Value of: Stashing players in Vegas during the expansion draft.

[Oddbob]

Call the cops. How is flipping Vanicek to another team after the ED illegal?

How does that help Washington in keeping Vanicek if that is their worry. Trades can't be in limbo during the expansion draft. If WSH wants to keep Vanicek they will have to make a move to keep him before the draft or risk losing him.

 

[Oddbob]

or three way trades.

example.


Islanders trade player X + 2nd round pick to Vegas for expansion protection.

After expansion draft

Vegas trades player X to Detroit.

Detroit trades player X back to the islanders for 5th

Bill Daly already said any moves where teams try and park players temporarily on Vegas would be scrutinized heavily and won't be allowed. He also said he doesn't expect any team to even try this, as they know the rules.

 

[CupInSIX]

How does that help Washington in keeping Vanicek if that is their worry. Trades can't be in limbo during the expansion draft. If WSH wants to keep Vanicek they will have to make a move to keep him before the draft or risk losing him.

Getting something is better than losing him for nothing or paying to keep him. And teams are allowed to make trades before the Expansion roster freeze.

 

[Djp]

Link to this?

it’s the same as you match an offer sheet.

it’s not in CBA because it’s expansion draft related or you getting a player back you traded.

 

[CupInSIX]

flipping after ED is fine

doing something like trading him to vegas pre draft then vegas flips him post draft within a Cale er year of transaction date is illegal.

They have to keep any player they acquire pre-ED for a calendar year? Do you have a source for this?

That sounds preposterous. Daly is looking at obvious draft circumvention and 'parking' players to be returned to the same team.

 

[Ciao]

Its probably easier, more straightforward, and no more expensive to just make a deal with Seattle.

None of these schemes would work, anyway.

 

[Oddbob]

Getting something is better than losing him for nothing or paying to keep him. And teams are allowed to make trades before the Expansion roster freeze.

Yeah, of course it is, but Vegas only has so much space, so at most they can take on some other teams younger lesser paid players, and won't be able to take on any really good players with an easy trade. Why would Vegas want Vanicek anyways as they already have 2 goalies for next year?

 

[CupInSIX]

Yeah, of course it is, but Vegas only has so much space, so at most they can take on some other teams younger lesser paid players, and won't be able to take on any really good players with an easy trade. Why would Vegas want Vanicek anyways as they already have 2 goalies for next year?

Well they could keep him and flip MAF, which is unlikely, but Daly doesn't know that so it's impossible to prove circumvention.

It's more likely that a team like Edmonton or the Sharks trade for Vanecek though.

 

[Djp]

They have to keep any player they acquire pre-ED for a calendar year? Do you have a source for this?

That sounds preposterous. Daly is looking at obvious draft circumvention and 'parking' players to be returned to the same team.

the same will apply to teams not named vegas where teamX has a 4th Dmannand other team has an 8th forward but room for a Dman( Arizona has an open D spot). Thrm trading for thrm thrn trading thrm back Dally woukd fine the teams. If they use middle ment, those teams will get punished too.

 

[CupInSIX]

the same will apply to teams not named vegas where teamX has a 4th Dmannand other team has an 8th forward but room for a Dman( Arizona has an open D spot). Thrm trading for thrm thrn trading thrm back Dally woukd fine the teams. If they use middle ment, those teams will get punished too.

I specifically said they would be flipping that player to a different team though.

And worse case scenario, they add more to the trades and space it out closer to training camp to make it look less obvious. That was a sticking point on some TDL trades where teams were retaining cap space. A minor leaguer had to be moved in order to satisfy the NHL.

And FWIW the league softened its stance on players being traded back to their original team in 2017. Ottawa was informed they were allowed to trade to get Methot back but they refused to beat the Dallas offer.

 

[majormajor]

Scenario B would be banned.

Scenario A happens but isn't quite as common for a couple of reasons.

1) most teams don't have one good player and a bunch of bums exposed. They have smaller differences in value, so you're losing a similar value player to Seattle no matter what trades you do.

2) The expansion team knows that teams can sell good players and that they can finagle guys into waiving their NMCs if badly pressed. So they're open to taking a 2nd rounder or something in exchange for taking a "lesser" player. This is what Vegas did, and it's why we saw a lot less pre-draft movement in 2017 than anticipated.

 

[jetsforever]

It's not like they can be very stealthy about circumvention - there are only 30 teams

 

[These Are The Days]

This gets brought up like every 2 months. Staahhpp

 

[Freudian]

Seattle didn't pay $650M to allow other NHL teams to screw them over.

