GWNR
Registered User
Dorion still thinks MacArthur is exempt from expansion draft, I wouldn't be so sure.
Terminating his contract is only in Sens interest. I doubt Lulea and Jaros will go there.
He is exempt?
Confirmed with Link: Christian Jaros signs ELC
- Thread starter SixthSens
- Start date
He is exempt?
The point of that rule is that we need pick at least 2F to expose from that list. We already can expose two of Ryan, Burrows, Smith but most likely we'll sign Dzingel and Pyatt in the next couple of weeks to add to it.
MacArthur is eligible to be taken because he came back from his "potential career-ending injury" that could've made him exempt.
He has to have played a certain number of games in the last two years to meet exposure guidelines, I thought.
GWNR
Registered User
The rule says:
* Players with potential career-ending injuries who have missed more than the previous 60 consecutive games (or who otherwise have been confirmed to have a career-threatening injury) may not be used to satisfy a club's player exposure requirements, unless approval is received from the NHL. Such players also may be deemed exempt from selection by the League.
https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-expansion-draft-rules/c-281010592
So I guess he isn't exempt becuase he came back meaning it wasn't consecutive.
edguy
Registered User
Well the way that is worded makes it seem like he cant be exposed (or taken).. " (or who otherwise have been confirmed to have a career-threatening injury)"
He is confirmed to have a career-threatnening injury.
aragorn
Do The Right Thing
- Aug 8, 2004
- 28,608
- 9,124
Exposing Ryan & Burrows from that list make the most sense since Ryan has a huge cap hit & Burrows because he is a bottom six player winding down. I would also expose MacArthur, I doubt LV takes a flyer on him knowing his injury history.
Congrats on signing Jaros, great signing.
UnHappyDude
Fire Dorion
- Jan 11, 2011
- 2,128
- 175
How the hell is there so much confusion around exposure requirement and protection eligibility this close to the draft. This should not be something people are guessing at. Another major flub by fumbling Bettman
jbeck5
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2009
- 16,315
- 3,300
This. A list of who needs protection and who doesn't should have been released by the nhl to the public months ago
People are consistently confusing the eligibility requirements with the minimum exposure requirements. They are two different thresholds.
So a team may have 5 players that are exposed because they meet the minimum eligibility requirements (i.e. a 3rd year pro who hasn't played many NHL games), but they still have to expose one player who meets the minimum exposure requirements (i.e. 50 NHL games).
This is ideal for Vegas in that there is a decent pool of young non-NHL players they can choose from (3rd year pros like Charles Hudon for the Canadiens, for example), but at the same time, each team needs to have a veteran exposed at each position so Vegas can choose enough NHL quality players. So in Montreal's case, they have to expose Hudon, but Hudon doesn't meet the requirements of a veteran, so the Habs still have to have at least one veteran signed and exposed. Most teams have this going on.
In MacArthur's case, he doesn't qualify for exposure requirements for the team, but either way, he also doesn't have to be protected because he hasn't played enough games over the last two years - not sure what rule that is, but Dorion mentioned it on the radio today. Doesn't matter anyway, as we'll have vets to expose already, and MacArthur isn't getting taken anyway.
So a team may have 5 players that are exposed because they meet the minimum eligibility requirements (i.e. a 3rd year pro who hasn't played many NHL games), but they still have to expose one player who meets the minimum exposure requirements (i.e. 50 NHL games).
This is ideal for Vegas in that there is a decent pool of young non-NHL players they can choose from (3rd year pros like Charles Hudon for the Canadiens, for example), but at the same time, each team needs to have a veteran exposed at each position so Vegas can choose enough NHL quality players. So in Montreal's case, they have to expose Hudon, but Hudon doesn't meet the requirements of a veteran, so the Habs still have to have at least one veteran signed and exposed. Most teams have this going on.
In MacArthur's case, he doesn't qualify for exposure requirements for the team, but either way, he also doesn't have to be protected because he hasn't played enough games over the last two years - not sure what rule that is, but Dorion mentioned it on the radio today. Doesn't matter anyway, as we'll have vets to expose already, and MacArthur isn't getting taken anyway.
Sens of Anarchy
Registered User
- Jul 9, 2013
- 65,394
- 50,086
I think for him not to be taken he would have to be declared exempt by the league.
Its obvious he does not meet the minimal exposure requirement
JungleBeat
Registered User
danielpalfredsson
youtube dot com /watch?v=CdqMZ_s7Y6k
- Aug 14, 2013
- 16,575
- 9,269
I'm pretty sure either Pierre Dorion is confused or he fumbled his words and Garrioch not doing his homework as a journalist caused further confusion.
That above is the list courtesy of TSN of players who the NHL has ruled that Vegas IS NOT ALLOWED TO SELECT due to those players being considered as having long term injuries. MacArthur is not on the list. Can that change? I don't know. But with what we know right now, VEGAS CAN SELECT MACARTHUR.
The Senators have to expose two forwards that meet a certain games played requirement. MacArthur does not meet this requirement. Does this mean Vegas cannot select MacArthur if exposed? NO. VEGAS CAN STILL SELECT MAC IF EXPOSED.
All it means is that as of now the Senators either have to expose two of Ryan, Hoffman, Brassard, Stone, Turris, Smith, or Burrows...OR the Senators have to sign most likely one of Pyatt, Dzingel, or Stalberg to an extension prior to the expansion draft so that they can expose them along with the last forward from that list who won't make the cut (Ryan or Burrows?). They can also expose Pageau if he is signed prior to expansion.
Keep in mind, if Dorion makes a side deal with Vegas where future considerations=Vegas selects (insert player here) all this is pointless because it won't matter who the Sens expose since Vegas would have already agreed to select for example Chris Wideman. It's not like they can accept a draft pick in order to select Wideman and then pull a twist on everybody at draft day and take Derick Brassard or something.
Neiler
Registered Loser
- Jul 16, 2006
- 2,195
- 786
Sorry I'm on mobile and can't remember the tags so someone else can embed... This needs to be in this thread:
https://youtu.be/U0dBJ1pq9Qk
https://youtu.be/U0dBJ1pq9Qk
Six Assets
Tim Stützle
Caeldan
Whippet Whisperer
- Jun 21, 2008
- 15,459
- 1,046
He was never exempt.
Just couldn't be used to satisfy exposure rules.
Remember the team creates a list of players who they are protecting, every other contract on that 50 man roster is eligible to be taken (with some exceptions).
But they have to make sure they have at least a certain number of players with certain salary and games played requirements available to be selected from.
All of his games played for Slovakia (I'm from Slovakia), and then 5-10 Lulea games a season.
And to the above poster, a good Stanley Cup winning team has someone of Jaros's calibre on their third pairing, not either their first or second...
