Vegas about to circumvent cap again? UPD: Mark Stone back practicing.

[pantherbot]

They don’t have to be forced onto the ice, just forced off LTIR. Healthy scratch them if they don’t want to play a game they’re able to play.

Yeah exactly. This notion that a player is being forced to play or not being allowed to play is stupid. The league can put in a rule and the teams can decide how to respond. Just like how Vegas or Tampa has used the rule to their advantage.

The way LTIR works, it's already 'forcing' a player like Stone to not play. But really, that's a team decision. They could have also just chosen to not go over the cap and keep him on LTIR.

 

[TheBeard]

Pietrangelo is still out of the lineup and people are really confused about what is going on. $8.8 million cap hit. So far all I’ve heard is he has been sick for weeks.

If they could put him on LTIR so Stone could come back, believe me, they would.

 

[Jets]

Simple solution since there's no roster limit after the trade deadline.

In order to be active for the playoffs, a player has to be moved from LTIR onto regular IR or healthy by game 82.

They don't have to be healed, or even dressed for the game, they just can't be on LTIR and not counting for the cap on game 82 and then return for playoffs. So if you have a guy like Stone that should heal in time for round 1, he has to be removed from LTIR for game 82 and count towards the cap hit.

This completely removes the horseshit LTIRing to load up on other guys and effectively makes the salary cap apply to the playoffs without actually applying it.

 

[WhataKnight]

Some poor fans have typed a collective 10000 words defending the Vegas Cheating Knights on this thread alone. If only the team could have won fair and square..

Aw, shucks - sorry some of us try to type rational when explaining why for the 829,746,213th time why a cap in the playoffs or a game 82 won’t work, or that as this is a CBA level matter, aside from liking it or dealing with it/piping down about it, the next best option is to
ask your fave team’s owners why they’re playing chess as if pawns don’t level up when they cross the chessboard.

 

[Golden_Jet]

I understand the rules cant change until the next CBA.

However is there not a dr or someone from the league who can say this guy is healthy and has to play game 82?

Is there no mechanism to confirm players are injured or not?

Doubt it, as he’ll still be playing injured in playoffs.

 

[2for1PizzaPastuh]

Doubt it, as he’ll still be playing injured in playoffs.

“Injured” like last year when he put up a Smythe-worthy performance, despite being “injured”?

 

[chaser17]

If you finish the regular season on LTIR you can't play 1st round of playoffs. Tell me why that wouldn't be a simple solution.

 

[Golden_Jet]

If you finish the regular season on LTIR you can't play 1st round of playoffs. Tell me why that wouldn't be a simple solution.

Well kind of obvious, the PA would never approve it in CBA negotiations,

 

[KCC]

If you finish the regular season on LTIR you can't play 1st round of playoffs. Tell me why that wouldn't be a simple solution.

Because the nhlpa would never agree to it. People here need to realize there are 2 sides and both have to agree to things for it to pass. Lol

 

[Slats432]

If you finish the regular season on LTIR you can't play 1st round of playoffs. Tell me why that wouldn't be a simple solution.

On the off chance that someone is legitimately injured and is healthy right before the playoffs/early in the first round. My solution is you can replace any LTIR guy with a player making $1M or less. You can still ice a full roster and you don't have a mysterious $9.5M in cap space. No one cares if someone is over the cap by a couple million because have injuries.

Everyone (Except the teams that have worked the system) cares if teams load up at the deadline and add $10M in players with the plan that they will hold the LTIR players out until Game 83 to ensure they are cap compliant regardless of whether they are healthy or not.

 

[WhataKnight]

“Injured” like last year when he put up a Smythe-worthy performance, despite being “injured”?

NHL playoffs: Golden Knights' Mark Stone shows true colors after triumphant return goes awry

Mark Stone's return to the ice in Game 1 of the Vegas Golden Knights-Winnipeg Jets series was a disappointment. He made up for it in Game 2.

ca.sports.yahoo.com

The Vegas Golden Knights coped with the absence of Stone from Jan. 12 to the end of the regular season due to the winger's back injury. When they activated their captain from the LTIR for Game 1 of their series against the Winnipeg Jets they had plenty of reason to hope for a significant boost.

That's not what they got.

Stone led all Golden Knights forwards in ice time in a 5-1 loss (21:28), but he was a minus-3 without managing a shot on net. In fact, Vegas was outshot 12-5 in his even-strength minutes with a xGF% of 20.29%.

Sure; he may have turned it around soon after, but those stats show how he began those playoffs, and it wasn’t good. Looked like he was trying to do too much.

