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

[Slats432]

At least 10M over the cap unfortunately. It's criminal.

 

[Ford Prefect]

Lehner is a $5 million cap hit and hasn’t played at all and will not play.


An asterisk isn’t going to take down the championship banner I see in the stadium every time I’m there. I never saw an asterisk on that.

Exactly, and nor should there be. You don't punish teams exploiting an obvious but legal "loophole" in the rules. I think every team is required to exploit any rule that works in their favour, There is no "Hey, we're living up to the spirit of the rules" award in professional sports. If it was legal at the time, no asterisk required.

 

[Three On Zero]

Lehner is a $5 million cap hit and hasn’t played at all and will not play.


An asterisk isn’t going to take down the championship banner I see in the stadium every time I’m there. I never saw an asterisk on that.

Won’t show up in official record books either

 

[Vegas07]

My whole point is this is the most brazen attempt in this cap era. If they do nothing, likely, I am thinking about next year.

I’m actually expecting this to blow up and for the team to lose in the first round. And the regulars in the thread will be very happy when that happens. Maybe I’m wrong and the team loses in the second round. But personally I think the chances the team goes far are pretty low. This team isn’t getting out of the West.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

No, this is bullshit. I am sorry. The NHL has the most restrictive cap in all of sports. How about we loosen up about this and not make the game boring? IT’s good for the game/league when teams stack up.

Hey, I'm all for that. Soft cap with tax penalties (kinda like the baseball luxury tax but setting a hard cap 20% higher). Allowing a team to go over by 10-20% X-times over a X-year period. Allowing teams to roll over unused cap space.. I think almost anything would be better than what the league has in place at the moment.

But that's not the debate. The issue is with a hard cap in place, what is the best way to ensure it isn't abused. If you can't change the cap, then change the existing rules and interpretations.

All great, but the owners have repeatedly said they are never approving a soft cap. And, if they did, it would utterly hammer the players because they'd still be capped at 50% of HRR and every extra dollar spent by the owners would just come out of the pockets of the players via higher escrow.

I'm not sure on this point - To change the rules for cap compliancy in the playoffs, does it require approval from the NHLPA or can the league do it unilaterally?

Yes, it would be a CBA change so the NHLPA would have to sign off on any changes.

Which, I've pointed out every time someone comes up with a make players sit if [cap-related scenario idea: the NHLPA is never signing off on players being forced to sit for some arbitrary reason, when if it was Game 82 that player may have been able to play in a completely cap-compliant way.

 

[ijuka]

View attachment 852109

Doesn't matter, playoffs are less important than the all star game. Playoffs prize money: 0. All star game prize money: 1mil.

At least judging by NHL's decisions.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Your average cap hit for the last 5 games of the regular season = your cap hit for the playoffs.

You’d have to pull guys off LTIR for the last 5 games if you have the cap space to do so if they plan to play in the playoffs.

The NHLPA is NEVER signing off on some idea that forces players to play when they wouldn't be medically cleared, just to be eligible to play in the playoffs.

Seriously, people - think about this a little. Quit proposing ideas that are complete non-starters.

 

[Voight]

At least 10M over the cap unfortunately. It's criminal.

Its not.

The NHLPA is NEVER signing off on some idea that forces players to play when they wouldn't be medically cleared, just to be eligible to play in the playoffs.

Seriously, people - think about this a little. Quit proposing ideas that are complete non-starters.

Nevermind the potential of reaggravating an injury or making ti worse.

 

[SeanMoneyHands]

View attachment 852109

Well I am completely shocked.

 

[Ford Prefect]

The NHLPA is NEVER signing off on some idea that forces players to play when they wouldn't be medically cleared, just to be eligible to play in the playoffs.

Seriously, people - think about this a little. Quit proposing ideas that are complete non-starters.

No one said you have to play them. They just have to be taken off LTIR, where their relief expires. They can still keep them on IR

 

[Slats432]

Doesn't matter, playoffs are less important than the all star game. Playoffs prize money: 0. All star game prize money: 1mil.

At least judging by NHL's decisions.

I am just posting it so the person that said $10 M over the cap based on playoff cap hit would know they are underestimating. The players don't care, they still get paid while sitting out.

And there is playoffs prize money.

How Much Do Players Get Paid in the Playoffs? - The Hockey Writers The Business of Hockey Latest News, Analysis & More

Do players get paid in the playoffs? The NHL and NHLPA agree to set aside a bonus pool to be distributed based on how far they advance.

thehockeywriters.com

 

[Golden_Jet]

I think the easiest way to balance things out would be to have a rule that if the player is on LTIR on the last game of the season they are ineligible for the playoffs.

