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

[justHypnos]

The mechanic is deliberately designed to allow teams to free up cap space to remain competitive when a player is unable to play. It is not designed to allow teams to ice a roster that would otherwise be impossible. Using something that exists to mitigate risk and protect the competitive environment and exploiting it to gain an undeserved advantage is clearly wrong.

The Knights made the playoffs as the 8th seed after spending Stone's money at the deadline when they were collapsing so it looks like the mechanic worked as intended then

 

[Lacaar]

The Knights made the playoffs as the 8th seed after spending Stone's money at the deadline when they were collapsing so it looks like the mechanic worked as intended then

Didn't the cap they used at the deadline in Hertl go directly to LTIR for the most of the rest of the season? How many games did Hertl actually play in the regular season?

Honestly I think you're argument actually goes against the point you're trying to make. Vegas made the trade with no intent to quote "Remain competitive" as the player they acquired missed all but a few of the games since the trade deadline. Even their trade deadline move was with the intention of "f*** the regular season". It's playoffs that matter.

Brings up a good question. Why are teams allowed to fill LTIR space with more LTIR space? If in fact they are. I know the argument will be made.. well he may come off in a day or two as well. Even so they'd likely take them off and just put them back on or something of the sort haha.

In the end the rule is what it is and teams are going to exploit it. Vegas fans denying it is a load of shit is the only thing I would say. Use it and abuse it but at least call a spade a spade is my point. Vegas the organization itself can't admit it obviously. Hell no organization would.

 

[Voight]

I stand by my statement that players should not be allowed to practice with the team until taken of LTIR. It's one thing to magically be healthy for game 1, but to be allowed to practice and get into game shape because they're obviously on the cusp of returning is even sketchier. That's a blatant case of prolonging the return designation for cap-related purposes.

Thi sis riduclous. If a guys out for 4 months, he needs that practice time to get his legs back and get into game shape.

Again.... They ARE benefiting even if the iced team doesn't exceed the cap. Because they were able to add Hanifin, Hertl, and Mantha with Stone out. They're only under the cap threshold because Martinez got hurt after the trade deadline.

Without utilizing the LTIR loophole, Vegas would be icing a team without Hanifin and Hertl essentially replacing Martinez and would be well-below the cap, just like every other team would have to be in this situation.

Not exactly true... they had 5 million via Lehner. So they could've added Hanifin regardless.

 

[Mr Positive]

The Knights are smart about it.

Meanwhile us Oiler fans find out just before playoffs that Kane has had a sports hernia almost all year and we didn't pounce on this. Playable, sure, but we could have sent him to get surgery and weaponize that cap space.

But no we are too moral, or dumb. The NHL made it so both are the same

 

[Voight]

Murray was playing with Marlies before the season ended, just never called him up, not to mention he waited 5 months to get surgery.

Leafs are the originators of LTIR abuse and Robidas Island.

Because he tried to rehab his injury without surgery...

It depends on your goal and how it's measured.

I would argue that it might be impossible for it to be universally "fair". But I can contend quite easily the it could be more fair than it is.

Most people misinterpret the word "fair" to mean equal to both sides, but in sports that is a trap because it's virtually impossible for it to be true. There are too many variables. A much more realistic way to interpret what is fair in a sports context is insuring that no side is afforded any undue advantages. You set an optimal baseline (every team ices a full/healthy squad within the cap) and you do everything in your power to ensure that happens without allowing it to become an advantage. (Having a roster that would be impossible within the cap)

This is really just the trolley question, is it not? By allowing Vegas to exceed the cap, you have now created an unfair situation for 15 other teams. In a scenario in which there cannot be universal fairness, this is a wildly illogical choice.

Another argument is one of practicality. In a scenario without perfect fairness, we may have to make as choice about WHO should carry the weight of any unfairness that does exist. To me, it makes the most logical sense that any disadvantages that cannot be remedied should be carried by those with whom the disadvantages originated. In this case, Stone oo the Vegas Team as a whole. It is HIS injury and THEIR player. If any party were to be obligated to suffer, it is them. Not because it's fair, but because it's the most fair in an unfair circumstance.

Of course this is all an aside to the fact that they all had a choice and decided in that moment to make the unethical one.

LTIR is available to all 32 franchises. I'd argue most teams would prefer one of their best players remains healthy.

