2024-25 NHL discussion thread

[GHT120]

The "NHL Year" rolled over to 2024-25 yesterday, so thought it was time for a new "NHL Discussion" thread.

Starting it off with a "future-forward" Tweet from Pierre Lebrun

 

QUESTION: Couldn't find the "Pin" option ... could the mods do so please?

[GHT120]

84 games would allow home and away with the other conference, 3 games against the other division in the same conference and 4 games in-division ... the extra home game doesn't hurt the owners' pocketbooks either.

[Commandant]

Full Schedule

https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-announces-2024-25-regular-season-schedule

[GHT120]

1 minute ago, Commandant said:

Full Schedule

https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-announces-2024-25-regular-season-schedule

If this is in response to my post, and not just 24-25 information, as Lebrun pointed out the proposal is for changes under the next CBA (i.e., no earlier than the 26-27 season).

[Commandant]

2 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

If this is in response to my post, and not just 24-25 information, as Lebrun pointed out the proposal is for changes under the next CBA (i.e., no earlier than the 26-27 season).

 

Wasn't a response to that.... was just posting the full NHL schedule that just dropped and I thought the 2024-25 discussion thread would be where to drop it. 

[TurdBurglar]

Rule changes for the 24-25 season;

 

Rule 38.2 (Situations Subject to Coach’s Challenge)

A coach’s challenge now will be permitted to take down a penalty for puck out of play. This only will apply to delay of game penalties when the puck is determined to have deflected off a player, stick, glass or boards, and not on a judgment call on how the puck left the defensive zone (e.g., batted pucks or if the puck was shot out from the defensive zone). In the event of a failed challenge, another two-minute minor penalty will be assessed (in addition to the existing delay of game penalty).

 

Rule 63.8 (Line Change Following Dislodged Net)

There will be an adjustment to Rule 63.8 so that the defensive team cannot make a line change in the event its goaltender accidentally dislodges the net (old language applied just to skater).

 

Rule 76.4 (Face-Off Procedure – Centers)

Following an icing, the offensive center also now will receive one warning (same as the defensive player) for a face-off violation.

 

Rule 75.3 (Unsportsmanlike Conduct – Player Sitting on Boards)

The referee now will provide the offending team (coach and players) with one warning regarding players sitting on the boards (and will so advise the other team). After one warning in a game, the team precipitating the warning will be issued a bench minor penalty for future violations.

 

https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-announces-rule-changes-for-next-season

[tomh009]

I saw somewhere that NHLPA would like to cut the draft down to four rounds. Fewer than seven does seem reasonable, even if the owners might not agree to four.

[GHT120]

2 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

Wasn't a response to that.... was just posting the full NHL schedule that just dropped and I thought the 2024-25 discussion thread would be where to drop it. 

Totally agree ... just wasn't certain which it was, so I qualified my response.

[Peter Puck]

Does the extra 2 for unsuccessfully challenging delay of game come as a double minor or as a 2 minute 5 on 3?  I guess probably 5 on 3.  Seems like a pretty steep penalty for what may be an unclear call.

 

[GHT120]

14 minutes ago, Peter Puck said:

Does the extra 2 for unsuccessfully challenging delay of game come as a double minor or as a 2 minute 5 on 3?  I guess probably 5 on 3.  Seems like a pretty steep penalty for what may be an unclear call.

Clearly intended to try to avoid there beiong too many challenges.

[dlbalr]

5 hours ago, tomh009 said:

I saw somewhere that NHLPA would like to cut the draft down to four rounds. Fewer than seven does seem reasonable, even if the owners might not agree to four.

 

It's something the agents are pushing for in particular.  Being a draft guy, I like seven rounds (I also liked nine) but I understand the logic behind the idea.

[hab29RETIRED]

1 hour ago, dlbalr said:

 

It's something the agents are pushing for in particular.  Being a draft guy, I like seven rounds (I also liked nine) but I understand the logic behind the idea.

If they are going to keep seven rounds, you should be able to keep rights for all picks (including CHL) for 4 years, or have a rule that picks in the first two rounds for CHL are 2 years, and 4 years for later rounds. For late round picks, 2 years is usually not enough time to know if they are worth a contract spot. It's what it makes more sense to draft American and Europeans with later picks.

[tomh009]

From a player point of view, having a team own your rights for four years when they may never give you an opportunity (and you don't really have anywhere else to play) is not ideal.

[Commandant]

55 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

From a player point of view, having a team own your rights for four years when they may never give you an opportunity (and you don't really have anywhere else to play) is not ideal.

 

Thats all true but changes that favour players are unlikely IMO. 

 

The reason is that this is a CBA negotiation issue. 

 

All the people who vote on the CBA are current players.  Undrafted prospects don't. 