GMs would never approve that change.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

No one said you have to play them. They just have to be taken off LTIR, where their relief expires. They can still keep them on IR

1. LTIR is a subset of IR. It's not a completely distinct thing.

2. Once you're on LTIR, you have to miss at least 10 games and 24 days. You can't be taken off early if you're healthy before 10 games and 24 days.

3. You can't put someone on LTIR unless you're sufficiently short on cap space and you have no other way to make moves than to put someone on LTIR. Which, means the player in question is so injured that they're going to miss 10 games and 24 days.

4. To "take someone off LTIR, but leave them on IR" implies "they won't miss 10 games and 24 days, but they're still unable to play." It also implies that you never needed cap relief in the first place. Which ... you can't do.

5. Their "relief expires" when they come off LTIR ... which is also when they come off IR. This isn't "well, we needed relief 3 days ago so he went on LTIR, but today we don't so we're taking him off LTIR - but a week from now we might need relief again, so we'll put him on LTIR then, and if 5 days after that we're good again we'll take him off LTIR, and ..." That's ... not how that works.

 

[Tawnos]

Doesn't matter, playoffs are less important than the all star game. Playoffs prize money: 0. All star game prize money: 1mil.

At least judging by NHL's decisions.

There is an amount of prize money that gets awarded in the playoffs. Assuming each team had a 23 man roster:

$11k per player on teams that lost in the first round.
$22k per player on teams that lost in the second round.
$54k per player on teams that lost in the third round.
$98k per player on the team that lost in the SCF.
$163k per player on the team that won the Cup.

 

[Ol' Jase]

1. LTIR is a subset of IR. It's not a completely distinct thing.

2. Once you're on LTIR, you have to miss at least 10 games and 24 days. You can't be taken off early if you're healthy before 10 games and 24 days.

3. You can't put someone on LTIR unless you're sufficiently short on cap space and you have no other way to make moves than to put someone on LTIR. Which, means the player in question is so injured that they're going to miss 10 games and 24 days.

4. To "take someone off LTIR, but leave them on IR" implies "they won't miss 10 games and 24 days, but they're still unable to play." It also implies that you never needed cap relief in the first place. Which ... you can't do.

5. Their "relief expires" when they come off LTIR ... which is also when they come off IR. This isn't "well, we needed relief 3 days ago so he went on LTIR, but today we don't so we're taking him off LTIR - but a week from now we might need relief again, so we'll put him on LTIR then, and if 5 days after that we're good again we'll take him off LTIR, and ..." That's ... not how that works.

LTIR and IR are completely distinct in the respect that a player on IR still counts towards the cap.

If a player can actively practice and participate in team activities, there is no need for said player to be on LTIR any longer. He should then be deemed on IR and his cap hit is reinstated. Fairly simple concept.

Point #4 makes absolutely no sense. The player has already missed the time that LTIR requires.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Doesn't matter, playoffs are less important than the all star game. Playoffs prize money: 0. All star game prize money: 1mil.

At least judging by NHL's decisions.

Players do get playoff prize money, goes up each round

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

Exactly, and nor should there be. You don't punish teams exploiting an obvious but legal "loophole" in the rules. I think every team is required to exploit any rule that works in their favour, There is no "Hey, we're living up to the spirit of the rules" award in professional sports. If it was legal at the time, no asterisk required.

The the Lady Byng award most certainly exists.

 

[Slats432]

I think the easiest way to balance things out would be to have a rule that if the player is on LTIR on the last game of the season they are ineligible for the playoffs. Make sure they're a cap compliant team heading into the playoffs. Really discourage the players (Kucherov) that might be fine the last week of the season but only come off on Day 1 of the playoffs. And to discourage teams trying to stack the deck for the playoffs.

It makes zero sense for a guy to be ineligible for the playoffs, because there are real injuries out there.

My thought is that you can go over the cap by adding a player of $X amount to replace the player. Let's use $1M as the example.

If Stone is out, then you replace him with a $1M player. If you have five guys that are out, then you could conceivably be $5M over the cap come playoff time.

Replacing LTIR players dollar for dollar is the issue. If Stone was replaced by a $1M player, then no one would complain. They could ice a roster and not game the system.

 

[Bobby9]

It’s hilarious that the fans justifying this can’t objectively look at the fact that the same player has been in the same situation 3 years in a row and see it as nothing more than a legitimate coincidence.

The results that come about from these situations result in a distinct competitive advantage, as we have seen in both the Tampa and Vegas Cup wins.

