For what it's worth, you just referenced the section on Group V Free Agents... that's 10.1(b)(i). Right after it there is another different definition in 10.1(c) for Group VI Free Agents. Whereas the sentiment behind the 10 games seems to trace back to the RFA definition of "professional experience" per 10.2(a)(i).
And then the NHL only blurbed out "
all first- and second-year professionals, as well as all unsigned draft choices, will be exempt from selection (and will not be counted toward their club's applicable protection limits)" in their expansion draft precis. Which doesn't reference "professional games" or "professional experience" or any of the aforementioned sections of the CBA explicitly.
So pointing directly to CBA terminology is not going to provide a satisfactory answer in either case... you still need a roadmap of somebody from the league telling you explicitly what the Expansion Draft rules refer to, because the CBA was not written with the expansion draft in mind, and the NHL did not publish a detailed enough set of expansion draft rules with terminology as clearly defined as it was in the CBA.
Case study does support the 1 game definition, however. A lot of people in 2015 and 2016 took the "professional experience" definition from 10.2(a) beforehand, and iirc GeneralFanager which was widely used at the time led the charge on that, as that seemed like a more commonly referenced CBA section in general, and a justifiable definition from the CBA perspective, while still providing a wealth of young talent to Vegas in the expansion draft. But from anything I've seen, an example like Copp does indeed fly in the face of that definition. Players like Pesce and Skjei who I think may have been signed in circumstances similar to Fabbro (?) were not given 1 NHL game immediately but instead started with AHL time on ATOs. Which is presumably what Nashville would want to do with Fabbro as well if possible.
I like the idea of the 10 game rule better, it makes more sense to me, so lacking a clear definition from the NHL, I will stubbornly stick with that for the purposes of fun forum debates, even in the face of examples which don't seem to follow it!
But that's because I'm nuts... not because I think any clear CBA-related answer has been provided to us - nothing that I've been able to google up anyway. I think it will be interesting to see if a Fabbro contract really does materialize or if instead he goes to Milwaukee on ATO, or whether he actually does play 1 game with the Preds. Maybe Poile doesn't care as much about Pitlick, and maybe he would rather try to protect Fabbro, and maybe that's why an official contract hasn't gone up on the board yet despite all parties agreeing that Fabbro is "going pro" and leaving BU to join us? We will soon see.
But regardless, you can't point to the Group V Free Agent section to settle this. Unless you have a league memo that explicitly (inexplicably!) says that the right definition out of the multiple definitions in the CBA is the one attached to Group V Free Agency, which is essentially an extinct form of Free Agency these days anyway. It makes total sense that GeneralFanager would have honed in instead on the Group 2 definition. Which it seems has turned out to have been mistaken too. There is a section on the Waiver exemption status in 13.4 which may also capture the intent behind the 1 game rule, if one still persists on relying on the CBA.
For what it's worth!
10.2 Restricted Free Agents.
(a) Group 2 Players and Free Agents.
(i) (A) Any Player who meets the qualifications set forth in the following
chart and: (1) is not a Group 1 Player or a Group 4 Player, and (2) is not
an Unrestricted Free Agent, shall be deemed to be a "Group 2 Player" and
shall, at the expiration of his SPC, become a Restricted Free Agent. Any
such Player shall be completely free to negotiate and sign an SPC with any
Club, and any Club shall be completely free to negotiate and sign an SPC
with any such Player, subject to the provisions set forth in this Section. As
used in this Section 10.2, "age," including "First SPC Signing Age" means
a Player's age on September 15 of the calendar year in which he signs an
SPC regardless of his actual age on the date he signs such SPC.
First SPC Signing Age Eligible for Group 2 Free Agency
18 - 21 3 years professional experience
22 - 23 2 years professional experience
24 or older 1 year professional experience
For the purposes of this Section 10.2(a), a Player aged 18 or 19 earns a
year of professional experience by playing ten (10) or more NHL Games
in a given NHL Season, and a Player aged 20 or older (or who turns 20
between September 16 and December 31 of the year in which he signs his
first SPC) earns a year of professional experience by playing ten (10) or
more Professional Games under an SPC in a given League Year.
