Muscular Development Forums - Powered by vBulletin

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 18 to 26 of 26

Thread: NHL Expansion ..AGAIN

  1. #18
    Iron Addict Sandpig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    VEGAS
    Posts
    3,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UkrainianGuy View Post

    vegas mob?
    Lol
    Well it is behind a casino

  2. #19
    Forum Legend UkrainianGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    57,572
    Gender
    Male

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sandpig View Post
    Lol
    Well it is behind a casino

    wonder if that image is taboo?! Sad part is it will be expansion franchise, dispersal draft + draft = 3-5 years of losing.
    relocation is easier... like to see florida move....
    Muscular Development Forum Rules :.

    This Post May be found offensive & may contain offensive material, consider yourself advised.

  3. #20
    Iron Addict Sandpig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    VEGAS
    Posts
    3,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UkrainianGuy View Post

    wonder if that image is taboo?! Sad part is it will be expansion franchise, dispersal draft + draft = 3-5 years of losing.
    relocation is easier... like to see florida move....
    I don't care as long as I get tickets to see the Bruins when they come here

  4. #21
    Forum Legend UkrainianGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    57,572
    Gender
    Male

    Default

    How Could NHL Expanding to Las Vegas & Quebec City Affect New Jersey?

    By John Fischer@JKFischer on Aug 23, 2015, 11:01a 24





    On Friday, Las Vegas and Quebec City ownership announced they were reaching Phase III of the expansion process. With their progress making it more likely that the NHL will add them, I wonder how expansion would affect the Devils.




    On Friday, another step was made in the effort to expand the National Hockey League to 32 teams. Josh Cooper at Puck Daddy rounded up the Tweets and information that confirmed that both the Las Vegas group led by Bill Foley and the Quebec City group led by Quebecor have entered Phase III of the expansion process. Cooper notes from David Pagnotta that the expansion process will end by September 4. That they're this far makes it appear likely that both ownership groups will be granted teams, and the NHL will expand in the future.



    This is certainly closer to an inevitability than, say, ads on jerseys. I'm not personally opposed to a team in Las Vegas given that Bill Foley and his group could be paying at least $500 million and it's in a brand new market. Las Vegas doesn't have any major professional sports teams, so they'd get a head start on taking hold there. The arena being built apparently seats 20,000, so they're not going to be stuck with a smaller building like Winnipeg or the Islanders. I'm less enthused about another team in Quebec City. The NHL already faltered there once, the city and general metropolitan area doesn't exceed seven figures, and while it's an area that enjoys its hockey, it's an area that has been enjoying its hockey. There's room to grow in Las Vegas; not as much in Quebec City. Most of all, it's in Canada and therefore their revenue will be driven in part by it's exchange rate. The NHL requires all payment to be in American dollars. With a current exchange rate that's favorable to the American dollar, even a splashy debut of the new QC team could yield less than favorable revenue for the league. The exchange rate won't stay as it is forever, but if this currency chart by XE is any indication, I'm not holding my breath on the Canadian dollar matching the American dollar anytime soon. That said, Quebecor is loaded too and they're building a good sized arena at 18,100 capacity. They'll likely keep the team on solid ground for a while. Either way, what I feel about it doesn't matter. Both groups are so in deep in the process, it'd be a bigger story if either one of them didn't get awarded an expansion team in the next few weeks.


    While expansion won't really come into form until the 2017-18 season at a minimum, it's something that will affect all thirty current teams, including our beloved New Jersey Devils, in some way or form. Now is a good time as any to discuss the ramifications for the other teams.
    First off, the league will likely re-align itself with 32 teams. This is good because I'm not a fan of the current alignment of fourteen teams in the West, sixteen in the East, and a glorious five-team Atlantic Division of Pure Rivalry diluted into the eight-team Metropolitan we have now. I'm not expecting to have a reduction in divisions, but I would expect the conferences to be evened out. Four divisions of eight teams each makes logical sense. The question is who goes West? Quebec City should be in the same division as Montreal for the potential rivalry implications, and they would be one of the most Northeastern teams in the NHL. Given that the last alignment was done in part to move Detroit to the Eastern Conference, I would not expect them to go back to the West so soon. The most "western" team after the Red Wings are the Columbus Blue Jackets. Should they go, then that leaves a spot in New Jersey's division. I would absolutely not want it to be Detroit for competitive purposes, but that may be one of the realistic options for re-alignment.


