New Rule: Prospect Activation

[Canuck09]

Effective this offseason a new formal deadline to activating prospects is being established. This deadline will inject some youth into the league, prevent stashing of prospects and encourage GM's to make some tough decisions around contract management.

Threshold: 82 NHL regular season games for skaters and 50 games for goalies as of the completion of the previous NHL season.
Timing: Reviewed each offseason after FA has been completed.
Deadline: Will be announced each offseason after the conclusion of FA.
Responsibility: Each GM will self assess their own team and submit the list of prospects to be signed to their agent.
Penalties: This will be monitored by league admin prior to the start of each season. Any prospects that meet the 82 game threshold and are not signed by their GM will be signed to a max money ELC contract where eligible or matching of NHL contract when not ELC eligible. Repeated violations may lead to additional punishment.

If you would like to sign your prospects before they've played 82 regular season games you still can. This change is meant to set a deadline only and still allows GM's to sign players prior as they can today.

As with all new rules put into place it's subject to change based on how it plays out and feedback from the league. This will be added to the league rules before the start of the next season.

Click to read more...

 

[MatthewFlames]

Excellent. I like it.

For the Flames it affects Dmitri Orlov and Zack Kassian only I think

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

Great job, Admin. Long overdue and makes total sense.

 

[Fan.At]

i like it. but it won't affect ratings right? so it won't inject a whole lot of youth into the league but only a whole lot of useless kids on the farm teams, i fear

 

[MatthewFlames]

i like it. but it won't affect ratings right? so it won't inject a whole lot of youth into the league but only a whole lot of useless kids on the farm teams, i fear

There are a lot of players that will also be better than existing roster players. I think we counted 12. Maybe some would have been signed regardless. If teams wanna stash them in the minors then they can. At least contract years start ticking down for those under 22 and they become free agents sooner.

 

[Fooladelfia]

------------

 

[HFNHLOilers]

82 games over how many years? Curious cuz some players pick up like 5-11 games a year would be useless to a team. But could still have upside im guessing like 3 year period?

 

[Fooladelfia]

-----------------

 

[MatthewFlames]

82 games over how many years? Curious cuz some players pick up like 5-11 games a year would be useless to a team. But could still have upside im guessing like 3 year period?

Sounds like 82 games over however many years it took to get them. But i don't think its an in-season activation. Only at the end of the season - pretty simple to work out - eliteprospects and hockeydb calculate how many NHL games

 

[Canuck09]

82 games over how many years? Curious cuz some players pick up like 5-11 games a year would be useless to a team. But could still have upside im guessing like 3 year period?

It's just 82 games at this point. No time frame yet.

That said, if you carried a prospect that took 7-15 years (based on your 5-11 games a year) to hit 82 career NHL games I think there's other problems to worry about.

 

[Vagrant]

It's just 82 games at this point. No time frame yet.

That said, if you carried a prospect that took 7-15 years (based on your 5-11 games a year) to hit 82 career NHL games I think there's other problems to worry about.

Ha.... for sure.....

*hides Lance Bouma behind him*

 

[TorontoGM]

Effective this offseason a new formal deadline to activating prospects is being established. This deadline will inject some youth into the league, prevent stashing of prospects and encourage GM's to make some tough decisions around contract management.

Threshold: 82 NHL regular season games for skaters and 50 games for goalies as of the completion of the previous NHL season.
Timing: Reviewed each offseason after FA has been completed.
Deadline: Will be announced each offseason after the conclusion of FA.
Responsibility: Each GM will self assess their own team and submit the list of prospects to be signed to their agent.
Penalties: This will be monitored by league admin prior to the start of each season. Any prospects that meet the 82 game threshold and are not signed by their GM will be signed to a max money ELC contract automatically. Repeated violations may lead to additional punishment.

If you would like to sign your prospects before they've played 82 regular season games you still can. This change is meant to set a deadline only and still allows GM's to sign players prior as they can today.

As with all new rules put into place it's subject to change based on how it plays out and feedback from the league. This will be added to the league rules before the start of the next season.

What is motivating this change?

I think there is an argument to be made for teams that do not ice the best possible roster, however I feel that there are many players that have 82 games but would not help a competitive team. What's wrong with being patient with your players and signing them when they have a usable rating.

 

[MatthewFlames]

What is motivating this change?

I think there is an argument to be made for teams that do not ice the best possible roster, however I feel that there are many players that have 82 games but would not help a competitive team. What's wrong with being patient with your players and signing them when they have a usable rating.

