|
|
Post by Minnesota Wild on Jul 14, 2023 21:16:09 GMT -5
Well I agree LTIR would make great sense…
I already carried Kuch’s deadweight for a full season so like a jaded victim of hazing I’m in favour of others suffering the same fate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Blackhawks on Jul 14, 2023 21:56:14 GMT -5
Well I agree LTIR would make great sense… I already carried Kuch’s deadweight for a full season so like a jaded victim of hazing I’m in favour of others suffering the same fate. Maybe have it that as of August 1 - 2023, any announced season long injuries are eligible. I for one don't agree with me being able to place Muzzin on a LTIR as I acquired him as a cap dump 6 months ago. But Arizona who has had Landeskog on his roster for 10+ years, in my opinion, should be able to. Again, I'm just spitting ideas, trying to encourage more dialogue here, especially during the dog days of summer. |
|
|
|
Post by San Jose Sharks on Jul 18, 2023 17:12:29 GMT -5
Im really torn here but id have to agree with letting Price go but keeping other guys on the roster with a hybrid of the rule.
|
|
|
|
Post by Montreal Canadiens on Jul 18, 2023 22:23:14 GMT -5
if they didnt play at all you have the option to buy them out no penalty, assuming its an under 35 contract. if they come back try and get them in free agency.
|
|
|
|
Post by Montreal Canadiens on Jul 18, 2023 22:23:43 GMT -5
its harder when they play 5 games and have a shit rating for a year and you cant buy them out
|
|
|
|
Post by Montreal Canadiens on Jul 18, 2023 22:26:47 GMT -5
Im really torn here but id have to agree with letting Price go but keeping other guys on the roster with a hybrid of the rule. we have a non activity buyout clause that has zero penalty. unless thats gone i dont understand why this is such a debate. |
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Blackhawks on Jul 18, 2023 22:45:46 GMT -5
Im really torn here but id have to agree with letting Price go but keeping other guys on the roster with a hybrid of the rule. we have a non activity buyout clause that has zero penalty. unless thats gone i dont understand why this is such a debate. Price isnt really a great example as he is likely to never play again, and is in on an expiring contract anyways. But lets give a hypothetical situation. Team trades 5 1st round picks for Connor McDavid and then signs him to a 5 year contract here in the VHL in the off-season. During that NHL Pre-season, he suffers a season ending injury so in year 2 of the deal, he will be 54 overall as he wont get into any games in the NHL. Shouldnt that team have some protection so that they can still compete during the window they have, and be able to put McDavid on LTIR and spend some of that $13,000,000 that is tied up during season 2, either that or drop McDavid for nothing, after just giving up major assets to get him. I guess my main point is, the NHL has the LTIR, so maybe, on a case-by-case basis (staff decision) we should consider it here. Again, I don't see this being more then 10 active LTIR's a year. Nothing that is gonna create a huge amount of work. |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas Golden Knights on Jul 19, 2023 0:21:55 GMT -5
I agree fully with Chicago on this and the example he provided. From last year, I counted 10 instances of players that could be considered a LTIR option:
- Gabriel Landeskog & Sean Couturier I consider prime candidates for this. They’re key players to teams, expectation is that they will hopefully be back. Just because they are eligible, I would not use an inactivity buyout on them (very similar to Kucherov the year prior)
- Carey Price I would consider a candidate for this. Given the option, I’d stash him on LTIR. Within our current rules, given his pedigree, I can understand the hesitation to hold onto him on the slim hope he returns but given the high probability of his career ending, I’d use an inactivity buyout on him
- Max Pacioretty/Jake Muzzin/Mark Borowiecki I consider candidates for this. The three all played less than 5 games last season due to injury & their ratings reflect that. So none are eligible for an inactivity buyout cause they played games but the players are virtually useless so teams are still penalized for this. It’s not like your stashing Muzzin or Boro in hopes they play again some day
- Cam Atkinson/Ryan Ellis I would have considered candidates for this before inactivity buyouts were used on them. It’s not like they’re core players like Landy or Couturier so it’s easier to avail of the inactive buyout option here.
- Oliver Kylington is the last one I consider a candidate for this. Young enough and has enough potential that I wouldn’t risk using an inactivity buyout on him, but his cap hit still hurts when he is useless to your team for this upcoming season
- Jakub Voracek is the last one I’ll highlight. He’s the perfect player to highlight as that threshold because he played 11GP, so he still has a decent enough rating to be in your lineup but not effective enough for what you expect from Voracek. 11 GP I would not consider a LTIR candidate, this scenario would be like what Seattle compared to previously, a player having a garbage season and their rating being reflected as such. But a player who misses a full season due to injury, I don’t believe that’s an equal comparison.
Anyhow, I said my piece. I think with the minimal number of cases that would be eligible for LTIR that it is something that could be beneficial to the league to not totally screw over teams who get caught in this scenario. Maybe like a 4 mil minimum cap hit with less than 5 GP the prior season are conditions for LTIR eligibility.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pittsburgh Penguins on Jul 20, 2023 19:25:11 GMT -5
I agree fully with Chicago on this and the example he provided. From last year, I counted 10 instances of players that could be considered a LTIR option: - Gabriel Landeskog & Sean Couturier I consider prime candidates for this. They’re key players to teams, expectation is that they will hopefully be back. Just because they are eligible, I would not use an inactivity buyout on them (very similar to Kucherov the year prior) - Carey Price I would consider a candidate for this. Given the option, I’d stash him on LTIR. Within our current rules, given his pedigree, I can understand the hesitation to hold onto him on the slim hope he returns but given the high probability of his career ending, I’d use an inactivity buyout on him - Max Pacioretty/Jake Muzzin/Mark Borowiecki I consider candidates for this. The three all played less than 5 games last season due to injury & their ratings reflect that. So none are eligible for an inactivity buyout cause they played games but the players are virtually useless so teams are still penalized for this. It’s not like your stashing Muzzin or Boro in hopes they play again some day - Cam Atkinson/Ryan Ellis I would have considered candidates for this before inactivity buyouts were used on them. It’s not like they’re core players like Landy or Couturier so it’s easier to avail of the inactive buyout option here. - Oliver Kylington is the last one I consider a candidate for this. Young enough and has enough potential that I wouldn’t risk using an inactivity buyout on him, but his cap hit still hurts when he is useless to your team for this upcoming season - Jakub Voracek is the last one I’ll highlight. He’s the perfect player to highlight as that threshold because he played 11GP, so he still has a decent enough rating to be in your lineup but not effective enough for what you expect from Voracek. 11 GP I would not consider a LTIR candidate, this scenario would be like what Seattle compared to previously, a player having a garbage season and their rating being reflected as such. But a player who misses a full season due to injury, I don’t believe that’s an equal comparison. Anyhow, I said my piece. I think with the minimal number of cases that would be eligible for LTIR that it is something that could be beneficial to the league to not totally screw over teams who get caught in this scenario. Maybe like a 4 mil minimum cap hit with less than 5 GP the prior season are conditions for LTIR eligibility. Been in a few nhl leagues and most have an option such as this |
|
|
|
Post by San Jose Sharks on Jul 22, 2023 23:39:06 GMT -5
Wouldnt mind free’ing up Kylington’s salary as long as I maintain his rights for when he returns this season
|
|
