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

[Signing] Toronto to play $0 backup


lmm

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, mll said:

Vancouver could well end up in a similar situation.  They too are in LTIR and have no recall cap space right now.  

 

10 minutes ago, lmm said:

they say in the article that they would need to send a player down, (exposing to waivers) in order to bring up the Marlie guy.

They have options, they are choosing to play an amateur player for financial reason

We could just send a guy down instead.  So should Toronto since their starting blueline is mostly AHLers as it is.

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, lmm said:

they say in the article that they would need to send a player down, (exposing to waivers) in order to bring up the Marlie guy.

They have options, they are choosing to play an amateur player for financial reason

 

Sandin and Liljegren are waiver free.  They are not sending one down because it would put them a skater short-handed.  So instead they decided to take the risk that their backup ATO won’t have to draw in.   

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

 

We could just send a guy down instead.  So should Toronto since their starting blueline is mostly AHLers as it is.

And play a skater short vs having a backup goalie that probably won’t play.

 

If Campbell gets injured than they have an ATO in net.  The CBA allows for emergency cap relief after a team plays a game short-handed. 

 

Edited by mll
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mll said:

And play a skater short vs having a backup goalie that probably won’t play.

 

If Campbell gets injured than they have an ATO in net.  The CBA allows for emergency cap relief after a team plays a game short-handed. 

 

Most teams aren't Toronto and would ventilate the emergency backup.

 

Can you imagine how this poor guy would do behind Toronto's defence?

 

Edited by King Heffy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mll said:

And play a skater short vs having a backup goalie that probably won’t play.

 

If Campbell gets injured than they have an ATO in net.  The CBA allows for emergency cap relief after a team plays a game short-handed. 

 

OK. @mll i have to say that I'm extremely impressed by your CBA knowledge. Are you literally the CBA itself?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mll said:

Vancouver could well end up in a similar situation.  They too are in LTIR and have no recall cap space right now.  

Not really… we can easily choose to send a player down to cover it.

I wouldn’t agree with us using a mechanism intended for last minute injuries as a way to circumvent the cap and/or avoid having to expose a player to waivers.

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mll said:

And play a skater short vs having a backup goalie that probably won’t play.

 

If Campbell gets injured than they have an ATO in net.  The CBA allows for emergency cap relief after a team plays a game short-handed. 

 

meh on the CBA.  The league looked the other way when the Calgary Lames (spelling intentional :lol:) iced a less than full roster a number of years ago because they were 'tapped out' cap wise.  Though I suspect if the Canucks did this, Buttman would fine the Canucks a draft pick + $$$'s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mll said:

And play a skater short vs having a backup goalie that probably won’t play.

 

If Campbell gets injured than they have an ATO in net.  The CBA allows for emergency cap relief after a team plays a game short-handed. 

 

Toronto only has 22 players on the active roster in order to be cap compliant.  That is their problem, not because they have an injury.  If they had the normal 23 man roster they could easily send a guy down to the AHL and call up their AHL goalie.  The Canucks would never have this problem because if Demko or Halak got hurt we could just send Rathbone down to Abby and call up DiPietro.

 

This is mismanagement of the cap by Dubas to allow this to happen by only having 22 players on the active roster due to having to pay 4 players 50% of the cap...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

my opinion.... the team should be forced to sign the player to league minimum, even if its for only one game. that would satisfy the union requirement, they have a minimum for a reason. 

  • Huggy Bear 1
  • Vintage 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • -Vintage Canuck- changed the title to [Signing] Toronto to play $0 backup

No matter whether it's technically legal this is bs. So there is no minimum salary if it affects the Leafs. I agree the spirit of the rule is for an emergency ... this isn't. They should be forced to waive a player and bring up a goalie or sign someone for league minimum and find a way to become cap compliant.

  • Upvote 1
  • Huggy Bear 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Toronto only has 22 players on the active roster in order to be cap compliant.  That is their problem, not because they have an injury.  If they had the normal 23 man roster they could easily send a guy down to the AHL and call up their AHL goalie.  The Canucks would never have this problem because if Demko or Halak got hurt we could just send Rathbone down to Abby and call up DiPietro.

 

This is mismanagement of the cap by Dubas to allow this to happen by only having 22 players on the active roster due to having to pay 4 players 50% of the cap...

 

Teams can go with 20 players - they don't have to go with a 23 player roster.  

 

It's up to teams to decide how they want to spend their cap space.  There are consequences though.  With a roster of 20 they are far more likely to run into injuries and have to play games short-handed before they can invoke roster emergency exemption.   

 

It generally hurts a team to be short-handed.  Here Toronto put themselves at risk of having to play an ATO goalie if Campbell got injured.

 

Edited by mll
  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

meh on the CBA.  The league looked the other way when the Calgary Lames (spelling intentional :lol:) iced a less than full roster a number of years ago because they were 'tapped out' cap wise.  Though I suspect if the Canucks did this, Buttman would fine the Canucks a draft pick + $$$'s.

Isn't it why they introduced that rule.  Teams have to play a game short-handed first though.  Vegas played games at 16 skaters last season - even one at 15.

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...