 

[Voight]

AGAIN, there would be no ban for any players. The suggested solution that a player on LTIR is ineligible for round 1, saying that's a ban, is as much a stretch as saying a player that has to be sent to the minors because the team needs to be cap compliant in the regular season is a ban.

It's a team and player choice. If they want to be playing in round 1, then active and get off LTIR. There would be no ban. There is no situation where a player that would play for round 1 would not be able to unless they were not going to play anyways. No players should have any objection to this.

The easiest rule to implement would be a team must submit a cap compliant roster 2 days after game 82, and any players on LTIR are ineligible for Round 1 except if the player was on LTIR to start the season, keep no cap in playoffs. It's the same effect as keeping the cap in place for round 1, except you wouldn't need to do all the complicated calculations.

That wouldn't be easy at all. What if someone gets a serious long term injury during the first week of the season and is out until mid April? How would it be fair to their team?

Regardless that will never happen. 0% chance the NHLP{A will agree to a measure such as that.

 

[TheBeard]

Thi sis riduclous. If a guys out for 4 months, he needs that practice time to get his legs back and get into game shape.

Then take him off LTIR! It doesn’t mean the team is forced to play him. Put him on IR then.

 

[Curufinwe]

They will arbitrarily pick a point in time and a team, and throw the book at them. This is the MO of the league, to think it's not coming is burying your head in the sand.

Someone will be made an example to the rest, once they finally have had enough of it.

The camels back always breaks, the question is do you want your franchise involved in it once the shit hits the fans.

Was the Kovalchuk contract the only ine of its kind? Nope just the last example right before the league had enough.

Was the punishment they got fair in that situation? It won't be in this one either.

Chicago and Tampa Bay started this, Vegas is on another level. Some GM will convince a desperate owner moving forward and that franchise will pay for everyone sins. Count on it.

This is some next level cope.

 

[TheBeard]

I'd argue most teams would prefer one of their best players remain healthy.

Probably, but timing it so he’ll be ready just in time for game 1 of an uncapped playoffs is a veeeeery close second.

 

[VivaLasVegas]

0% chance the NHLP{A will agree to a measure such as that.

0% chance the owners and GMs will agree to it either. IMHO, there will be some window-dressing at the next CBA negotiations, but nothing will really change and folks will have to wait until the summer of 2026 for even that.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Because he tried to rehab his injury without surgery...

Ahh just coincidence then it was timed for the start of the season.

 

[Voight]

Then take him off LTIR! It doesn’t mean the team is forced to play him. Put him on IR then.

There's no sense in that.

 

[The Gr8 Dane]

You guys still crying about this? Work smart not hard , losers lose winners win

 

[TheBeard]

There's no sense in that.

So then you agree that keeping him on is strictly for cap related purposes even though the player is healthy?

 

[Mr Positive]

There's no way the league would allow a situation where a team is thrown over the cap because someone got back early off LTIR. There's just no realistic mechanism to deal with this. Sure there is trading, but cmon. Is a team really going to make a post deadline trade to clear several million? Could you imagine the leverage? Plus the player moved can't play in the playoffs by the rules. It's just non sensical

The most I see happening is some kind of post season cap that has flexibility in it that doesn't involve forcing trades or forfeiting games. Or a post season cap with some kind of draft pick penalty. Or, have "long term healthy scratch" where a team can shelve players during the playoffs for no cap hit, with special rules on how to reactivate them

 

[Saga of the Elk]

Just get rid of the salary cap. As salaries rise, so will revenues for teams like the Rangers and Leafs. It'll be fun to watch super-teams again. And then the loser teams in small markets can move to different markets, owners can cry poor, a lockout can ensue and hockey can be cancelled for a season while a new CBA with a salary cap is negotiated. Everyone wins. Why mess with the formula?

 

[Slats432]

View attachment 856148

 

[pantherbot]

Just get rid of the salary cap. As salaries rise, so will revenues for teams like the Rangers and Leafs. It'll be fun to watch super-teams again. And then the loser teams in small markets can move to different markets, owners can cry poor, a lockout can ensue and hockey can be cancelled for a season while a new CBA with a salary cap is negotiated. Everyone wins. Why mess with the formula?

Why stop there, let's just get rid of salaries too. Players play for the love of the game! Maybe they can get a daily stipend for a value meal and a beer plus some bus tickets to get them to the arena.