 

[pantherbot]

Well kind of obvious, the PA would never approve it in CBA negotiations,

Because the nhlpa would never agree to it. People here need to realize there are 2 sides and both have to agree to things for it to pass. Lol

This argument keeps coming up, but that is an assumption that's been made. There's no evidence to suggest the NHLPA would say no.

There are already rules today that don't allow players to play. LTIR itself means a player has to miss 10 games and 24 days. Players can get suspended. Teams can't go over the cap and players sometimes get sent to the minors. This notion that the NHLPA wouldn't agree to a very reasonable rule because it prevents players from playing isn't backed up by anything.

Also, it wouldn't be the rule preventing a player from playing, it would be the team. The team can choose to keep the player on LTIR or not, its up to them. If the team thinks the player could reasonably be healthy enough for round 1, then activate him, its that simple.

I'd suggest that a team just needs to be cap compliant by the end of the season, not for game 82, and players kept on LTIR are ineligible for round 1. And then in the playoffs there's no cap. That way, if a team is in a fight for a playoff spot, they can still have all the flexibility of LTIR for all games including game 82, but after game 82 and before playoffs, the roster has to be cap compliant.

 

[Golden_Jet]

This argument keeps coming up, but that is an assumption that's been made. There's no evidence to suggest the NHLPA would say no.

There are already rules today that don't allow players to play. LTIR itself means a player has to miss 10 games and 24 days. Players can get suspended. Teams can't go over the cap and players sometimes get sent to the minors. This notion that the NHLPA wouldn't agree to a very reasonable rule because it prevents players from playing isn't backed up by anything.

Also, it wouldn't be the rule preventing a player from playing, it would be the team. The team can choose to keep the player on LTIR or not, its up to them. If the team thinks the player could reasonably be healthy enough for round 1, then activate him, its that simple.

I'd suggest that a team just needs to be cap compliant by the end of the season, not for game 82, and players kept on LTIR are ineligible for round 1. And then in the playoffs there's no cap. That way, if a team is in a fight for a playoff spot, they can still have all the flexibility of LTIR for all games including game 82, but after game 82 and before playoffs, the roster has to be cap compliant.

The argument keeps coming up, because if you told the players they might not be able to play in playoffs, it’s not going to pass.
No matter how much you think it might.

 

[WhataKnight]

This argument keeps coming up, but that is an assumption that's been made. There's no evidence to suggest the NHLPA would say no.

If you go back through the right podcasts with people connected to the league (Seravalli & Friedman, to name a few), missives suggest pretty strongly that on one hand, players don’t want an obstruction to skating in the playoffs.

On the other, as they’re not paid for playoff action, a majority of owners and GMs don’t want to create that obstruction themselves.

That’s the majority of owners, GMs and players shoulder-to-shoulder against it. Any “game 82 mandate” attempted likely wouldn’t last long in the next CBA negotiations.

 

[Jets]

You guys won't believe this but Stone is far too injured to dress tonight.

However he's going to be perfectly healthy tomorrow morning

 

[CanesUltimate11]

The argument keeps coming up, because if you told the players they might not be able to play in playoffs, it’s not going to pass.
No matter how much you think it might.

Like any negotiation it would depend on what the league offered up in return. Would the NHLPA offer up those (fairly) rare instances of LTIR keeping a player out of round 1 in exchange for getting to UFA one year earlier? That would be a pretty tempting prize for the majority of the PA I'd think.

Not that I think the owners would make that particular offer though.

 

[pantherbot]

The argument keeps coming up, because if you told the players they might not be able to play in playoffs, it’s not going to pass.
No matter how much you think it might.

If you go back through the right podcasts with people connected to the league (Seravalli & Friedman, to name a few), missives suggest pretty strongly that on one hand, players don’t want an obstruction to skating in the playoffs.

On the other, as they’re not paid for playoff action, a majority of owners and GMs don’t want to create an obstruction.

Yes but that was based on the crude "must play game 82 or you miss X games" thinking, but that's not what's being suggested. The suggestion is that the player needs to be on the roster, that's it.

It's not the rule preventing a player from playing, it would be the team preventing it by choosing to not activate the player. And the impact on a team would be very similar to if a player got hurt after the deadline. So just keep the player activated, its that simple.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Yes but that was based on the crude "must play game 82 or you miss X games" thinking, but that's not what's being suggested. The suggestion is that the player needs to be on the roster, that's it.

It's not the rule preventing a player from playing, it would be the team preventing it by choosing to not activate the player. And the impact on a team would be very similar to if a player got hurt after the deadline. So just keep the player activated, its that simple.

This is what I responded to, this is what was “suggested”. Like numerous people have said, would never be approved like that.

