and missed the playoffs. The pressure was on, the losing possibly had a negative mental effect on the team and the players might have been rushed back. You don’t think teams would be eager to knock the defending champs out of the playoffs before the playoffs even begin? I could see the players pressing if things are not going as well as expected.

I don’t think it’s that easy to just get everyone back together and immediately flip the switch. It’s not always that easy to acquire talented players in a trade and have them immediately fit in. Our team acquired some big names in the past that took months before they finally found their game.

 

[TheBeard]

Vegas has to take a real deep look at their roster and decide how much more of their future they want to sacrifice for another run. I wouldn’t be shocked if GMgM makes a couple of small low risk moves for minimal picks/prospects instead of one big splash for premium commodities.

 

[Alex1234]

Stone about to join Eichel
Just add Tanev, Hanifin ,Guentzel and Tarasenko with that 19,5MM$ of new cap space and call it a cup

 

[Panteras]

No, I'm not. I'm trying to apply consistency if we're making up a rule, not create new problems that unfairly punish teams for completely legal behavior because we're trying to punish some team for perceived unfairness. I'm certainly not trying to pretend dividing by a different number and then adding everything back up magically comes up with a different answer.

The rest of your post is a non-answer to the questions I asked. Which is OK, I'm fine if you don't have an answer, but I'd rather you concede that than continue to lob remarks that have nothing to do with the original question and response and instead raise the usual complaints.


Life isn't fair.

I know I keep saying this and eventually someone's going to get pissed about it, but seriously: it's like everything has to be fair in whatever desired fashion, and to achieve that we must come up with ways to make that happen so that we can feel good about ourselves in whatever way; if it screws over someone else in the process and that someone else did absolutely nothing wrong, whatever. Or if it creates new problems that need new solutions and that results in 38 layers of rules that perhaps [probably don't] "solve" the original problem, whatever. Or if it tilts "fairness" against some other group, as long as it's not "my" group getting screwed, whatever.

Pick easy but smart solutions, not knee-jerk, half-assed, "doesn't really solve anything, creates new problems that now need solutions" solutions.

“Apply consistency instead of unfairly punishing teams that do things perfectly legally” - says guy that is against cap parity in playoffs….dear lord you can’t make this up. The fact that this gigantic glaring irony staring right at you is completely lost for you speaks volumes.

Answer to what? Concede what ? I’ve literally told you what needs done and the funny thing is it goes hand in hand to your whole word salad about life not being fair! Are you even reading? Your whole persona that you’re trying to portray here and this hill you’re wanting to die on is a contradiction. You speak about keeping things fair and balanced and not punishing teams and then go on about whoops life isn’t fair deal with it, yet get hung up about how it’s simply an unfathomable impossibility to apply cap in playoffs because how are we going to calculate if we can’t accrue space for a trade because ZOMG ZOMG the “days” aren’t set.. or how is team X going to fit guys they picked up in a trade? As if that isn’t the literal job of a GM. Figure it out. You have a system, make things fit. Simple as. So yes, you actually are making things super complicated by doing things your way.


85 million cap space with all the accrual and any other shenanigan during regular season. You played 41 games below and accrued space to pick up X guy for the next 41 games. Good on you bro. Come day one of playoffs, reset to a true hard cap and figure out how to fit X guy you picked up. Simple as. If that means 2 guys need to be scratched and 2 guys from your AHL team need to come up to fit X guy you picked up then oops life isn’t fair!!! Right???
Injury happens? Call next man up that would fit. Again, simple as….

 

[Three On Zero]

“Apply consistency instead of unfairly punishing teams that do things perfectly legally” - says guy that is against cap parity in playoffs….dear lord you can’t make this up. The fact that this gigantic glaring irony staring right at you is completely lost for you speaks volumes.