 

[Golden_Jet]

So then you agree that keeping him on is strictly for cap related purposes even though the player is healthy?

Player might not be healthy, could have shoulder injury, but is fine to skate and get back in shape, but could still be 3 weeks away from a game.

Not sure why you think it’s ok to put a square peg in a round hole all the time.
Try and think one step ahead of your ideas first, ok if this implemented what are the what ifs, and results of idea.

 

[WhataKnight]

I wouldn’t go as far as getting rid of the cap.

Were there a clean way of….

• modifying the rules around waivers/ELCs accordingly
• codifying strict rules around how LTIR works
• implementing a maintenance roster, so no gymnastics are required to allow a player rest

……it could arguably work with the cap, while also providing teams an option to rest a player and setting firmer rules for how players can be called up, sent down, waived, claimed and rested.

Bet we’d see about 2 dozen teams spending into overage rather than the dozen or more that already are now.

Best of all it would plant the onus of doing right by a team’s fans directly on the owners signing checks, the GMs making deals, and the “capologists” capable of such villainously effective roster management.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Just get rid of the salary cap. As salaries rise, so will revenues for teams like the Rangers and Leafs. It'll be fun to watch super-teams again. And then the loser teams in small markets can move to different markets, owners can cry poor, a lockout can ensue and hockey can be cancelled for a season while a new CBA with a salary cap is negotiated. Everyone wins. Why mess with the formula?

It’s not EA sports NHL24.

I wouldn’t go as far as getting rid of the cap.

Were there a clean way of….

• modifying the rules around waivers/ELCs accordingly
• codifying strict rules around how LTIR works
• implementing a maintenance roster, so no gymnastics are required to allow a player rest

……it could arguably work with the cap, while also providing teams an option to rest a player and setting firmer rules for how players can be called up, sent down, waived, claimed and rested.

Bet we’d see about 2 dozen teams spending into overage rather than the dozen or more that already are now.

Overage unfortunately is just another word for more escrow.

 

[onetweasy]

This is a rule literally everyone can take advantage of and y’all mad at Vegas? For what?

Idiocy all around.

Seriously - have we not addressed this?

The argument from opposing fans is that they are fudging the recovery time to align absolutely perfectly with the end of the regular season and salary cap so that he can play in Game 1 of the playoffs.

Your right though, we can all do it so lets just have all teams fudge injuries - who cares right.

We can all take advantage of it so as an Oiler fan lets just sit McDavid from Feb 15 to April 12th every single year for lets say a 3rd degree bruise on his quad and lets load up every single year and lets see how fans feel about it.

I am sure as a Islander fan you would be pumped if the Rangers did this for the 3rd straight year.

 

[WhataKnight]

Overage unfortunately is just another word for more escrow.

I am far from a legal mind, but it sounds like a case where those overages should be in a different bucket from standard escrow.

Say, for instance - team A goes over by $7M; team B by $10M. The math that gets figures out doesn’t penalize A for B or B for A, but owner A incurs some deduction of their escrow payout relative to their cap finagling, as does B for theirs, however the application of $7M and $10M would impact their respective escrow payouts.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

I am far from a legal mind, but it sounds like a case where those overages should be in a different bucket from standard escrow.

Say, for instance - team A goes over by $7M; team B by $10M. The math that gets figures out doesn’t penalize A for B or B for A, but owner A incurs some deduction of their escrow payout relative to their cap finagling, as does B for theirs, however the application of $7M and $10M would impact their respective escrow payouts.

I pointed that out soon after the CBA was finally released in 2005. It still exists today.

It's entirely possible (likely) no one has thought about it, but it's also very likely nothing's going to happen with it.

 

[BKIslandersFan]

Seriously - have we not addressed this?

The argument from opposing fans is that they are fudging the recovery time to align absolutely perfectly with the end of the regular season and salary cap so that he can play in Game 1 of the playoffs.

Your right though, we can all do it so lets just have all teams fudge injuries - who cares right.

We can all take advantage of it so as an Oiler fan lets just sit McDavid from Feb 15 to April 12th every single year for lets say a 3rd degree bruise on his quad and lets load up every single year and lets see how fans feel about it.

I am sure as an Islander fan you would be pumped if the Rangers did this for the 3rd straight year.

I would want my team doing it. If it’s allowed then it’s fair game. This is nonsense.