2024 spring GM meetings underway

[LadyStanley]

 

[Flukeshot]

Which is perfectly legal when you build a roster within the rules of the salary cap by saving cap space for it. Which, some people want to put in a rule to say after the fact, "that's not legal."

Which, if implemented, will kill activity at the trade deadline.

I mean literally these GM meetings are about changing existing rules so yes if you want to call it after the fact that's fine.

I think the real matter is the nhl brass wasn't smart enough at the time to foresee such an issue and now doesn't want to do the hard work to change it.

1- there is no cap in the playoffs bc the history is there that players don't receive their standard pay check then.

2- LTIR was to ensure teams were not at a disadvantage due to injuries. From a legal point of view, the "spirit of the law" or the reason for its existence is more important than the wording or implementation and those can be changed to uphold the spirit.

3- There is no doubt that LTIR is being abused today. But no one wants to acknowledge it on the record. Should teams carry an advantage into the playoffs because they had a conveniently timed injury?

4- if no one wants to fix the rule why not just come to a better solution, ex. No team cap after March 1st (or a week before TDL). Give all teams an even playing field. Make the final month of the season more exciting.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

I mean literally these GM meetings are about changing existing rules so yes if you want to call it after the fact that's fine.

The rule that everyone wants to implement .... would be an "after the fact" rule. And, it would prevent a number of roster moves between teams and trash movement at the trade deadline.

You get to put together a roster, under the in-season rules of the salary cap, which permit a team to save cap space so as to be able to add players with that saved cap space which permits the team to "have a roster over the cap" in absolute terms, but under the cap in real terms because the overage is "paid back" the rest of the way, and there may be (likely will be) cap savings that remain at the end of the season.

And then, everyone's desired rule comes in and says "hey, that lineup you could play in Game 82, that we said was perfectly legal? Well, now it's not - start pulling guys out until you're compliant with this new cap that you didn't have to play under in Game 82 but you do in Playoff Game 1."

Though at the rate people keep wanting this, I kind of want it put in just so that in the first season everyone realizes how much they f***ed things and then see how many of the same people come up with beyond idiotic "solutions" to the problem that they created, when listening to people who said this idea is going to cause more problems than it solves would have saved everyone the trouble - because "f***, I was wrong, maybe these people that kept telling me I was wrong were right all along" is never getting uttered, no matter how much they realize it.

 

[LadyStanley]

3- There is no doubt that LTIR is being abused today. But no one wants to acknowledge it on the record.

Please provide proof.

NHL is very concerned that players are injured enough they will be out 10+ games and apparently reviews medical records to ensure that. The union would be up in arms if a (100%) healthy player were kept on IR/LTIR rather than being activated.

How often have you heard about guy held out of RS game and it is said he'd be in the lineup if it was the playoffs?

Could it be that many of these returning for game 1 of playoffs aren't 100% healthy, but the team is better with mostly healthy player than not.

 

[LadyStanley]

June GMs meeting moved to September. Coaches involved as well.

 

[rojac]

Please provide proof.

NHL is very concerned that players are injured enough they will be out 10+ games and apparently reviews medical records to ensure that. The union would be up in arms if a (100%) healthy player were kept on IR/LTIR rather than being activated.

How often have you heard about guy held out of RS game and it is said he'd be in the lineup if it was the playoffs?

Could it be that many of these returning for game 1 of playoffs aren't 100% healthy, but the team is better with mostly healthy player than not.

In any event, LTIR changes are not something that will be made through a GM meeting. It's going to involve negotiation between the NHL and NHLPA and almost certainly require changes to the CBA. While it's conceivable that the two sides could negotiate a side agreement like the one after the Kovalchuk deal that placed further limitations on long term contracts, I'm guessing they may prefer to handle it as part of the new CBA that will start with the 2026-27 season.

 

[archangel2]

So if your favorite team loses one of their best players and can't afford to bring in any replacements without going over the cap - you'll be OK with this?

I believe the problem come playoff time and the team gets use both players

 

[Flukeshot]

Please provide proof.

NHL is very concerned that players are injured enough they will be out 10+ games and apparently reviews medical records to ensure that. The union would be up in arms if a (100%) healthy player were kept on IR/LTIR rather than being activated.

How often have you heard about guy held out of RS game and it is said he'd be in the lineup if it was the playoffs?

Could it be that many of these returning for game 1 of playoffs aren't 100% healthy, but the team is better with mostly healthy player than not.

Fair criticism, I of course don't have proof, so I'll rephrase as, I have no doubt. The TSN talking heads discussed the topic recently and it ultimately came down to not enough within the nhl care about tackling the issue because of that injury discussion/debate.

So I will say I have no doubt that there are wink wink nudge nudge agreements between team staff, along the lines of, hey we know you would likely be good to go 1-2 weeks prior to season end, but if you stay on IR longer we will get to improve our team and you'll be back game 1 of the playoffs.

I don't think it's a coincidence that we've never seen a player come back for late season games that would force a team to go over the cap bc the team gambled on that LTIR cap space being available.

One proposal they discussed was indeed, if you don't play in the 82nd game due to injury you're ineligible for X amount of playoff games.

But then the reverse argument kicks in, what would the PA say to having healthy players not in the playoffs.

I am really not even passionate about the core issue, more than the illogical standard that during the reg season your team has to be cap compliant and then come playoffs if you play your injury cards right you can have both the 8m original player and his 8m replacement player in the lineup.

So again if no one has an issue with it, remove the cap at the time of the trade deadline so that all teams are on level grounds.

Its not like new players are being added to the overall nhl payroll at that time so it doesn't impact leaguewide HRR share/spend.