Answer to what? Concede what ? I’ve literally told you what needs done and the funny thing is it goes hand in hand to your whole word salad about life not being fair! Are you even reading? Your whole persona that you’re trying to portray here and this hill you’re wanting to die on is a contradiction. You speak about keeping things fair and balanced and not punishing teams and then go on about whoops life isn’t fair deal with it, yet get hung up about how it’s simply an unfathomable impossibility to apply cap in playoffs because how are we going to calculate if we can’t accrue space for a trade because ZOMG ZOMG the “days” aren’t set.. or how is team X going to fit guys they picked up in a trade? As if that isn’t the literal job of a GM. Figure it out. You have a system, make things fit. Simple as. So yes, you actually are making things super complicated by doing things your way.


85 million cap space with all the accrual and any other shenanigan during regular season. You played 41 games below and accrued space to pick up X guy for the next 41 games. Good on you bro. Come day one of playoffs, reset to a true hard cap and figure out how to fit X guy you picked up. Simple as. If that means 2 guys need to be scratched and 2 guys from your AHL team need to come up to fit X guy you picked up then oops life isn’t fair!!! Right???
Injury happens? Call next man up that would fit. Again, simple as….

Vegas needs to be punished for following the rules set out by the NHL and NHLPA! How dare they operate in the same fashion as the other 31 teams in the league.

It’s unfair that Vegas is doing something every other team can do and hurting themselves at the same time by having their top players hurt

 

[Panteras]

Vegas needs to be punished for following the rules set out by the NHL and NHLPA! How dare they operate in the same fashion as the other 31 teams in the league.

Nah I never said that lol I have no problem with teams doing what is currently allowed. Just arguing for a solution to trying to implement some parity in the playoffs. It’s one thing to go over by a marginal amount, it’s another thing when you’re obviously gaming the system.

 

[Three On Zero]

Nah I never said that lol I have no problem with teams doing what is currently allowed. Just arguing for a solution to trying to implement some parity in the playoffs. It’s one thing to go over by a marginal amount, it’s another thing when you’re obviously gaming the system.

I’m just going off, don’t mind me . I just find it silly how certain fanbases are getting worked up over teams doing something that the NHL/NHLPA has seen no issue with and encourages

 

[Ted Hoffman]

“Apply consistency instead of unfairly punishing teams that do things perfectly legally” - says guy that is against cap parity in playoffs….dear lord you can’t make this up.

You're making up what I'm actually for. Which ... you would know, if

(1) you asked me what I'm for, or - and I know this sounds crazy,
(2) you read what I've written and tried to understand it, instead of ignoring it because it doesn't fit what you want to believe and what you're apparently demand happen.

I’ve literally told you what needs done

You literally said

Either extend the cap artificially to be the same in the playoffs as it is on a daily basis in the regular season or if you “must calculate” and “math it up” then calculate it all together as a season being from day one of regular season to the theoretical last day that the SC finals could take place.

without explaining how that's going to change anything. Even in your later tirades, you don't explain what "change how many days we calculate the cap over" is going to change anything. All you do is pivot to "well, teams should have to " which doesn't provide any insight.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Teams were signing players to 15+ year contracts before 2012 to circumvent the cap. It was something that was deemed legal until it wasn’t. The league corrected it

The league "corrected" it by deeming all contracts over 7 years to be improperly gaming the cap and slapping artificial limits on contract lengths without fixing the real problem: teams were using those contracts to create cap savings in early years, and they never had to pay that savings back. Oh, and then it decided on a "cap penalty" for the already signed ultra-long contracts, where the penalty was larger than the cap savings gained - which, incredibly, they did away with and came up with a "more reasonable" solution that still wasn't right, but was better.

Hossa getting signed through age 43 with $1 million salaries in the last 4 years was a problem; it was very unlikely he'd be playing at age 40 or beyond. Pronger getting signed through age 42 with minimum salaries in the last 2 years was a problem; it was very unlikely he'd be playing at age 40 or beyond. Connor McDavid getting signed for 12 years at age 21 wasn't going to be a problem; you expect he'll probably still be playing at 33. Nathan MacKinnon getting 11 years at age 21 wasn't going to be a problem; you expect he'll probably still be playing at age 32. But, in the "one size fits everything" solution neither one can do that, which necessarily means each signs a contract that carries a higher cap hit, which reduces cap space and future cap flexibility for their respective teams.

