WildCard Posted March 7, 2016 Report Share Posted March 7, 2016 Poorly Agreed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#freejame Posted March 8, 2016 Report Share Posted March 8, 2016 (edited) "NHLPA has been informed that Quebec City is excluded from the NHL expansion" - @GeorgesLaraque #919sport #lnh #ch #habs #hockey #nhl https://twitter.com/frank_seravalli/status/706929372708675585NHL refutes the claim Edited March 8, 2016 by IrwinNelson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted March 15, 2016 Report Share Posted March 15, 2016 So will they make the expansion draft difficult for the Sabres to rid themselves of unwanted salary like Moulson or Gorges? Â Â http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nhl/2016/03/15/nhl-expansion-las-vegas-quebec-city-gary-bettman/81800994/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 So will they make the expansion draft difficult for the Sabres to rid themselves of unwanted salary like Moulson or Gorges? Â Â http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nhl/2016/03/15/nhl-expansion-las-vegas-quebec-city-gary-bettman/81800994/ Â Sounds like the opposite from the last paragraph, where they might have a minimum salary of the exposed players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 So will they make the expansion draft difficult for the Sabres to rid themselves of unwanted salary like Moulson or Gorges? Â Â http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nhl/2016/03/15/nhl-expansion-las-vegas-quebec-city-gary-bettman/81800994/ It's not official, but it sounds like players with no movement clauses will not be eligible for the expansion draft. Â Bill Daly on one-team expansion scenario: "You may lose a good player, but it's only one." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 So will they make the expansion draft difficult for the Sabres to rid themselves of unwanted salary like Moulson or Gorges? Â Â http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nhl/2016/03/15/nhl-expansion-las-vegas-quebec-city-gary-bettman/81800994/ Â Why write that article after the NHL already said no to Quebec? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 It's not official, but it sounds like players with no movement clauses will not be eligible for the expansion draft. Â Bill Daly on one-team expansion scenario: "You may lose a good player, but it's only one." Â And the dreams of jettisoning Moulson die :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 It's not official, but it sounds like players with no movement clauses will not be eligible for the expansion draft. Â Bill Daly on one-team expansion scenario: "You may lose a good player, but it's only one." Â So give every player a NMC? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 So give every player a NMC? Â Is completely tying the franchise's hands long term in the trade market worth not losing 1 decent player? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 More from Elliott Friedman  The choice is three defencemen and seven forwards OR eight skaters of any makeup. One expansion team means you can only lose one player. Two means two players. Anyone with fewer than three years of professional experience is exempt. You don’t have to worry about losing them.   And one goalie can be protected.  Decision on expansion will be made before the draft  As discussed further up thread, Quebec is putting expansion on the back burner because of the value of the dollar. And the dreams of jettisoning Moulson die :( Bogo, Bogo, Bogo!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 Is completely tying the franchise's hands long term in the trade market worth not losing 1 decent player? Â I meant hypothetically. Â Looks like there's a way for teams to protect more than 7F/3D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 More from Elliott Friedman  The choice is three defencemen and seven forwards OR eight skaters of any makeup. One expansion team means you can only lose one player. Two means two players. Anyone with fewer than three years of professional experience is exempt. You don’t have to worry about losing them.   And one goalie can be protected.  Decision on expansion will be made before the draft  As discussed further up thread, Quebec is putting expansion on the back burner because of the value of the dollar.  Bogo, Bogo, Bogo!!  If GeneralFanager is correct, he has a NMC that kicked in this season. I meant hypothetically.  Looks like there's a way for teams to protect more than 7F/3D.  