Hypothetical question on Seattle

[miles]

Teams need to protect players that have a nmc for the expansion draft.

What would happen if a team had nmc on more players than they are allowed to protect. Or is there an nhl limit on number of nmc a team can give in contracts

[thewookie1]

22 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

Teams need to protect players that have a nmc for the expansion draft.

What would happen if a team had nmc on more players than they are allowed to protect. Or is there an nhl limit on number of nmc a team can give in contracts

In theory if you had 9 NMCs excluding goalies the league would of likely adjusted the protection numbers. Let's imagine 5 Fs and 4 Ds. In that case neither option would be possible as you would be over the 8 skater option and with 1 too many dmen for the 7-3 version.

The other way the NHL could attempt to remedy the situation is by telling the team to convince a player to waive although that is unlikely to work.

Lastly the league could theoretically force the team to lose two players instead of one after protecting the 9 NMCs.

[Drag0nDan]

21 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

In theory if you had 9 NMCs excluding goalies the league would of likely adjusted the protection numbers. Let's imagine 5 Fs and 4 Ds. In that case neither option would be possible as you would be over the 8 skater option and with 1 too many dmen for the 7-3 version.

The other way the NHL could attempt to remedy the situation is by telling the team to convince a player to waive although that is unlikely to work.

Lastly the league could theoretically force the team to lose two players instead of one after protecting the 9 NMCs.

Could always dock them some picks too.  I think it'd be highly unlikely though - I think Minnesota leads the league with 5, and they have 0 other NTCs.

[apuszczalowski]

On 5/27/2021 at 2:53 PM, Drag0nDan said:

Could always dock them some picks too.  I think it'd be highly unlikely though - I think Minnesota leads the league with 5, and they have 0 other NTCs.

Its weird to see a team like that with the most, you would expect those to be something the big market top teams (Boston, NY, Toronto, etc.) would be leading, but they probably have the least because they don't need to offer them to entice the top players to sign there. Its the small market teams and the bottom feeders that need to offer them to entice a player to sign.

[Drag0nDan]

11 hours ago, apuszczalowski said:

Its weird to see a team like that with the most, you would expect those to be something the big market top teams (Boston, NY, Toronto, etc.) would be leading, but they probably have the least because they don't need to offer them to entice the top players to sign there. Its the small market teams and the bottom feeders that need to offer them to entice a player to sign.

Right - if it doesn't work out, I have final say on where I go if/when the team decides to try and move you.  Parise and suter both signed for 13 years and I think part of it was wanting to play for a hometown team (parise is from minnesota, and suter from wisconsin).  

Boston will probably have to give them to Pastrnak and Bergeron on a new deal though.  Same with Rask if they end up keeping him on.  McAvoy will also probably have one that triggers a couple of years into his deal assuming they buy out some UFA years on his next deal.