Which, from all the bitching over the years here, means "gosh, teams can't keep all their players together now" which now means we have to have "solutions" like franchise players who don't count against the cap, or discounted cap hits for home-grown players, or a bunch of other stuff often proposed that creates many more problems than it "solves."

But hey, we "solved" the "problem" of guys getting contracts for too many years so GMs didn't have to make mistakes that they didn't get held accountable for anyway. Mission Accomplished, everyone.

and it looks like this is something they’ll have to step in and correct again.

And they'll probably f*** up the solution, like they did "fixing" ultra-long contract lengths.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

This isn’t “life”. This is Sport. This is a Game.

You are SO close to getting it.

It’s a basic expectation of any Sport or Game that the Rules are Fair.

Fairness is a judgment call, frequently invoked when someone feels like they're being screwed. Someone else is being screwed? Hey, that's their problem - everything is fair because it benefits me, or I'm not getting harmed.

That said: there's a lot of games where the rules are not fair. In my opinion, of course. There's even sports where the rules aren't fair. In my opinion, of course. I can either accept that, or skip it. I don't get to interject my views of what's fair and what's not and demand everyone else bend to them.

YMMV.

What kind of Joke Ass League can’t even provide an even playing ground.

Yeah, who the hell comes up with a system where teams aren't on an even playing ground? That would be stupid.

Sincerely,

MLB (no salary cap, high-revenue teams can spend to forever if they wish), La Liga (top teams can spend multiples of what everyone else can), and a ton of other leagues around the world.

To accept that the rules in a sport won’t be fair, is some major mental gymnastics.

While you demand everything be fair to some standard you deem acceptable, yes.

When you realize how reality works, no.

Who the hell wants to watch a Rigged Game. Integrity matters in a League if you are going to go after fan engagement and fan involvement.

Good point. If you feel that way, you should just abandon following the sport entirely. If enough people like you do it, maybe you can have an impact.

 

[nhlfan9191]

The league "corrected" it by deeming all contracts over 7 years to be improperly gaming the cap and slapping artificial limits on contract lengths without fixing the real problem: teams were using those contracts to create cap savings in early years, and they never had to pay that savings back. Oh, and then it decided on a "cap penalty" for the already signed ultra-long contracts, where the penalty was larger than the cap savings gained - which, incredibly, they did away with and came up with a "more reasonable" solution that still wasn't right, but was better.

Hossa getting signed through age 43 with $1 million salaries in the last 4 years was a problem; it was very unlikely he'd be playing at age 40 or beyond. Pronger getting signed through age 42 with minimum salaries in the last 2 years was a problem; it was very unlikely he'd be playing at age 40 or beyond. Connor McDavid getting signed for 12 years at age 21 wasn't going to be a problem; you expect he'll probably still be playing at 33. Nathan MacKinnon getting 11 years at age 21 wasn't going to be a problem; you expect he'll probably still be playing at age 32. But, in the "one size fits everything" solution neither one can do that, which necessarily means each signs a contract that carries a higher cap hit, which reduces cap space and future cap flexibility for their respective teams.

Which, from all the bitching over the years here, means "gosh, teams can't keep all their players together now" which now means we have to have "solutions" like franchise players who don't count against the cap, or discounted cap hits for home-grown players, or a bunch of other stuff often proposed that creates many more problems than it "solves."

But hey, we "solved" the "problem" of guys getting contracts for too many years so GMs didn't have to make mistakes that they didn't get held accountable for anyway. Mission Accomplished, everyone.


And they'll probably f*** up the solution, like they did "fixing" ultra-long contract lengths.

I don’t think it would be hard to have the salary cap carry over into the playoffs.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

I don’t think it would be hard to have the salary cap carry over into the playoffs.

You know what, you're right. It's fantastically easy. It's so easy, even a caveman's caveman can do it.

Draw up some ideas, we'll see if they make any more sense than everything that's been proposed that I and other have explained why they don't work.

 

[Panteras]

You literally said

without explaining how that's going to change anything. Even in your later tirades, you don't explain what "change how many days we calculate the cap over" is going to change anything. All you do is pivot to "well, teams should have to " which doesn't provide any insight.

artificially setting a hard cap back to a number for the playoffs is going to change the cap disparity for the playoffs. It’s not that hard to comprehend.