I would assume the league can punish teams at their discretion for circumventing the cap system, just like they could punish Arizona for testing players before the draft.

 

[DingDongCharlie]

Really....the already are by not having to participate in the draft.

Thats cause they get zero of the expansion fee $$

 

[mouser]

A bit offtopic, but I have a specific expansion draft question and you seem to have decent knowledge around the rules.

Would it be considered cap circumvention if Seattle takes EJ, and then trades him back to Colorado at 50% retained for their actual expansion pick + 1st (just an example).

It would not be allowed, but the governing rule has nothing to do with the Expansion Draft.

Teams are not allowed to acquire any Player in a Retained Salary Transaction who was on the team's Reserve List within the past calendar year (365 days or 366 w/leap year).


*Reserve List includes all players under contract, plus players the team holds rights to like unsigned draft picks, RFA's and defected players.

 

[mouser]

I specifically said they would be flipping that player to a different team though.

And worse case scenario, they add more to the trades and space it out closer to training camp to make it look less obvious. That was a sticking point on some TDL trades where teams were retaining cap space. A minor leaguer had to be moved in order to satisfy the NHL.

And FWIW the league softened its stance on players being traded back to their original team in 2017. Ottawa was informed they were allowed to trade to get Methot back but they refused to beat the Dallas offer.

Players like Methot selected by the Expansion team (Vegas here) can be traded back to the original team at any time.

Players traded before the expansion draft cannot be reacquired by the original team before January 1st.

 

[biturbo19]

The whole problem with the basic concept of this is that it either:

a)is obvious circumvention of the rules of the expansion draft and will not fly.

or

b)is basically just a team giving up not only a "good player" but then also losing a "worse player" in the expansion draft. Which is a double-whammy, and doubly decimates your depth, which is of no interest to any actual team, where depth is key to success these days.

The only way i could see it working...is as a 1 time thing, if one specific team has a really good player that is sure to be claimed. Like...not just a decent middle of roster piece, but a bona fide impact player somehow. And i just don't see anybody having that problem. And Vegas don't really have the picks/exempt assets to make a deal for that caliber of player anyway. So it's a moot concept.

 

[CupInSIX]

Players like Methot selected by the Expansion team (Vegas here) can be traded back to the original team at any time.

Players traded before the expansion draft cannot be reacquired by the original team before January 1st.

I know I'm just pointing out how the league seemingly relaxed on something everyone thought was a hard and fast rule during the last expansion. Or rather, Lebrun had to speak with the league & clarify this for everyone post expansion draft.

 

[Mersss]

A bit offtopic, but I have a specific expansion draft question and you seem to have decent knowledge around the rules.

Would it be considered cap circumvention if Seattle takes EJ, and then trades him back to Colorado at 50% retained for their actual expansion pick + 1st (just an example).

EJ won't waive

 

[Riseonfire]

Vegas is the Trojan Horse for the draft hahaha

 

[McSuper]

It is easier to just pay Seattle not to pick your good player . Why do anything illegal and risk losing draft picks like Arizona has with their illegal interviews of players before the combine . Fans scream about a player that cheats or crosses the line but this is asking a GM to do that very thing . Owners split 650,000,000 it cost to get a franchise the least they can do is honour the deal they made !

 

[tsujimoto74]

or three way trades.

example.


Islanders trade player X + 2nd round pick to Vegas for expansion protection.

After expansion draft

Vegas trades player X to Detroit.

Detroit trades player X back to the islanders for 5th

Seems like it would be easier, and maybe cheaper, just to give Seattle a pick to select/not select a particular player

 

[McSuper]

I thought about a different approach to dealing with Seattle . For Example Edmonton needs a goalie . The talk to Seattle about selecting a goalie they want then after the ED draft trading for said goalie . I am sure the NHL would probably have rules about talking trades about a player that isn’t Seattle property. I am sure Edmonton could say we are looking for a goalie if you have an extra one after the draft we will touch base with you .

 

[SI90]

Seems like it would be easier, and maybe cheaper, just to give Seattle a pick to select/not select a particular player

absolutely. But Seattle has to build the best team they can. They don’t have to accept the deal. They may like the player available to them better than any compensation offered.

In my hypothetical scenario Vegas and Detroit get assets without giving up anything. That’s why they’re more likely to take less compensation.
Seattle would probably want a lot more in return in order to NOT select a certain player.