    Alternatively, the league could scrap the four division format and go with six, with an even six in each one. I would almost prefer a division of, say, New Jersey, Our Hated Rivals, the Islanders, the Second Rate Rivals, Washington, and Pittsburgh. They could radically re-align other divisions, possibly moving Nashville to the East to join Tampa Bay, Florida, Carolina, Columbus, and Detroit. This leaves Quebec City to join Montreal, Ottawa, Buffalo, Toronto, and Boston. I don't know if they're willing to consider that. But it's another option if they're willing to get away from four divisions. Sorry, I made a mistake: six divisions of six would mean 36 teams, not 32. My bad.
    Second, the two teams will need players and so there will be an expansion draft. I don't think the overall talent of the league will be too diluted with the expansion. Even with two teams joining at once, it'll be sixteen years since the last expansion effort, which ended with Minnesota and Columbus being added a year after Atlanta was added and a year after Nashville came into existence. The 1990s brought in nine new teams; that hurt the talent pool. It's been plenty of time since then. I'd also like to think that the supply of players have improved since then. Canadian junior leagues continue to be strong developers of talent, and the growth of the USHL, the USNTDP, and college hockey have only added to that. The KHL has plenty of "tweener" talents that could fit into the NHL; expansion may see a few of those players possibly jumping back over the Atlantic. Should the rise of analytics in hockey drill down to lower levels and improved drills, then we could see better talents coming out in time. Between all of this, I think there will be enough bodies to support 32 competitive hockey teams.


    Assuming both teams will join the league in 2017-18, there will be plenty of time for the other 30 teams to prepare. the Devils will - hopefully - be on their re-building ways and looking a little bit more forward to the postseason. The Devils do have a handful of players currently signed through 2017-18 and beyond; these drafts may provide them an "out" should some of those players decline or if other players rise up to take their spot. According to General Fanager, those players are: Travis Zajac, Mike Cammalleri, Adam Henrique, Ryane Clowe, Andy Greene, Adam Larsson, and Cory Schneider. Some of those names will likely be key parts of the team in two seasons, others less so. As tempting as it may be to want to see the Devils dump Zajac and his big deal; the eventual expansion draft may be better suited for others. Cammalleri will be close to 35 and may not be the scorer he was last season again. Henrique may not turn out to be ; as he's younger, he may be a more attractive option to be picked in an expansion draft. Should Greene start wearing down by then, he could be set free as well. A lot can change in two years. While the expansion draft rules haven't even been thought of, the Devils would be wise to keep a potential draft in mind to drop some players on significant deals to gain some space.


    Third, the Devils would do well to try to hit big in the next two drafts. Well, they would do well to do that regardless of the expansion teams. The point is that with two expansion teams, that means two more teams that likely aren't going to be very good. With two more teams not likely to be very good, that's two more teams to "compete" for high picks. There will likely be a lottery process in 2017-18 for the top draft picks; but I can't imagine two new teams joining the league won't get some kind of protected pick to ensure they get a top prospect early. That's what happened when Nashville, Atlanta, Minnesota, and Columbus joined the league. Should the Devils still be in the middle of their re-build, looking for another (or an) "ace" player to form a squad around, this would be two more proverbial obstacles in their plans. Therefore, cross your fingers for good luck in the lottery and cross them harder for Castron and his crew to hit big on their high picks in the next two seasons.



    Expansion won't be coming as soon as 2017-18 and it could happen later than that. However, with both ownership groups touting their progress in the process, I think it will happen in the next few years. It will lead to further changes to the NHL that will affect how the Devils and other teams do business from multiple standpoints. These three areas were the big ones that came to my mind. There are surely others, such as the rest of the league now having two more teams with deep-pocketed owners to compete with for free agents, another team to threaten players to trade to (Quebec, not Las Vegas), and a bunch more travel. What else do you think expansion would mean for the Devils and the other 29 teams in the NHL? Do you agree these two teams will soon be announced as the next entrants into the NHL? How do you think the Devils and others will deal with it? Please leave your answers and other thoughts about expansion in the comments. Thank you for reading.
    Muscular Development Forum Rules :.

    This Post May be found offensive & may contain offensive material, consider yourself advised.

  5. #22
    Forum Legend UkrainianGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    57,572
    Gender
    Male

    Default

    Bruins owner, board of governors chairman Jacobs says he’s unsure of desire for expansion





    Jeremy Jacobs (Photo by John Tlumacki/The Boston Globe via Getty Images)


    Las Vegas and Quebec City have given their formal presentations and jumped through all the hoops necessary to put their expansion bids in the best position possible, but even that may not be enough for the two potential expansion cities to land NHL franchises.

    In December, the executive committee of the board of governors will gather in Palm Springs, Calif., where they will hold the fates of the expansion bids in their hands. Members of the executive committee include Ducks owner Henry Samueli, Flames co-owner Murray Edwards, Hurricanes owner Peter Karmanos, Blackhawks owner Rocky Wirtz, Wild owner Craig Leipold, Flyers owner Ed Snider, Lightning owner Jeff Vinik and Maple Leafs Sports and Entertainment chairman Larry Tanenbaum and Capitals owner Ted Leonsis, but the most powerful man of all may be Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs, who is chairman of the committee.

    And Thursday, Jacobs spoke with ESPN’s Joey McDonald, but Jacobs’ words weren’t music to the ears of those behind the Vegas and Quebec City bids.

    “There’s a lot of content there,” Jacobs said. “There’s a lot of capability there, but I don’t know if there’s a desire or will within the board of the existing franchises for expansion yet. They both made pretty interesting proposals. Both have very legitimate arenas in place and organizations in place. There’s a capacity out there, but I don’t know if there’s a will from a league standpoint.”