Extending it from game one of season to end of playoffs was more for your concern of how salary is calculated because of number of games and bla bla so the whole “one pie” “one season” thing you brought up. Extending the cap to reflect the new number of games. Again, not that hard to comprehend.

Pivoting to teams should have to bla bla is literally in response to your whole concern of “well it’s not fair if team gets a rash of injuries bla bla” or “ahh teams now have figure out how to include new shiny toy?? Shux”…..thought life isn’t fair? lol

 

[Ted Hoffman]

artificially setting a hard cap back to a number for the playoffs is going to change the cap disparity for the playoffs. It’s not that hard to comprehend.

It's apparently really difficult to comprehend that "a hard cap" necessarily means that any team that added players before the deadline, whose total cap hits now exceed the cap, but that was perfectly valid in the regular season and didn't violate anything with respect to the salary cap and it didn't use LTIR to add those players, cannot use all those players in the playoffs because they don't fit under "a hard cap."

It replaces "I believe I'm getting screwed" with "I'm going to intentionally screw everyone else whether they deserve it or not." It substitutes "sometimes life isn't fair but it's not intentional" with "I'm going to make things unfair, and I'm going to do it intentionally ... but then I think it's fair for me, everyone else can suck it."

I can't imagine how that doesn't work.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Extending it from game one of season to end of playoffs was more for your concern

I didn't give a shit. You lobbed it out like it was a solution, and when I kept pointing out it wasn't you kept repeating it like the more you did, the more of a solution it would be.

Extending the cap to reflect the new number of games. Again, not that hard to comprehend.

Apparently math is tough to comprehend, because I've only explained countless times now how nothing changes.

Since it seems you're dug in and are going to just keep repeating non sequiturs, I think we're done.

 

[fsanford]

With what cap space? If a guy goes on IR, they still count against the cap. If a team is already against the cap they wouldn't be able to fill out their roster.

Then allow for you to bring up someone from your AHL squad. Someone who was on your AHL roster at time of injury designation.

Again simple ways to avoid it. Not that hard.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Then allow for you to bring up someone from your AHL squad. Someone who was on your AHL roster at time of injury designation.

Again simple ways to avoid it. Not that hard.

So ... you're proposing a rule that when a player goes on IR, the team can only add players from within the organization and trades with other teams are strictly prohibited? Cause ... if you trade for someone else, that potentially lands you over the cap when the injured player comes back, and we're trying to "fix" that "problem" from continuing. Right?

 

[Panteras]

It's apparently really difficult to comprehend that "a hard cap" necessarily means that any team that added players before the deadline, whose total cap hits now exceed the cap, but that was perfectly valid in the regular season and didn't violate anything with respect to the salary cap and it didn't use LTIR to add those players, cannot use all those players in the playoffs because they don't fit under "a hard cap."

It replaces "I believe I'm getting screwed" with "I'm going to intentionally screw everyone else whether they deserve it or not." It substitutes "sometimes life isn't fair but it's not intentional" with "I'm going to make things unfair, and I'm going to do it intentionally ... but then I think it's fair for me, everyone else can suck it."

I can't imagine how that doesn't work.

Simple, make it a true hard cap regular season too and we wouldn’t have this dumb argument.

But for the sake of what is being discussed, I guess that’s where we fundamentally differ. I see absolutely nothing wrong with a team having to deal with 2 different parameters. Nobody is forcing teams to make trades. You are allowed to use players you have under contract. Or you can make trades that make you compliant whether in the regular season or the playoffs simple as.

