|
|
Post by Tampa Bay Lightning on Jul 3, 2017 22:58:38 GMT -5
I thoguth the rule was "once a player hits 10 games, you have to create him 'the off season' after" If a guy hits 10 games during the 16-17 season, you have to create him the summer of 2017. No ELC years gets burnt off.
|
|
|
|
Post by Edmonton Oilers on Jul 3, 2017 23:04:51 GMT -5
I thoguth the rule was "once a player hits 10 games, you have to create him 'the off season' after" If a guy hits 10 games during the 16-17 season, you have to create him the summer of 2017. No ELC years gets burnt off. the issue right now is the timing thing. when does the off season start, after the expansion draft, entry draft, after the last game of the season or when free agency starts. so say we decide its the expansion draft than on technicailty these count as prospects until after. however vegas would need to create them almost immediately. its more deciding exactly when the offseason starts is the problem here. if we said after the last game of the season that all these guys were created there wouldnt be any issue. its more of a technicailty thing that we're arguing about. because roster moves were banned by scott until the expansion draft technically our offseason started this year after the expansion draft. |
|
|
|
Post by Seattle Kraken on Jul 3, 2017 23:06:10 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). Louis made it sound like I had to create them as soon as they played 10 games. And this just boosts my arguement that they should be eligible for this draft because the ELC doesn't go in to effect until next season and therefore are still eligible for my prospect list and considered prospects. |
|
|
|
Post by Edmonton Oilers on Jul 3, 2017 23:10:30 GMT -5
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). Louis made it sound like I had to create them as soon as they played 10 games. And this just boosts my arguement that they should be eligible for this draft because the ELC doesn't go in to effect until next season and therefore are still eligible for my prospect list and considered prospects. to be fair i never said that. the rule is that once they play 10 games they need to be created in the off season. right now we're trying to determine when exactly the elc kicks in which is your argument. also my opinion is that these players are not eligible because we have a set of rules that govern what an eligible prospect is which is 10 games or 25 or under. just because they are on the prospect list does not mean they are still eligible. i understand the Kings point of view in his argument and thats fine. but right now its more Scotts call at the end of the day. its not fair to expose prospects that Vegas would technically have to create in the offseason. At this point I can live with the players being exposed because I hhonestly dont really care anymore but im sure Vegas is aware that he will have to do this. but we will have to write a rule about when we need to create the players after theyve reached the limits. |
|
|
|
Post by Andre Deblois on Jul 3, 2017 23:16:45 GMT -5
As Louis has stated, what is being discussed now is exactly when they have to be created... under normal circumstances it does not much matter, but in this case it does. If they need to be created immediately following the season, they are ineligible to be exposed as prospects. If they need to be created at any time before the following season, they are eligible to be exposed as prospects. There is no question that all of the players highlighted by Louis need to be created before next season, that part of the rule is clear.
|
|
|
|
Post by Seattle Kraken on Jul 3, 2017 23:16:50 GMT -5
Louis made it sound like I had to create them as soon as they played 10 games. And this just boosts my arguement that they should be eligible for this draft because the ELC doesn't go in to effect until next season and therefore are still eligible for my prospect list and considered prospects. to be fair i never said that. right now we're trying to determine when exactly the elc kicks in which is your argument. also my opinion is that these players are not eligible because we have a set of rules that govern what an eligible prospect is which is 10 games or 25 or under. just because they are on the prospect list does not mean they are still eligible. i understand the Kings point of view in his argument and thats fine. but right now its more Scotts call at the end of the day. I'm just looking for consistancy. The staffs lack of clarity or foresight on this issue shouldn't result in me being punished. Nothing about this was discussed or mentioned when the expansion draft was announced. I'm not trying to dump on the staff, they do a great job here but it's the first expansion draft we've ever had so there are bound to be some kinks to be worked out and this issue was never addressed. |
|
|
|
Post by Philadelphia Flyers on Jul 4, 2017 0:44:44 GMT -5
Dallas has notified me he will be swapping Rykov with Vigneault under his unprotected prospects
|
|
|
|
Post by Edmonton Oilers on Jul 4, 2017 9:03:49 GMT -5
Alright we decided that teams dont have to switch so disregard my post, Vegas knows if he picks any of those players he will have to create them when the off season starts @kyle told me that he would like his list switched back and thats fine. we will be creating a rule of when these prspects should be created for next year and beyond. new process new kinks. @detroid still need your prospect list and Calgary Flames we need your list too. @devils we need a replacement for hoffman |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2017 10:35:12 GMT -5
I'll replace Tanev with AJ Greer
|
|
|
|
Post by Edmonton Oilers on Jul 4, 2017 11:07:21 GMT -5
I'll replace Tanev with AJ Greer you dont need to anymore |
|
