Speculation: Armchair GM/Rumors Thread XIX

[Demetric]

source? because I saw no such thing, just people speculating.

just like the one that came out today from a media source about the NMC, not direct from the NHL so it is still not a full rule yet, but it would have been from like sportsnet or something but yes it was even speculation from them at the time, just like this whole NMC thing.

gary lawless ‏@garylawless 5h5 hours ago
More #nhl expansion draft info. sources indicate no-moves must be protected by teams. no-trade clauses not exempt and can be left exposed.

that to me still leaves the door open and sound like speculation to me, educated speculation, but speculation none the less

 

[Lunatik]

just like the one that came out today from a media source about the NMC, not direct from the NHL so it is still not a full rule yet, but it would have been from like sportsnet or something but yes it was even speculation from them at the time, just like this whole NMC thing.

gary lawless ‏@garylawless 5h5 hours ago
More #nhl expansion draft info. sources indicate no-moves must be protected by teams. no-trade clauses not exempt and can be left exposed.

that to me still leaves the door open and sound like speculation to me, educated speculation, but speculation none the less

I meant a media source, which Lawless is (somehow, the guy is terrible). So if you are claiming that that other info came out (which I am pretty sure it didn't), please provide a media source saying what you claim.

 

[Flames Fanatic]

Fighting about speculation at this point is silly. Until we have a clear concise explanation more than a few tweets, everything is still mostly speculation as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Lunatik]

Fighting about speculation at this point is silly. Until we have a clear concise explanation more than a few tweets, everything is still mostly speculation as far as I'm concerned.

when many sources are reporting NMC's need to be protected, it's a safe bet that is accurate. But if one is to speculate, it makes more sense to prepare for worst case.

 

[Flames Fanatic]

when many sources are reporting NMC's need to be protected, it's a safe bet that is accurate. But if one is to speculate, it makes more sense to prepare for worst case.

Yes, but we don't know when the draft will be held exactly, with when it being held affecting players like Wideman.

Personally I think it makes more sense to think about it logically anyways. I don't see why teams would be forced to protect guys with 3 days left on their contracts if the expansion draft is June 27th sort of thing. Nor why an expansion team would want a guy that can walk in 3 days.

 

[MonyontheMoney]

Not sure how accurate this is but worth sharing. Columbus is in a bad spot with their NMC.
http://www.nhlfreeagents.com/#!NHL-NHLPA-Agree-on-Exp-Rules/c1l2b/572399a80cf2dcaa5312a4a7

 

[Demetric]

I meant a media source, which Lawless is (somehow, the guy is terrible). So if you are claiming that that other info came out (which I am pretty sure it didn't), please provide a media source saying what you claim.

it seems we are at an impasse, I will wait till the final rules are released and then we can all argue on the interpretation of those rules and how each team will handle them. Till then good day.

 

[Flames Fanatic]

Not sure how accurate this is but worth sharing. Columbus is in a bad spot with their NMC.
http://www.nhlfreeagents.com/#!NHL-NHLPA-Agree-on-Exp-Rules/c1l2b/572399a80cf2dcaa5312a4a7

Ha! They agree with me!

My favorite part of that list is that Clowe has a NMC. Wtf was that contract. Awful in every way.

Plus as we've discussed before I'm not sure if all of those are still active. For example, Phaneuf waived his to go to Ottawa, and we weren't sure if once waived they were still active.

 

[Anglesmith]

I'm pretty confident the NHL and the NHLPA will sort this out. If it's a pending UFA (where there's zero effect on the player if they are taken in the draft or not) or an LTIR guy with an NMC (where there's zero effect on the player if they are taken in the draft or not), there will be some kind of mechanism to avoid that having a significant impact.

 

[Lunatik]

Yes, but we don't know when the draft will be held exactly, with when it being held affecting players like Wideman.

Personally I think it makes more sense to think about it logically anyways. I don't see why teams would be forced to protect guys with 3 days left on their contracts if the expansion draft is June 27th sort of thing. Nor why an expansion team would want a guy that can walk in 3 days.

It will very likely be the day before the Entry draft, like they have every other time. So I'd put my money on June 22nd, 2017 in Chicago.

I would love for them to do things logically, but at the end of the day a contract is a contract and unless the NHLPA agrees to those NMCs not counting they will count.

Personally I think they should push the start of free agency back to July 2nd and hold the draft on the 1st when there are no questions about contracts (although who pays July 1st bonuses will then become a question), but the NHL will want them to have players heading into the Entry Draft so they can partake in what has become more of a trade day than the deadline.

 

[Lunatik]

I'm pretty confident the NHL and the NHLPA will sort this out. If it's a pending UFA (where there's zero effect on the player if they are taken in the draft or not) or an LTIR guy with an NMC (where there's zero effect on the player if they are taken in the draft or not), there will be some kind of mechanism to avoid that having a significant impact.

How is it any different than Tampa trading Stamkos' rights to the Oilers? Stamkos would still have to waive his NMC even though he would never sign there.

 

[Flames Fanatic]

It will very likely be the day before the Entry draft, like they have every other time. So I'd put my money on June 22nd, 2017 in Chicago.

