l.moustakas Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 Seriously? This is allowable? (I know it is, but it's a rhetorical question). Anyone have comments on this? I'm not quite sure what my feelings are about this. On one hand, you cannot simply cancel a game that nearly 13000 people attended, it would be a public relations nightmare. On the other hand, it's possibly an even more blatant cap circumvention than the whole Ilya Kovalchuk debacle. http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=337120 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 Didn't the Flames forced to do something similar a few years ago? That was later in the season tough if my memory is correct. This is fine to do for a few games but in the long run players get tired from being overplayed so much and it will catch up to you. Lou took a gamble and so far he's loosing it. I'm sure glad the Habs have enough cap space to carry more than 20 players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 Didn't the Flames forced to do something similar a few years ago? That was later in the season tough if my memory is correct. This is fine to do for a few games but in the long run players get tired from being overplayed so much and it will catch up to you. Lou took a gamble and so far he's loosing it. I'm sure glad the Habs have enough cap space to carry more than 20 players. They did for several games, though not quite to the extent the Devils did last night. The league reportedly will step in if New Jersey tries to pull this for an extended period of time as it is cap/CBA circumvention - heck, the NHLPA can't like it either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 Technically, it's not allowable. The rules specifically forbid a team from icing less than 20 skaters unless under emergency situations... being up against the cap with your current roster isn't an emergency, especially with 80 games to play. Within 24 hours, the Devils could be cap compliant: place a guy with a significant cap hit on waivers, wait for him to clear or be claimed, put him in the minors if unclaimed and call up enough replacements to get a full, 20 man lineup, under the cap. When you start the year $40k under your LTIR inflated limit, you aren't in an emergency... this was entirely forseeable. That being said, the enforcement measure is so severe that the NHL won't ever touch it: forfeiting games. You think the NHL will shut down a game on a couple hours notice (3 PM EST is the deadline each day)? Tell all the fans that paid for tickets that there's no game? Tell their broadcasters that there's nothing on tonight? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 They did for several games, though not quite to the extent the Devils did last night. The league reportedly will step in if New Jersey tries to pull this for an extended period of time as it is cap/CBA circumvention - heck, the NHLPA can't like it either. Personally I dont care if the Devils screw up their season because their GM is too dumb to do basic math. They could ice a 10 man roster for all I care, that's their problem. I could see the 10 eastern teams that aren't in the atlantic division not liking it tough. Considering you play 6 games VS in division teams and 4 VS in conference teams, it could be argued than the Pens/Flyers/Isles/Rags gets an unfair 4 pts advantage in the standings by playing more often against a thin Devils roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l.moustakas Posted October 12, 2010 Author Share Posted October 12, 2010 Technically, it's not allowable. The rules specifically forbid a team from icing less than 20 skaters unless under emergency situations... being up against the cap with your current roster isn't an emergency, especially with 80 games to play. Within 24 hours, the Devils could be cap compliant: place a guy with a significant cap hit on waivers, wait for him to clear or be claimed, put him in the minors if unclaimed and call up enough replacements to get a full, 20 man lineup, under the cap. When you start the year $40k under your LTIR inflated limit, you aren't in an emergency... this was entirely forseeable. That being said, the enforcement measure is so severe that the NHL won't ever touch it: forfeiting games. You think the NHL will shut down a game on a couple hours notice (3 PM EST is the deadline each day)? Tell all the fans that paid for tickets that there's no game? Tell their broadcasters that there's nothing on tonight? On some level though, I wish they simply had cancelled the game. As much as Lou should have been able to do basic math, as Jean put it, the league should have figured out the whole average-salary loophole a whole lot sooner. The fine of 3 million dollars and the loss of draft picks was, I felt, excessive, especially considering that these contracts existed before and it didn't take psychic to divine someone would dare push said loopholes boundaries. However, now that the Devils have put themselves into this mess (not only by signing Kovalchuk, but also acquiring Arnott, Volchenkov and Tallinder), forcing them to forfeit the game would have been an appropriate punishment. Of course, given the aforementioned fine and loss of draft picks, doing that would just be picking on the Devils at this point. As for the enforcement being too severe, I am not so sure. Not that I'm leaning one way or another, but I can't help but think that if the league wants its rules to be taken seriously, on