Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Official] NHL Return To Play Thread (24 team play off, 15 team draft lottery)

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Hamhuis Hip Check said:

God forbid a young single man have one last night out while following the law

This is a little dramatic, isn't it?

 

"One last night out"?  Will he never ever get to go out again?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the new collective bargaining agreement that is being done up, they should retroactively penalize teams that took on contracts of players who were on long-term injury and had no intention of playing again. It’s just as sneaky of a way of circumventing the cap as the Luongo contract, and in my mind it’s worse because it unfairly rewards teams that have huge markets and funds to be able to get away with it, when the whole point of the cap was to bring smaller market clubs onto an even playing field.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Slegr said:

In the new collective bargaining agreement that is being done up, they should retroactively penalize teams that took on contracts of players who were on long-term injury and had no intention of playing again. It’s just as sneaky of a way of circumventing the cap as the Luongo contract, and in my mind it’s worse because it unfairly rewards teams that have huge markets and funds to be able to get away with it, when the whole point of the cap was to bring smaller market clubs onto an even playing field.

 

LTIR doesn't create cap space.  It's more of a hindrance where teams can't always build an active roster up to the salary cap.  It also creates bonus overages and limits who can get recalled.

 

LTIR only allows to exceed the cap up to the amount necessary to be cap compliant.  Injured players count against the salary cap but LTIR allows teams to exceed the salary cap up to their salaries.  IE it's a mechanism to allow to try and eliminate their cap hit from counting against the active roster (as they are inactive).  Teams have to do some roster manoeuvring to get the full relief. Their cap hit is not simply removed.  

 

The portion that exceeds 81.5M is only LTIR money - it's not active players.  Active players are still under the 81.5M cap.  Most of the time teams in LTIR have trouble building an active roster up to 81.5M.

 

Last year Toronto kept money for Marner and had to add Clarkson otherwise their active roster would have been at most 78M while other teams could operate at the maximum salary cap of 81.5M.   By adding Clarkson they were able to have an active roster closer to 81.5M like any other team that isn't using LTIR.

 

Friedman in his 31 thoughts even writes "I'm also not sure the Maple Leafs are too eager to flirt with LTIR once again. They knew they were starting last year without Travis Dermott and Zach Hyman. It wasn't an easy dance for them - or Vegas - last season".

 

The Canucks used the same mechanism by putting Ferland on LTIR otherwise they would have had an active roster of only 78M.  By using LTIR they now have a bonus overage of some 1.7M that is going to count against next season's cap.

 

GMs would apparently like for the league to reconsider the LTIR mechanism.  They suggest to simply remove the cap hit of LTIR players.  It would simplify the whole process and not penalise teams who have LTIR players from operating up to the salary cap.  It would have made the Leafs life so much easier and they wouldn't have had to add Clarkson to be able to reach 81.5M in active players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Gawdzukes said:

Well there you go. A lot of people incorrectly thought there would be no protocols surrounding food service and such.

That could be because there was no info regarding testing those people, till now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/3/2020 at 7:18 PM, WHL rocks said:

They should make a rule that if any one gets caught leaving the bubble they will not be allowed back in.. they are immediately sent home. No exceptions except a medical emergency. 

 

The public shame it would bring will help players stay inside the bubble.

 

.  

Two men enter, one man leave! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DeNiro said:

So it’s a 4 year extension?

 

The rumors were they were negotiating 6. I would guess the players wanted it to be shorter with all the economic uncertainty.

It will be valid through 2025/26.  The press release says that it will add 4 years to the current CBA so with 2 years remaining makes it 6 total.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a very reasonable amendment to recapture.  Nashville could have been facing a $24m cap penalty for a year if Weber retired in the last year of his contract.  Under the amendment they’d still get hit with the $24m but it’ll max out at $7.85m a year over 3+ years now 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/3/2020 at 7:18 PM, WHL rocks said:

They should make a rule that if any one gets caught leaving the bubble they will not be allowed back in.. they are immediately sent home. No exceptions except a medical emergency. 

 

The public shame it would bring will help players stay inside the bubble.

 

.  

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/4/2020 at 4:18 AM, WHL rocks said:

They should make a rule that if any one gets caught leaving the bubble they will not be allowed back in.. they are immediately sent home. No exceptions except a medical emergency. 

 

The public shame it would bring will help players stay inside the bubble.

 

.  

 

Players are not allowed to leave the secure zone without permission and could be removed from phase 4.

 

Each team will have to designate a compliance officer for their party of 52.  That compliance officer has to sign off daily that everyone has complied with protocol - from testing to staying in the secure zone and wearing face masks where required. 

 

There are penalties if a player or a team is not following protocol -  fines and even losing draft picks dependent on the severity of the infraction.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...