I would love for them to do things logically, but at the end of the day a contract is a contract and unless the NHLPA agrees to those NMCs not counting they will count.

Personally I think they should push the start of free agency back to July 2nd and hold the draft on the 1st when there are no questions about contracts (although who pays July 1st bonuses will then become a question), but the NHL will want them to have players heading into the Entry Draft so they can partake in what has become more of a trade day than the deadline.

Agreed to the bolded.

 

[Flames Fanatic]

How is it any different than Tampa trading Stamkos' rights to the Oilers? Stamkos would still have to waive his NMC even though he would never sign there.

Why would the Oilers do it then? They wouldn't. They would just wait for the pre-free agency talk with the players period (blanking on the appropriate name).

 

[Anglesmith]

How is it any different than Tampa trading Stamkos' rights to the Oilers? Stamkos would still have to waive his NMC even though he would never sign there.

I'm not saying that's an issue, I'm saying forcing teams to protect a guy when it makes zero sense is an issue.

I don't mind making teams protect NMCs who have term left and will be playing hockey the next season. That makes sense. But being forced to protect a guy who either a) is going to turn around a sign with someone else before ever performing any duty for your team ever again or b) is no longer medically able to play hockey and will be living at home regardless of who owns his rights completely throws out the system.

 

[Lunatik]

Agreed to the bolded.

You know me FF, I have put a TON of thought into this.

Now let me ask you a question. I've been an NHL fan for over 2.5 decades and you have been a fan for what 15 years (judging by your age)? We both pay a great deal of attention.

When was the last time you saw the NHL do something because it was logical?

 

[Lunatik]

I'm not saying that's an issue, I'm saying forcing teams to protect a guy when it makes zero sense is an issue.

I don't mind making teams protect NMCs who have term left and will be playing hockey the next season. That makes sense. But being forced to protect a guy who either a) is going to turn around a sign with someone else before ever performing any duty for your team ever again or b) is no longer medically able to play hockey and will be living at home regardless of who owns his rights completely throws out the system.

I'm not saying it wouldn't be stupid, I just don't think the NHL cares about being logical, because they never have before.

 

[Flames Fanatic]

You know me FF, I have put a TON of thought into this.

Now let me ask you a question. I've been an NHL fan for over 2.5 decades and you have been a fan for what 15 years (judging by your age)? We both pay a great deal of attention.

When was the last time you saw the NHL do something because it was logical?

I have a picture of me in a Flames onesie at age 2, does that count?

But yeah following the NHL closely since about 2000.

As to the bolded.... I really don't want to think about it. Watching politics in Canada is bad enough (let alone observing the States from afar) that I don't want to apply the "lets look at their actions critically and logically" filter to the NHL right now.

 

[Lunatik]

I have a picture of me in a Flames onesie at age 2, does that count?

But yeah following the NHL closely since about 2000.

As to the bolded.... I really don't want to think about it. Watching politics in Canada is bad enough (let alone observing the States from afar) that I don't want to apply the "lets look at their actions critically and logically" filter to the NHL right now.

and there is my answer

 

[Flames Fanatic]

and there is my answer

You can't blame people for wanting to speculate about it logically though. Let them have their fun

 

[Anglesmith]

I'm not saying it wouldn't be stupid, I just don't think the NHL cares about being logical, because they never have before.

I think they do. They change rules when they have a reason to, like in the Kovalchuk fiasco and the John Scott fiasco.

 

[Lunatik]

I think they do. They change rules when they have a reason to, like in the Kovalchuk fiasco and the John Scott fiasco.

That wasn't logic though. Kovalchuk was the NHL folding and not standing behind their decision. The Scott thing was them folding to to public pressure.

So maybe they will fold to do that, but it's not really logic based, it's because they're spineless.

 

[Calculon]

I think they do. They change rules when they have a reason to, like in the Kovalchuk fiasco and the John Scott fiasco.

The whole compensation for poached executives saga suggests otherwise.

Current NHL administration tends to be a whole lot more reactive then proactive.

 

[Anglesmith]

That wasn't logic though. Kovalchuk was the NHL folding and not standing behind their decision. The Scott thing was them folding to to public pressure.

So maybe they will fold to do that, but it's not really logic based, it's because they're spineless.

In both cases, it was making a common-sense decision to rectify what would otherwise be a big controversy. That's what I'm saying they should do here. If you want to call it 'folding,' fine. I hope they fold to what is sure to be significant pressure from GMs.

 

[BigRangy]

Regardless, nobody actually knows what the rules are right now. It's fun to speculate, but let's not get our knickers twisted while we pile on the Wideman buyout-train before it actually leaves the station.

 

[Lunatik]

Regardless, nobody actually knows what the rules are right now. It's fun to speculate, but let's not get our knickers twisted while we pile on the Wideman buyout-train before it actually leaves the station.

We need to dump his contact regardless, buying him out will leave us without what asset? I think he's better than most people here and I'd peg him at no more value than a 2nd rund pick and that is assuming he doesn't need to be protected.