Trading for someone and now being faced with the headaches of fitting that guy for the playoffs for the sake of parity is the price to pay. I don’t care that there’s a mechanism that allows you to fit him in the regular season and then it changes for the playoffs. Life isn’t fair right? New parameters to work with for the playoffs. I mean that’s what happens anyway right? New rules for the playoffs. That’s the only way to make it remotely fair. Come playoffs you’re gonna have to figure out how to either fit him or exclude him. I’ve already told you this yet you keep bringing it up. This deals with the issue the same whether you have LTIR or not. If you accrued space to bring in a good player for the last half of the season, then good on you, come playoffs you’re gonna have to figure out how to accommodate him. If you got an LTIR and wanna fill that void with an equally valuable player then cool, but you’re gonna have to figure out how to fit them both once the injured player is activated. If that means you’re gonna have to scrap your whole 4th line with dudes in your AHL farm team for the playoffs, then whoops, life ain’t fair…that’s the job of a GM assess if shiny new toy is worth your entire 4th line….

Again, I see fundamentally nothing wrong with a mechanism allowing you to add X dude during the regular season because you accrued space and then come playoffs a new mechanism means you have to figure out how to make space for X dude.

So ... you're proposing a rule that when a player goes on IR, the team can only add players from within the organization and trades with other teams are strictly prohibited? Cause ... if you trade for someone else, that potentially lands you over the cap when the injured player comes back, and we're trying to "fix" that "problem" from continuing. Right?

Bro since when are teams trading for someone right after one of their guys got injured? Like 99% of teams just call the next man up from their AHL team. It’s not the ONLY way, you can still trade as long as you’re cap compliant. How is that so hard to comprehend?

 

[RichLittle]

Sketchy is returning in Game 1 after months of "recovery". Stone did it. Kucherov did it. And both won the Cup.

View attachment 823874

How many others did the same, but didn't win? Lots of players get injured, only the cap winners are remembered. Landeskog was seen as a cap circumvention as well, how did that go? Injuries happen.

Does that mean anything? I feel like a owner or GM complaining publicly about something like this would be paramount to career suicide lol. I am sure they are a few making calls privately.

I just dont understand why more GMs arent doing the same thing. I think its pretty clear, even though impossibleG to prove that this is to help bolster your team before deadline. Its asinine to see it being applied so effectively by a team and have basically zero other teams following suit.

GMs know all the rules, how LTIR is validated by NHL doctors etc. You? Just a poorly informed and bitter fan. Whose "opinions" matter more?

 

[Ted Hoffman]

How many others did the same, but didn't win? Lots of players get injured, only the cap winners are remembered. Landeskog was seen as a cap circumvention as well, how did that go? Injuries happen.

Shut up, RichLittle. We can't talk about the times where teams used LTIR and added players and didn't win the Cup, we're only focused on those who did because that clearly means they were cheating. Everyone else was playing by the rules and got f***ed over. And the only way to fix this is to screw everyone, including the teams abiding by the rules and making perfectly legitimate moves within the cap system, just to be safe we've caught all the cheaters.

Just like how we need to "fix" the "problem of tanking" by rigging the draft so that bad teams can't draft high very often, even if it's due to being truly terrible and having bad luck hit, just in case someone is intentionally tanking to load up on great prospects - which, when they do that, guarantees they're going to win the Cup down the road.

 

[Forgot About Drai]

GMs know all the rules, how LTIR is validated by NHL doctors etc. You? Just a poorly informed and bitter fan. Whose "opinions" matter more?

How am I bitter? I am saying the Oilers should figure out ways do the same or get just as creative with the cap. I have stated multuiple times that Vegas can and should take advantage of this. You just must not know how to read.

Strangely defensive about an apparently fair and not sketchy practice...

 

[HolyGhost]

How many others did the same, but didn't win? Lots of players get injured, only the cap winners are remembered. Landeskog was seen as a cap circumvention as well, how did that go? Injuries happen.


GMs know all the rules, how LTIR is validated by NHL doctors etc. You? Just a poorly informed and bitter fan. Whose "opinions" matter more?

Only if a GM/team Challenges it. Right now the players are injured so they are injured. Teams wont announce the player is back till game day. The problem is convincing the NHL to give the player a medical before the last game

 

[snag]

How many others did the same, but didn't win? Lots of players get injured, only the cap winners are remembered. Landeskog was seen as a cap circumvention as well, how did that go? Injuries happen.


GMs know all the rules, how LTIR is validated by NHL doctors etc. You? Just a poorly informed and bitter fan. Whose "opinions" matter more?

So true