If you finish the regular season on LTIR you can't play 1st round of playoffs. Tell me why that wouldn't be a simple solution.

 

[pantherbot]

On NHL/NHLPA negotiations, you guys are saying this as if its just the NHL that would want some rule change to fix this. We'll see how it all goes.

The GM groups are supposed to discuss on whether this is important to the teams enough to warrant addressing, I'm going to guess yes based on the initial comments from the article in The Athletic.

The players, harder to say, but on the Cam & Strick podcast, Andy was saying that its an issue that team management and players want to see addressed.

Lastly, the fans also want this and it would be in the best interest of both the NHL/NHLPA to work on some solution. If they do nothing, it'll happen again and again. Its just going to be a farce every other year. I know some in this thread think the fan opinions don't matter, but we'll see. Sometimes it does.

So if there's alignment between the GM and players to address the issue, then they'll work together on something reasonable.

 

[Golden_Jet]

On NHL/NHLPA negotiations, you guys are saying this as if its just the NHL that would want some rule change to fix this. We'll see how it all goes.

The GM groups are supposed to discuss on whether this is important to the teams enough to warrant addressing, I'm going to guess yes based on the initial comments from the article in The Athletic.

The players, harder to say, but on the Cam & Strick podcast, Andy was saying that its an issue that team management and players want to see addressed.

Lastly, the fans also want this and it would be in the best interest of both the NHL/NHLPA to work on some solution. If they do nothing, it'll happen again and again. Its just going to be a farce every other year. I know some in this thread think the fan opinions don't matter, but we'll see. Sometimes it does.

So if there's alignment between the GM and players to address the issue, then they'll work together on something reasonable.

Yet every GM meetings, small discussion, and end result is , there’s no appetite to change at the moment, is what we’re told when meetings end.

 

[pantherbot]

Yet every GM meetings, small discussion, and end result is , there’s no appetite to change at the moment, is what we’re told when meetings end.

That's only been the case to date, but as reported by LeBrun at the most recent GM meetings, the GM executive committee decided it was an issue worth exploring and asked the committee members to ask their respective GM groups for more feedback.

From that same article, we know that wat least Holland, Zito, and Nill think its an issue that should be addressed.

 

[Golden_Jet]

That's only been the case to date, but as reported by LeBrun at the most recent GM meetings, the GM executive committee decided it was an issue worth exploring and asked the committee members to ask their respective GM groups for more feedback.

From that same article, we know that wat least Holland, Zito, and Nill think its an issue that should be addressed.

Yep if they find a solution I’m fine with it, doubt it will be telling players they are ineligible for round 1.

 

[Lt Dan]

T minus 8 hours until Mark is activated for the playoffs

 

[pantherbot]

This is what I responded to, this is what was “suggested”. Like numerous people have said, would never be approved like that.

The suggestion is that a player on LTIR misses round 1. So that means a player would have to activate the player or they miss the first round. But think about this logically.

If the player was likely to return for round 1 and the player was someone the team wanted to play, they would activate him and the won't miss any games. If the player wasn't read to return anyways or it was a player they didn't care to have play anyways, then they would have missed round 1 anyways.

So the suggested rule really isn't preventing a player from playing, it's just saying that if a player is ready to play, then he gets activated.

The comments from Friedman and others to me sounded more like they were against forcing a player to play game 82 if hurt or that player misses time. But no player would be forced to play and nobody who was going to play anyways would actually be prevented from playing.

The affect on a team would be very similar to dealing with an injury to a player after the trade deadline. They can't make their team whole by using the LTIR cap relief in whole, but could supplement with reinforcements from the farm team.

 

[Curufinwe]

Yeah exactly. This notion that a player is being forced to play or not being allowed to play is stupid. The league can put in a rule

The league can't do anything without a new rule being bargained into the next CBA.

On NHL/NHLPA negotiations, you guys are saying this as if its just the NHL that would want some rule change to fix this. We'll see how it all goes.

The GM groups are supposed to discuss on whether this is important to the teams enough to warrant addressing, I'm going to guess yes based on the initial comments from the article in The Athletic.

The players, harder to say, but on the Cam & Strick podcast, Andy was saying that its an issue that team management and players want to see addressed.

Lastly, the fans also want this and it would be in the best interest of both the NHL/NHLPA to work on some solution. If they do nothing, it'll happen again and again. Its just going to be a farce every other year. I know some in this thread think the fan opinions don't matter, but we'll see. Sometimes it does.

So if there's alignment between the GM and players to address the issue, then they'll work together on something reasonable.

Terminally online fans are not representative of NHL fans in general