 

So when push comes to shove and you have to give concessions to the league in one area, to get concessions from the league in a different area, this is the first thing that they will give the owners what they want.  For that reason I doubt the draft changes. 

Why do you think ELCs became so cheap, barely above league minimum?  Cause the players association in those negotiations, that was the easiest concession to make. It effects none of them. 

[Sir_Boagalott]

2 hours ago, Commandant said:

Thats all true but changes that favour players are unlikely IMO. 

 

The reason is that this is a CBA negotiation issue. 

 

All the people who vote on the CBA are current players.  Undrafted prospects don't. 

 

You're absolutely right - its about future players and the people that vote are current players.  i.e when all the players have no teeth they don't care that Lisa needs braces.

 

I could see Bettman changing the rules but it would only be to take away any advantage the Habs, Leafs and Rangers should have.   When there is no limit on scouting the richest teams can easily outspend lesser teams and be the best at drafting.  There is no reason that hasnt been happening.  Luckily, Hughes is finally leading the Habs in that direction.    

[Commandant]

You think making all those young players normally drafted, into free agents would be a disadavantage to rich teams in cities where they would want to play?

 

Oh boy....

 

The Rangers and Leafs would love.it.

 

They already scoop up the best college FAs.  Now there will be better college and junior FAs.

[DON]

Might be interesting.

e.g.

5th round picks, Luke Misa and Justin Poirier would be 2 skaters to pick their own team.

And the 7 Goalies taken, just in the 5th, would also be available to anyone.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

I see Florida just signed Lyndell to a 5M a year contract effectively using up the rest of their cap space. Their defence looks a bit thin after losing Montour and Ekman Larson. They better hope Eckblad and Forsling stay healthy. They signed Nate Schmid but he won't replace what they lost.  Assuming the Flames finish bottom 10 (you never know) the potential is there for Florida to slide a bit. 

[Peter Puck]

4 hours ago, DON said:

Might be interesting.

e.g.

5th round picks, Luke Misa and Justin Poirier would be 2 skaters to pick their own team.

And the 7 Goalies taken, just in the 5th, would also be available to anyone.

Players taken in the 4th round would end up with less leverage than undrafted players.  That seems like a perverse situation.

[TurdBurglar]

17 hours ago, tomh009 said:

From a player point of view, having a team own your rights for four years when they may never give you an opportunity (and you don't really have anywhere else to play) is not ideal.

This could be countered by a MLB Rule-5 style draft.  Using a standardized late round draft pick instead of cash.  it's not perfect, but it's an idea.

[DON]

Heard it suggested that small market Canadian teams simply not favoured by USA players and Conroy was not gonna draft one after so many issues retaining USA players.

Flames-OHL d-man, Sens - WHL d-man

 

Also suggested that the Habs only drafting 2 CHLers on purpose, giving the rest of picks more years before needing signed, with bit of glut in prospect pool #s.

[dlbalr]

31 minutes ago, DON said:

Also suggested that the Habs only drafting 2 CHLers on purpose, giving the rest of picks more years before needing signed, with bit of glut in prospect pool #s.

 

They largely went for longer-term pieces last year as well to balance things out.

[hab29RETIRED]

18 hours ago, tomh009 said:

From a player point of view, having a team own your rights for four years when they may never give you an opportunity (and you don't really have anywhere else to play) is not ideal.

That does exist for USA HS and college players, as well as Europeans. Lower round picks are less likely to be ready to step in, require extra 2-3 years to be ready, and can still have teams guide them on their development without actually receiving a contract. From a teams perspective, they have more time to assess a player. 
 

as it is, I think more t and are drafting from Europe and USA programs because they have more time to assess them, so those more marginal CHL players are probably already at a disadvantage.
 

From a player perspective, currently, they can be redrafted in 2 years, or become free agents. Benefit of being drafted, is as I said they can still receive guidance from teams and attend camps.

[GHT120]

1 hour ago, Peter Puck said:

Players taken in the 4th round would end up with less leverage than undrafted players.  That seems like a perverse situation.

That is already true for players taken in the 7th round versus those that are undrafted ... and will always the same for whatever cut-off is decided ... undrafted players are obviously somewhat less valued but do have the freedom to sign with the team that offers them the best opportunity (assuming more than one team offers a contract).

[tomh009]

5 hours ago, GHT120 said:

That is already true for players taken in the 7th round versus those that are undrafted ... and will always the same for whatever cut-off is decided ... undrafted players are obviously somewhat less valued but do have the freedom to sign with the team that offers them the best opportunity (assuming more than one team offers a contract).

Exactly. And if you are undrafted, in most cases the teams are not knocking on your door, you need to chase them to get an opportunity to play in a development camp or similar.