I probably should have understood that at first glance, sorry. With last night's elections and today's SC nomination, I'm in super serious mode :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 I meant hypothetically. Â Looks like there's a way for teams to protect more than 7F/3D. Â It'd be interesting to see the league say any players with NMCs are automatically on your protected list, you can't leave all the NMCs "unprotected" and protect the rest. It'd hose Buffalo as Moulson (as the example du jour) would eat a slot and we wouldn't be able to protect Girgensons (or some other combination). Â Also, I wonder how partial NMCs will be applied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 (edited) If GeneralFanager is correct, he has a NMC that kicked in this season. l:  Although maybe the prospect of being a bottom pair defenseman here and the allure of playing in Las Vegas will be enough. :lol:   Updated from Pierre LeBrun  Should clarify: first- and second-year "pros" exempt from potential expansion draft, not necessarily NHL players. Pro includes AHL Edited March 16, 2016 by BRAWNDO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabel79 Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 Just spitballing here, but does the "No" on expansion to Quebec as discussed really have to go any deeper than the sheer insanity of putting anther team in the east right now? The conferences are already lopsided, and unless Detroit and/or Columbus feel like going back to the West for old time's sake, the situation only gets worse. Add to that the very possible need for a landing pad in the near future for one of a couple franchises, and the situation gets more interesting. Â I've got no info to back this up, just something I've been mulling over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 Just spitballing here, but does the "No" on expansion to Quebec as discussed really have to go any deeper than the sheer insanity of putting anther team in the east right now? The conferences are already lopsided, and unless Detroit and/or Columbus feel like going back to the West for old time's sake, the situation only gets worse. Add to that the very possible need for a landing pad in the near future for one of a couple franchises, and the situation gets more interesting.  I've got no info to back this up, just something I've been mulling over.  Fair point.  I've read that QC is maybe more a relocation candidate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 Just spitballing here, but does the "No" on expansion to Quebec as discussed really have to go any deeper than the sheer insanity of putting anther team in the east right now? The conferences are already lopsided, and unless Detroit and/or Columbus feel like going back to the West for old time's sake, the situation only gets worse. Add to that the very possible need for a landing pad in the near future for one of a couple franchises, and the situation gets more interesting.  I've got no info to back this up, just something I've been mulling over.  Absolutely not, but an expansion fee of 657,375,000 in Canadian Dollars today magnifies the level of insanity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 The NMC issue is a big deal Assuming Jack and Sam don't have to protected: Kane, O'Reilly, Risto, Lehner automatics. Gionta Moulson Gorges and Bogo potentially automatics due to NMC That means Pysyk and McCabe likely available, as well as at least one of Ennis, Foligno, Larsson, Deslauriers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 Will be curious to see how many NMC magically get added over the next year to new deals. I wonder if players can say "I'll wave my NMC if the expansion team wants me." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ducky Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 (edited) My question is, if you can only protect 3 D men, what happens if you have more than 3 d men with NMC and/or NTC clauses. The Jets will have Buff, Enstrom, Myers and Stuart with one of those clauses. Also, if I am Chevy and it benefits the team, Trouba is signed to a NTC before the expansion draft as well. There is going to be a lot of arguing with PA before this is settled. I say move Phoenix to Las Vegas. Is it worth 16 million dollars to lose a valuable asset and water down the talent in the league. Move the Coyotes to Las Vegas. Edited March 16, 2016 by Ducky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 Is there a difference between how they will treat NMCs versus NTCs? Intuitively, I would guess that NTCs are fair game to leave unprotected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ducky Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 I doubt it. If I am right, the only difference between the two is if you have a NMC, you can't be sent to the minors. If you have a NTC, you can be sent to the minors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 I read that players with nmc or ntc won't count against the players your team can protect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 I doubt it. If I am right, the only difference between the two is if you have a NMC, you can't be sent to the minors. If you have a NTC, you can be sent to the minors. A full NMC prevents a movement of any kind without player permission, trade or minors. NTCs can work a bunch of different ways, but they generally involve a list of ~10 teams the player can't be traded to without his consent. The list can be larger or smaller, and can be required to be submitted each league year or at the time of trade negotiations, all depends how it's written. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norcal Posted March 18, 2016 Report Share Posted March 18, 2016 If NMC are between the team and the player couldn't the league overrule the clause for the purposes of expansion? Technically the team isn't moving the player, the league is. There's most likely language written into the clause in this event but it makes an interesting question none the less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.