 

[LadyStanley]

Its not like new players are being added to the overall nhl payroll at that time so it doesn't impact leaguewide HRR share/spend.

Ah, but that was almost not the case with Phil Kessel negotiating deal with Vancouver. TDL is also the deadline for UFA signings for rhe season.

 

[Flukeshot]

Ah, but that was almost not the case with Phil Kessel negotiating deal with Vancouver. TDL is also the deadline for UFA signings for rhe season.

That's a manageable issue. All playoffs eligible contracts have to be on the book before the TDL anyway. Even if that were a viable loophole you move that date up a month and it would have almost no impact.

 

[Ciao]

I mean literally these GM meetings are about changing existing rules so yes if you want to call it after the fact that's fine.

I think the real matter is the nhl brass wasn't smart enough at the time to foresee such an issue and now doesn't want to do the hard work to change it.

1- there is no cap in the playoffs bc the history is there that players don't receive their standard pay check then.

2- LTIR was to ensure teams were not at a disadvantage due to injuries. From a legal point of view, the "spirit of the law" or the reason for its existence is more important than the wording or implementation and those can be changed to uphold the spirit.

3- There is no doubt that LTIR is being abused today. But no one wants to acknowledge it on the record. Should teams carry an advantage into the playoffs because they had a conveniently timed injury?

4- if no one wants to fix the rule why not just come to a better solution, ex. No team cap after March 1st (or a week before TDL). Give all teams an even playing field. Make the final month of the season more exciting.

I have a better solution: just eliminate the salary cap entirely.

 

[LadyStanley]

I have a better solution: just eliminate the salary cap entirely.

How will you achieve "cost certainty" that resulted from the league locking out players and losing an entire season over?

 

[Ciao]

How will you achieve "cost certainty" that resulted from the league locking out players and losing an entire season over?

Cost certainty?

I would just stop supporting money-losing teams.

Those who have money would spend it and those that don't won't, just like every other business. Pay-up or shut- up. That's certainty.

 

[LadyStanley]

So you want a Yankees-style domination where only the HAVES will have the top UFAs?

 

[Fourier]

Please provide proof.

NHL is very concerned that players are injured enough they will be out 10+ games and apparently reviews medical records to ensure that. The union would be up in arms if a (100%) healthy player were kept on IR/LTIR rather than being activated.

How often have you heard about guy held out of RS game and it is said he'd be in the lineup if it was the playoffs?

Could it be that many of these returning for game 1 of playoffs aren't 100% healthy, but the team is better with mostly healthy player than not.

Set aside any concern about abuse and simply look at what a difference timing means. If a top team loses a $10M player five games into the season for 20 games LTIR allows them flexibility to replace that player internally. What would be very difficult and very rare would be using that space to replace that player with a high impact player comparable to the one who got hurt. So in that situation the team needs to survive the loss without gaining any significant advantage which a top team can probably do. Fast forward and assume that that injury happens at the TDL. That top team is now mostly a lock for a playoff position and now instead of having to be restricted to internal replacements the team has money to go shopping for not only one impact player but because of the nature of the deadline possibly two.

The difference in these two scenarios is minimal in terms of what LTIR is designed to do for a team losing a player long term to an injury. But the difference in timing results in a potentially massive advantage to the latter team when it really counts, in the playoffs. Independent of the legitimacy of the injury to Stone, because it happens at the TDL Vegas for example was able to add both Hanifan and Hertl without touching their core. It might be argued that they could have worked in Hanifan anyways at the TDL but there is no way they could have fit in Hertl had the not been using LTIR.

It is clear that there is no easy fix for this that is probably acceptable to both parties. But it is also clear to me that this advantage was not an intended part of the LTIR rule even if you completely ignore any potential for abuse.

 

[edog37]

The union would be up in arms if a (100%) healthy player were kept on IR/LTIR rather than being activated.

Players on IR/LTIR are still getting paid their salary. That’s all the union cares about.

I have a better solution: just eliminate the salary cap entirely.

The league isn’t going back to that ever. Nor should it.

Cost certainty?

I would just stop supporting money-losing teams.

Those who have money would spend it and those that don't won't, just like every other business. Pay-up or shut- up. That's certainty.

The NFL, NBA, & NHL strongly disagree with you

 

[edog37]

Cost certainty?

I would just stop supporting money-losing teams.

Those who have money would spend it and those that don't won't, just like every other business. Pay-up or shut- up. That's certainty.

The NFL, NBA, & NHL strongly disagree with you

I mean literally these GM meetings are about changing existing rules so yes if you want to call it after the fact that's fine.

I think the real matter is the nhl brass wasn't smart enough at the time to foresee such an issue and now doesn't want to do the hard work to change it.

1- there is no cap in the playoffs bc the history is there that players don't receive their standard pay check then.

2- LTIR was to ensure teams were not at a disadvantage due to injuries. From a legal point of view, the "spirit of the law" or the reason for its existence is more important than the wording or implementation and those can be changed to uphold the spirit.

3- There is no doubt that LTIR is being abused today. But no one wants to acknowledge it on the record. Should teams carry an advantage into the playoffs because they had a conveniently timed injury?

4- if no one wants to fix the rule why not just come to a better solution, ex. No team cap after March 1st (or a week before TDL). Give all teams an even playing field. Make the final month of the season more exciting.

there nothing to change. Every team can potentially benefit, so it’s already a level playing field. People really need to stop whining about something that’s not a thing. The cap can’t be extended into the playoffs since there’s no revenue recapture prediction model to account for playoff revenues by team.

The GMs don’t want it since it would take away a roster mgmt tool. You get these guys monitor cap space on a daily basis right?

The teams/players don’t want it since it takes away a possibility to add talent at the deadline for a possible Cup run.