Prospect Info: Kirill Kaprizov lll

Status
Not open for further replies.

mouser

Business of Hockey
Jul 13, 2006
29,285
12,586
South Mountain
This whole post is so wrong. I can't even break it down.

Its so disheartening when the situation has been explained dozens of times across many threads and you still have people like this who post so brazenly as though they know the rules when they clearly don't...

My post was three sentences long. It shouldn’t be that difficult to respond to it and point out which parts are wrong?
 

2Pair

Registered User
Oct 8, 2017
12,633
5,103
My post was three sentences long. It shouldn’t be that difficult to respond to it and point out which parts are wrong?
I'll give it a shot.
Sentence #1 is completely irrelevant. Pointing out that they can sign a contract for next season doesn't really add anything to the discussion as to why they aren't being allowed to sign one this year.

Sentence #2 is completely wrong. There has never been a "typical deadline" for a team to sign a player from their reserve list. If you're still playing the deadline hasn't come. Pretty sure Minnesota still has games scheduled for this year.

Sentence #3 is completely irrelevant. A contract is a legally binding document. The CBA is a legally binding document. You don't get to change these things by gut feelings. This rule change could cost Kaprizov millions of dollars. That's not something that Bettman/Daly get to affect by using "odds are"
 

P10p

Registered User
May 15, 2012
3,017
1,435
My post was three sentences long. It shouldn’t be that difficult to respond to it and point out which parts are wrong?

The option to sign a KHL player after his teams season is over, so long as he is on your reserve list, and have him join your NHL team for the playoffs has always been there. Now they have taken it away for no good reason.

This isn't about "extending" some deadline so the Wild can sign Kaprizov. As soon as his season with CSKA ended he would be eligible to sign any other year.

The problem most wild fans have is that this is so arbitrary as is affects 6 players league wide, and less than that will actually play for their teams if permitted. So the excuse of "too many moving parts" is nonsense.

Secondly, wild fans have been waiting for 5 years to see Kirill Kaprizov sign a contract. And now that he is on the brink of signing, the league arbitrarily says no. With no real sensible reasoning.

Especially puzzling as you would expect the league to be welcoming and accommodating to young, exciting, fan drawing talent.
 

mouser

Business of Hockey
Jul 13, 2006
29,285
12,586
South Mountain
Let's start out with the post response I received:
This whole post is so wrong. I can't even break it down.

Its so disheartening when the situation has been explained dozens of times across many threads and you still have people like this who post so brazenly as though they know the rules when they clearly don't...

Going through your response:
I'll give it a shot.
Sentence #1 is completely irrelevant. Pointing out that they can sign a contract for next season doesn't really add anything to the discussion as to why they aren't being allowed to sign one this year.

That's fine, I disagree, but even if you think it's irrelevant that doesn't make it wrong.

Sentence #2 is completely wrong. There has never been a "typical deadline" for a team to sign a player from their reserve list. If you're still playing the deadline hasn't come. Pretty sure Minnesota still has games scheduled for this year.

You're ignoring important context in my sentence:
"The issue at question is whether the league should extend the typical deadline for signing contracts starting in the current 2019-20 season long past how it historically has worked."

I very clearly highlighted this is a decision the NHL was facing, and I didn't even take a position to be declared right or wrong. Historically teams very rarely sign players after the playoffs start. In the past four seasons three players have signed after the playoffs started, the latest was April 15th, 3-4 days after the playoffs started and only one of those three players actually participated in the playoffs. Should the extraordinary circumstances this season allow teams to sign players to contracts that otherwise wouldn't have been possible?

Sentence #3 is completely irrelevant. A contract is a legally binding document. The CBA is a legally binding document. You don't get to change these things by gut feelings. This rule change could cost Kaprizov millions of dollars. That's not something that Bettman/Daly get to affect by using "odds are"

Sentence #3 is relevant to Sentence #2. If there had been no league suspension of play due to COVID this season odds would have been stacked again Kaprizov being able to sign a contract burning the 2019-20 season with Minnesota.

The league can't unilaterally change the CBA--it's a negotiated agreement between the NHL and the Players Union. If the PA objects to any NHL change or interpretation of the CBA they sort it out via negotiation or take it to the CBA arbitrator.
 
Last edited:

mouser

Business of Hockey
Jul 13, 2006
29,285
12,586
South Mountain
The option to sign a KHL player after his teams season is over, so long as he is on your reserve list, and have him join your NHL team for the playoffs has always been there. Now they have taken it away for no good reason.