When everything is said and done, Vegas will have a starting roster they would not have been able to have less than a week before. Again. With the same player being involved.

Hall 1st overall
RNH 1st overall
Yak 1st overall
Nurse 7th overall
Drai 3rd overall
McD 1st overall
Pulj 4th overall
Bouch 10th overall
Broberg 8th overall

 

[Slats432]

Lehner is a $5 million cap hit and hasn’t played at all and will not play.


An asterisk isn’t going to take down the championship banner I see in the stadium every time I’m there. I never saw an asterisk on that.

You aren't looking close enough.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

LTIR and IR are completely distinct in the respect that a player on IR still counts towards the cap.

A player on LTIR also still counts against the cap. It's just that part of his salary can be replaced by someone else.

If a player can actively practice and participate in team activities, there is no need for said player to be on LTIR any longer.

Really? This happens all the time. Guys get hurt, come back from injury, they practice for a bit, get more involved, start taking contact, get back up to speed to play. They don't hit the ice on Tuesday and practice and then jump into the lineup and play Wednesday. That's because there's a huge difference between "actively practice and participate in team activities" and "playing in a game."

He should then be deemed on IR and his cap hit is reinstated. Fairly simple concept.

See point above re: how players on LTIR still count against the cap.

Point #4 makes absolutely no sense. The player has already missed the time that LTIR requires.

In the current situation? Yes. In other situations, where a player may land on LTIR and doesn't hit the 10-game, 24-day threshold until Game 82? How do you propose the player "come off LTIR" to play in Game 82, yet still satisfy the requirements for having been on LTIR?

 

[Chaos2k7]

I’m actually expecting this to blow up and for the team to lose in the first round. And the regulars in the thread will be very happy when that happens. Maybe I’m wrong and the team loses in the second round. But personally I think the chances the team goes far are pretty low. This team isn’t getting out of the West.

Both our teams are unlikely to get back. But both are capable.

 

[Ol' Jase]

Hall 1st overall
RNH 1st overall
Yak 1st overall
Nurse 7th overall
Drai 3rd overall
McD 1st overall
Pulj 4th overall
Bouch 10th overall
Broberg 8th overall

Huh?

 

[Ford Prefect]

1. LTIR is a subset of IR. It's not a completely distinct thing.

2. Once you're on LTIR, you have to miss at least 10 games and 24 days. You can't be taken off early if you're healthy before 10 games and 24 days.

3. You can't put someone on LTIR unless you're sufficiently short on cap space and you have no other way to make moves than to put someone on LTIR. Which, means the player in question is so injured that they're going to miss 10 games and 24 days.

4. To "take someone off LTIR, but leave them on IR" implies "they won't miss 10 games and 24 days, but they're still unable to play." It also implies that you never needed cap relief in the first place. Which ... you can't do.

5. Their "relief expires" when they come off LTIR ... which is also when they come off IR. This isn't "well, we needed relief 3 days ago so he went on LTIR, but today we don't so we're taking him off LTIR - but a week from now we might need relief again, so we'll put him on LTIR then, and if 5 days after that we're good again we'll take him off LTIR, and ..." That's ... not how that works.

All of these are on the presumption that the player was placed on LTIR within the last month of the schedule. That's not the case, as if they were placed on LTIR over the last month, they could have not been LTIRed at the trade deadline, when most of the moves that result in exploitation occur, or at some point near the end of the season where their LTIR relief is relatively small. Any other point in the season they would have been healthy and counted then, meaning the team was compliant. As stated above, if they are healthy enough to be activated on game 1 or the first round of the playoffs, they should be counted as part of the team's salary structure for the last day of the season.

What it boils down to is the general feeling that teams exploit the intention of the rule. Holding out players that are otherwise healthy. Remember the Weber/Parise/Suter deals? Those contracts were an exploitation of the AAV requirement. It was recognized as such and changed to 7/8 year max extensions with limited backdiving of the contracts. I think what you're seeing is something similar that some people feel betrays the spirit of the rule, though there doesn't seem to be an appetite for changing it (at least at the NHL level).

 

[BMOK33]

I think the easiest way to balance things out would be to have a rule that if the player is on LTIR on the last game of the season they are ineligible for the playoffs. Make sure they're a cap compliant team heading into the playoffs. Really discourage the players (Kucherov) that might be fine the last week of the season but only come off on Day 1 of the playoffs. And to discourage teams trying to stack the deck for the playoffs.

I think what will happen is you'll be required to miss the opening round entirely