My feeling, and I am not speaking for the admin since I am not part of it, is that it keeps players from free agency and hides players from 2nd contracts (for example I could just sign Jeff Skinner now and get 3 years of ELC, while in the real NHL he is making $5 million). That is cap circumvention imo and protects teams unfairly. We try to follow the NHL as closely as possible in law and spirit and to me this fits that parameters. And 82 games still lets you hide most players for 2 years (like Nichushkin for my Flamettes for example.)

I am sure there are more reasons which others will fill in, but from my perspective this is the main reason.

 

[Dryden]

here here. this whole stashing till a player has usable ratings is a crock of *****. If the rookie is any good he will have good ratings. If Scott Laughton makes the Flyers this year he will be on my team provided he plays a season.

Totally all for this rule. Should have been done a long time ago

 

[Hossa]

There was a fair bit of discussion on this issue several months ago in the admin group, and there was more or less consensus on moving forward with a rule on prospect activation. Certainly, there were no strong objections to moving forward with some kind of rule, however, we didn't come a conclusion at the time because there was some dispute about the details, such as where to set the threshold. But that's often the case with admin group discussions, they get brought up, linger and disappear without resolution.

A couple weeks ago, with free agency upon us, we reviewed the discussions among admins during the year and moved forward with a few decisions (including maximum salary). This was one of them. We went more or less the safest route in terms of the parameters for the rule and moved to announce it at the beginning of the off-season, so teams can factor this into their free agency decisions.

As for the motivation behind it, there are some who feel strongly that "stashing" is a practice that needs to be cracked down upon. Those opposed to "stashing" seem to feel more strongly than those opposed to "mandatory activation". I think it's quite similar to the rule on roster limits, both in terms of its objectives and implementation, and I don't think there is any desire to reverse that decision from a few years back.

here here. this whole stashing till a player has usable ratings is a crock of *****. If the rookie is any good he will have good ratings. If Scott Laughton makes the Flyers this year he will be on my team provided he plays a season.

Respectfully disagree, speaking only as GM here, not as an admin as above. Kyle Palmieri is brought up as an example, and that's a good case study, as he is a solid player but not an impact rookie by any means. As a GM (and without going into all the details, because I typed them out and they were way long), the key factors with Palmieri were cap hit and ratings. In the absence of a rule, I could wait and see what was best for my roster. While some may be thinking about those post-ELC contracts, with Palmieri it was ratings and cap hit, and I am sure others take those into account as well. If Palmieri could have been a valuable player, I would have signed him as I did Justin Faulk. But that's just me as a GM.

 

[Circulartheory]

I like this rule. I basically gave myself the rule that if a player plays around 5 games in the NHL, he will be signed in the HFNHL. For me, it stays close to the NHL experience where you have players developing in the farm.

This season, I will be signing Nate Schmidt, Tyler Wotherspoon, Colton Sissons, and Linden Vey. Even if they do not have useable ratings, I like the idea of them filling up my farm team. Sure, it may kill a year off his ELC but that is sometimes the challenge as GM and I like that challenge.

 

[Regal Beagles]

HFNHL Ducks applaud this new rule. Well done!

 

[Fooladelfia]

-----------------------

 

[Canuck09]

Just a reminder about this new rule. If you haven't already reviewed your prospect list and submitted contract offers for any eligible prospects please do so ASAP.

 

[Wildman]

How are we handling players who are over 25 and in prospect list with more than 82 games played. These players are not eligible to sign Entry Level Contract.

 

[Canuck09]

How are we handling players who are over 25 and in prospect list with more than 82 games played. These players are not eligible to sign Entry Level Contract.

You're the agent...you tell us.

Wouldn't they need to match their NHL deal if they aren't eligible for an ELC?

 

[Lord Stanley]

You're the agent...you tell us.

Wouldn't they need to match their NHL deal if they aren't eligible for an ELC?

This sounds like it should be the case.

 

[Wildman]

You're the agent...you tell us.

Wouldn't they need to match their NHL deal if they aren't eligible for an ELC?

The rule needs to be updated because the communication was that team will be forced to sign with maximum ELC.

 

[Vagrant]

What about a player like Leo Komarov for example for me. He hasn't hit 82 games in his career, but will likely hit that mark following this season. If I try to sign him next season for the standard 1 year term for a player of his age, will I be confined by the terms of his NHL deal or will I be able to get him under contract for 1 year at maximum ELC number? Interesting case with him.

 

[Dryden]

I'd say NHL contract. He's 27 so too old for ELC. But what do I know