This isn't about "extending" some deadline so the Wild can sign Kaprizov. As soon as his season with CSKA ended he would be eligible to sign any other year.

Yes, any other year Kaprizov would have been eligible to sign with the Wild so long as:

A) Minnesota was still playing games, including the playoffs.
B) It was May 1st when Kaprizov's contract ended or CSKA agreed to release him earlier (against the KHL's policy)

Kaprizov plays for the best team in the KHL, cup finalist the past two KHL season. There's a high probability he wouldn't be free of his KHL contract until after the NHL playoffs commenced. In which case Minnesota would have no option to sign Kaprizov unless the Wild first of all made the playoffs. The Wild were outside the playoffs at the time of the season suspension and fighting for a wild card spot.

There's also the possibility that CSKA wouldn't release Kaprizov before May 1st, in which case the Wild would need to not only reach the playoffs but also advance to the 2nd round to be able to sign Kaprizov this season.
 

BagHead

Registered User
Dec 23, 2010
6,367
3,408
Minneapolis, MN
Yes, any other year Kaprizov would have been eligible to sign with the Wild so long as:

A) Minnesota was still playing games, including the playoffs.
B) It was May 1st when Kaprizov's contract ended or CSKA agreed to release him earlier (against the KHL's policy)


Kaprizov plays for the best team in the KHL, cup finalist the past two KHL season. There's a high probability he wouldn't be free of his KHL contract until after the NHL playoffs commenced. In which case Minnesota would have no option to sign Kaprizov unless the Wild first of all made the playoffs. The Wild were outside the playoffs at the time of the season suspension and fighting for a wild card spot.

There's also the possibility that CSKA wouldn't release Kaprizov before May 1st, in which case the Wild would need to not only reach the playoffs but also advance to the 2nd round to be able to sign Kaprizov this season.

I suppose maybe we should wait until the 24 team playoff is set in stone. Once it is, both A and B will be true. The rest of your argument is unknowable and therefore irrelevant. Following the actual rules, Kaprizov would be allowed to sign with the Wild for the playoffs this season. Altering the rules is what the NHL seems to be wanting to do, and my argument against that is that it better have a good reason for doing it, because changing the rules is sort of a big deal. If they have a good reason for it, then power to them and I'll go right along with it.
 

Kshahdoo

Registered User
Mar 23, 2008
19,146
8,457
Moscow, Russia
I doubt, Kaprizov will get back to the KHL, if he's not allowed to play in the playoffs, because CSKA doesn't have enough cap space and won't trade his rights to another club. But he can go to a European league, say, Liiga or SHL, because their clubs usually agree to give players an NHL out clause. He can play there till the NHL season starts.
 

2Pair

Registered User
Oct 8, 2017
12,633
5,103
31 Thoughts: Fun week, but high hurdles remain for NHL resumption - Sportsnet.ca

6. I don’t profess to know the CBA as well as some of the people involved, but I was talking to a team affected by the NHL’s desire not to allow anyone to sign players for the remainder of the 2019–20 season. This includes valuable KHL transplants like Kirill Kaprizov (Minnesota), Alexander Romanov (Montreal) and Ilya Sorokin (Islanders). His position was, “If it is allowed every other year, what in our agreement prevents it this year?” I honestly don’t know if he’s got a legit beef or not, but the June 1 entry-level deadline will be pushed back to July 1 to give everyone more time to figure this out.

It's starting to look more and more like everyone but Bettman and Daly realize that the rule they tried to put in isn't going to fly. I'm starting to get the impression that it's likely that these guys will be allowed to sign.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DemidovSaveUs

2Pair

Registered User
Oct 8, 2017
12,633
5,103
I know this as been said already but Russo on the radio just said the NHLPA is going to Fight this
That's the big one IMO. If the PA isn't on their side, the NHL has no shot at getting their rule through.
 

2Pair

Registered User
Oct 8, 2017
12,633
5,103
If what Brooks says is true about the NHLPA, then Kaprizov is as good as signed. Starting to wonder if this wasn't a bargaining chip for Bettman all along?
 
Last edited:

Minnesnota

Registered User
Apr 20, 2017
2,266
1,028
Denver
I never thought the PA would've liked it anyways. Seemed like the league was overstating their authority on the matter. I'm actually a bit surprised that Russo didn't call out Daly on his remarks, pointing to the "Collective Bargaining" part of the CBA.

Sometimes I think Russo is a bit of a boot-licker when it comes to the league.
 