the ice as much as off it, it needs to present, severe, consistent punishments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 Devils caught a lucky break : Brian Rolston and his $5M cap hit will go on LTIR for 6-8 weeks. That will allow them to ice a full roster until then. I wonder if they'll try to bury him on LTIR for the rest of the season. I guess that could work if Rolston is satisfied staying home and collecting his paycheque but what if he wants to play and the Devils won't let him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 Devils caught a lucky break : Brian Rolston and his $5M cap hit will go on LTIR for 6-8 weeks. That will allow them to ice a full roster until then. I wonder if they'll try to bury him on LTIR for the rest of the season. I guess that could work if Rolston is satisfied staying home and collecting his paycheque but what if he wants to play and the Devils won't let him? Anyone really convinced his injury is actually that severe? It's most likely not, just like Salvador's concussion isn't terrible either. But, doctors can legitimately claim that the injury could force him to miss 10 games/21 days so they can LTIR him even if it isn't that severe. You can't force a player to stay on LTIR technically...though I'm sure we'll see the Devils try that at some point this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 Anyone really convinced his injury is actually that severe? It's most likely not, just like Salvador's concussion isn't terrible either. But, doctors can legitimately claim that the injury could force him to miss 10 games/21 days so they can LTIR him even if it isn't that severe. You can't force a player to stay on LTIR technically...though I'm sure we'll see the Devils try that at some point this year. The Flyers decided to get Briere to do another surgery well after the fact last year in order to keep him on LTIR... basically it was a "take care of every minor injury you have until we can get our books in order". Players come back from concussions way too early anyways... 3 weeks should be standard practice, at minimum. Of course, I doubt Salvador's safety is the reason they're keeping him out for that length at minimum, but still. No idea on Rolston's injury. They didn't immediately put him there, so it's hard to tell. The Red Wings iced less than a full lineup this week as well... they had 5 injuries, none of which could be classified as LTIR, and couldn't make all the necessary callups. The cap is screwy on callups... they should only be counted on a per day basis, not as a projection for staying the full year. It would solve a lot of the problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 The Red Wings iced less than a full lineup this week as well... they had 5 injuries, none of which could be classified as LTIR, and couldn't make all the necessary callups. The cap is screwy on callups... they should only be counted on a per day basis, not as a projection for staying the full year. It would solve a lot of the problems. The other option, though I don't see it happening, is to go to a per-game system. I wouldn't mind seeing the projection part go away but some failsafe would have to be in place to allow the league to block moves if teams really look like they'll be over the cap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 The other option, though I don't see it happening, is to go to a per-game system. I wouldn't mind seeing the projection part go away but some failsafe would have to be in place to allow the league to block moves if teams really look like they'll be over the cap. That would also eliminate the Jamie McGinn situations: guys who are on two-way deals that are sent to the AHL in between games to save money on the cap. Here's kind of my idea: You have a playing roster that you submit at the start of the year. These players go by the projection system: they count right from the start and it is assumed they will finish out the year on the roster, unless they are actually removed (be it via waivers/re-assingment, LTIR, trade or retirement). There has to be a full 20 man roster on this list, and up to 23. Any callups outside of this are on a per diem basis, unless they spend 21 consecutive days or, say, 40 total days on the roster (you can get around it once by sending them down for a day, calling them back up after but not twice, so for example the Habs can't send Subban or Eller down every 20 days to skirt the issue for the full year). After those 2 points, they are counted in the projected total. This should solve the day to day cap stresses, especially pre-trade deadline. You also ALWAYS have to have at least 20 players projected to play through the end of the season. So Lou Lams can't put Leblond on there, waive him a week into the year, and then not add Mair to the list. LTIR rules remain the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueKross Posted October 20, 2010 Share Posted October 20, 2010 (edited) Make your own bed. Edited October 20, 2010 by BlueKross Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueKross Posted October 20, 2010 Share Posted October 20, 2010 I believe your roster size is mandated from a minimum of 20 to a maximum of 23. I believe you can dress 20 for any particular game. You put yourself at risk if you dress less. It looks cheap and unprofessional as well and abridges the level playing field idea. Just not a good idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.