|
|
Post by Edmonton Oilers on Jul 3, 2017 20:58:26 GMT -5
Nothing was mentioned about this in the Expansion Draft thread. Just that we had to expose 5 players off the prospect list. They are on the prospect list so I don't see why you can all of sudden say they are not eligible. because we've always had rules that determine what is considered is an eligible prospect. anyone who is overage or has played more than 10 games is not an eligible prospect in our league. its in the rules. its very clear. its not very fair for vegas to have ineligible prospects on their exposed pool to pick from. it defeats the purpose. |
|
|
|
Post by Seattle Kraken on Jul 3, 2017 21:04:30 GMT -5
Nothing was mentioned about this in the Expansion Draft thread. Just that we had to expose 5 players off the prospect list. They are on the prospect list so I don't see why you can all of sudden say they are not eligible. because we've always had rules that determine what is considered is an eligible prospect. anyone who is overage or has played more than 10 games is not a prospect in our league. its in the rules. its very clear. But why the hell would I create a player who won't have a rating and burn a year of thier ELC? We are still in the 2016 season, you guys have to remember we are a year behind with ratings so these players would still be prospects. |
|
|
|
Post by Edmonton Oilers on Jul 3, 2017 21:06:33 GMT -5
because we've always had rules that determine what is considered is an eligible prospect. anyone who is overage or has played more than 10 games is not a prospect in our league. its in the rules. its very clear. But why the hell would I create a player who won't have a rating and burn a year of thier ELC? We are still in the 2016 season, you guys have to remember we are a year behind with ratings so these players would still be prospects. both your players played last year thus have ratings. simple. the ratings were switch to the new ones already. nick lappin played 43 games last season and nogier played the 10 games. we expolained this when we switched it to 10 games that we don't want teams taking advantage of having an extra year of an elc when the player has played more than enough to have a rating. the rules were set. even if vegas didn't take them we were going to force you to sign them this offseason regardless because it was in our rules. |
|
|
|
Post by Seattle Kraken on Jul 3, 2017 21:28:15 GMT -5
But why the hell would I create a player who won't have a rating and burn a year of thier ELC? We are still in the 2016 season, you guys have to remember we are a year behind with ratings so these players would still be prospects. both your players played last year thus have ratings. simple. the ratings were switch to the new ones already. nick lappin played 43 games last season and nogier played the 10 games. we expolained this when we switched it to 10 games that we don't want teams taking advantage of having an extra year of an elc when the player has played more than enough to have a rating. the rules were set. even if vegas didn't take them we were going to force you to sign them this offseason regardless because it was in our rules. they never played enough to have a rating this year! I don't know why you can't understand that. WHY WOULD I CREATE A PROSPECT WHO HAS NO RATING?! This was their first year in the NHL. They meet all the requirements of being exposed in the prospect draft. I dont know why, when we are a few days from the expansion draft, this issue is coming up when it could have been dealt with months ago. Why would I ever think that a player who is playing in their first year in the NHL THIS YEAR would not be eligible, or that I should create them and BURN A YEAR OF THEIR ELC FOR NO GOD DAMN REASON. |
|
|
|
Post by Philadelphia Flyers on Jul 3, 2017 21:37:14 GMT -5
Because it's in the rules. He's played more than 10 games, so he gets created. It's pretty simple to understand.
|
|
|
|
Post by Seattle Kraken on Jul 3, 2017 21:38:59 GMT -5
Because it's in the rules. He's played more than 10 games, so he gets created. It's pretty simple to understand. The rules also state that I need to expose 5 players off my prospect list. They are on my prospect list. That's also pretty simple to understand. |
|
|
|
Post by Andre Deblois on Jul 3, 2017 21:44:09 GMT -5
Fellas lets move this to staff board and not pollute this thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by Corey Scott on Jul 3, 2017 22:44:26 GMT -5
Fellas lets move this to staff board and not pollute this thread. I prefer transparency especially when it is a non-staff member voicing his side. Unless LA is staff and I am just oblivious in which case carry on. For the record though, I do agree with Edmonton/Carolina. LA you are not "burning a year of the ELC" the ELC starts next year for VHL because they got to the 10 game mark in the NHL this year. The rule has been this way forever (with the exception that is used to be 50 games instead of 10). |
|
|
|
Post by Edmonton Oilers on Jul 3, 2017 22:47:29 GMT -5
Fellas lets move this to staff board and not pollute this thread. I prefer transparency especially when it is a non-staff member voicing his side. Unless LA is staff and I am just oblivious in which case carry on. For the record though, I do agree with Edmonton/Carolina. LA you are not "burning a year of the ELC" the ELC starts next year for VHL because they got to the 10 game mark in the NHL this year. The rule has been this way forever (with the exception that is used to be 50 games instead of 10). we moved it 10 10 cause to many times players had like 45 games and a decent rating but werent being created. it just made things simpler |
|
|
|
Post by Edmonton Oilers on Jul 3, 2017 22:50:55 GMT -5
@devils Mike Hoffman cant be protected hes a ufa
|
|