Nharris31

Registered User
Aug 9, 2013
4,433
225
I never thought the PA would've liked it anyways. Seemed like the league was overstating their authority on the matter. I'm actually a bit surprised that Russo didn't call out Daly on his remarks, pointing to the "Collective Bargaining" part of the CBA.

Sometimes I think Russo is a bit of a boot-licker when it comes to the league.
He has on his podcasts and on the radio
 

nickschultzfan

Registered User
Jan 7, 2009
11,558
908
At a minimum it helps that the Rangers and Islanders are pushing for their players to get in. They have a lot more pull with Bettman than we do.
 

Nharris31

Registered User
Aug 9, 2013
4,433
225
Scott Burnside on Q&A on the athletic On not allowing reserve list players to play

He said he think we will see it reversed or modify
In coming days. He also said the something similar about NHLPA is going to make case for them to play.
 

thestonedkoala

Going Dark
Aug 27, 2004
28,169
1,600
The question is, does Minnesota want to burn that year off Kap's contract for 5 games or not? It'd be good to get him into camp, but I don't know if playing him for a couple games would be smart.
 

Gargyn

Registered User
Oct 19, 2006
7,698
1,898
Kelowna, BC
The question is, does Minnesota want to burn that year off Kap's contract for 5 games or not? It'd be good to get him into camp, but I don't know if playing him for a couple games would be smart.
It’s more to ensure he come soon over and is committed. They need more talent up front so whatever it takes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nsjohnson

thestonedkoala

Going Dark
Aug 27, 2004
28,169
1,600
Probably doesn’t bother them

Actually it might. He'll play at least 3 games, so is 85 games a good sample size for his next contract? Furthermore, if he plays in 19-20, his contract will expire at the end of 21 (so next summer). Staal, Fiala, Foligno, Hartman, Donato, Eriksson-Ek, Brodin, Pateryn, Hunt, Dubnyk all have their contracts up. Pushing it into 21-22 when he expires in 22, would give the Wild a better picture of their financial situation as well.
 

AKL

Danila Yurov Fan Club President
Sponsor
Dec 10, 2012
39,525
17,981
Actually it might. He'll play at least 3 games, so is 85 games a good sample size for his next contract? Furthermore, if he plays in 19-20, his contract will expire at the end of 21 (so next summer). Staal, Fiala, Foligno, Hartman, Donato, Eriksson-Ek, Brodin, Pateryn, Hunt, Dubnyk all have their contracts up. Pushing it into 21-22 when he expires in 22, would give the Wild a better picture of their financial situation as well.

He’s likely not signing a long term contract after his ELC regardless, and most of those names you listed are either inconsequential, won’t be on the roster by the time their contract ends, or both.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dr Jan Itor

Goose312

Registered User
May 15, 2015
1,328
350
Actually it might. He'll play at least 3 games, so is 85 games a good sample size for his next contract? Furthermore, if he plays in 19-20, his contract will expire at the end of 21 (so next summer). Staal, Fiala, Foligno, Hartman, Donato, Eriksson-Ek, Brodin, Pateryn, Hunt, Dubnyk all have their contracts up. Pushing it into 21-22 when he expires in 22, would give the Wild a better picture of their financial situation as well.
If he doesn't sign before 1/1/21 his ELC is only 1 year which with the NHL schedule next year being pushed back to possibly start in December could mean by the time the KHL playoffs are over the regular season is close to wrapping up. Meaning he could burn his entire ELC in just a few games. Best case would be you're still only getting 1 season to look at him before his next contract.

There's also the issue that if they don't offer him an immediate contract the commissioner has the ability to place him on the FA list, clearing his defected player status and voiding MN's rights to him, but that's not really clear.
 

MuckOG

Registered User
May 18, 2012
15,343
5,485
There's also the issue that if they don't offer him an immediate contract the commissioner has the ability to place him on the FA list, clearing his defected player status and voiding MN's rights to him,

:confused:
 
  • Like
Reactions: thestonedkoala

AKL

Danila Yurov Fan Club President
Sponsor
Dec 10, 2012
39,525
17,981
If he doesn't sign before 1/1/21 his ELC is only 1 year which with the NHL schedule next year being pushed back to possibly start in December could mean by the time the KHL playoffs are over the regular season is close to wrapping up. Meaning he could burn his entire ELC in just a few games. Best case would be you're still only getting 1 season to look at him before his next contract.

There's also the issue that if they don't offer him an immediate contract the commissioner has the ability to place him on the FA list, clearing his defected player status and voiding MN's rights to him, but that's not really clear.

Can you prove any of this? Based on my understanding, none of this is correct.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->