    That is to say a final decision on expansion — either against or in favor of it — is far from certain at this point. And for fans desperate to see the Nordiques take the ice again in Quebec City, they’ll be saddened to see Jacobs seems to favor moving into Vegas more than he does putting a second team in La belle province.

    “Take a look at what’s gone up in Nevada — it’s scary,” Jacobs told McDonald. “I mean, it really is. It’s a heck of an arena built there, and there’s a strong interest there. Balance the fact, Quebec has a great hockey interest, [but] it’s an extraordinarily small market.”

    Quebec City, whose bid is led by the company that owns The Hockey News, and Las Vegas were the only two cities to enter bids for expansion, however, and that shocked Jacobs, who had his appeared to have his eye set on one specific location.

    “We had no applications from Toronto, so that says a lot,” he told McDonald. “We had two legitimate ones, Quebec and Nevada — it speaks volumes. I’d love to see us in the West to be up in Seattle. Seattle’s a natural, and I would love to see one in Houston, but we can’t get into that building. There are conditions and circumstances in each one of these that we have to take into consideration.”

    One aspect of the NHL receiving only two bids could have been the $10-million application fee, $2 million of which was non-refundable.
    Jacobs’ comments don’t sound the death knell for either of the bids, but they’re certainly interesting as we wait to see where exactly the NHL plans to go — if anywhere — with expansion.
    Muscular Development Forum Rules :.

    This Post May be found offensive & may contain offensive material, consider yourself advised.

  6. #23
    Forum Legend UkrainianGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    57,572
    Gender
    Male

    Default Dreger Report: A 'sense' of the direction expansion is headed


    Quebec City hockey fans, Phillip MacCallum/Getty Images




    Tuesday in Manhattan, NHL owners and team governors were presented with an expansion update following a meeting the league's executive committee had with representatives from Quebecor Inc. and Bill Foley's Las Vegas group.




    Very little detail was offered to the board, and nothing remotely close to an endorsement for expansion was shared, leaving those inside the boardroom at the Westin Times Square in New York City to fashion the league's position on expansion with a gut feeling or "sense" of what direction this is headed.


    According to a source involved in Tuesday's discussions, his "sense" is, if the NHL cast a vote today, the majority of club owners would vote to expand by two teams. Both Las Vegas and Quebec City would be awarded franchises with an attached fee, as commissioner Gary Bettman has publicly acknowledged, in excess of $500 million each.


    As intrigued as the NHL is by the massive marketing and television draw Las Vegas might offer, there is also a layer of uncertainty and considerable risk that goes along with partnering with another non-traditional hockey city. Plus, according to this source, the notion of handing the keys over to Vegas while leaving Quebec City high and dry is too big of a political monster for the commissioner to wrestle with.


    *************Some feel an eighth Canadian team, despite the sagging dollar, would cover the north and perhaps erase one of the few black marks on Bettman's legacy that dates back to the Nordiques leaving Quebec in 1995. In fairness, at the time, Le Colisée was viewed as inadequate NHL arena and owner Marcel Aubut could no longer carry the financial burden of the team. Not unlike the Jets return to Winnipeg, there are some in NHL circles who believe Bettman wants to right the perception of wrong.************


    Relocation is often suggested as an alternative for Quebec or Seattle by those who believe Vegas has the inside track on an expansion franchise. However, in Tuesday's meeting in New York, Bettman's message on the financial well-being and viability of Arizona, Florida and Carolina remained consistent, assuring the 30 team execs that ownership, across the league, is solid and everything is fine. Franchise values are through the roof and the view from Midtown Manhattan, the league's head office, is that the game has never been more competitive or healthy.


    Sure, there is opposition to expansion. Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs definitely has some concerns - and evidently geographic favourites - that he didn't mind sharing with ESPN.com's Joe McDonald on Thursday.

    Quebec fans might have an issue with Jacobs' views, however, as stated earlier in the Dreger Report, those opposed to expansion are believed to be far fewer than those who are salivating over their cut of a cash injection that could climb above $1 billion. For the record, that's $1,000,000,000, or way too many zeros for a number of NHL owners to turn their back on.


    Expanding by two teams, in theory, provides balance in a 16/16 conference split, but neither Columbus nor Detroit seem to have any interest in going back to the west, so a 17/15 imbalance would create an obvious problem. There is additional concern the player talent pool will be drained to a puddle by having to furnish two new franchises from top to bottom.



    There is no guarantee of expansion. As others have widely speculated, it could be one team, two teams, or none. The Bettman playbook suggests he has a plan, and he will spend the next several weeks polling/meeting with those who aren't yet on side with his vision so he clearly has a handle on how this will play out when NHL owners are asked to vote, as early as December.
    Muscular Development Forum Rules :.

    This Post May be found offensive & may contain offensive material, consider yourself advised.

  7. #24
    Forum Legend UkrainianGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    57,572
    Gender
    Male

    Default

    Muscular Development Forum Rules :.

    This Post May be found offensive & may contain offensive material, consider yourself advised.

  8. #25
    Forum Legend UkrainianGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    57,572
    Gender
    Male

    Default Expansion draft 2017: which players might get shipped to Vegas?



    Frederik Andersen. (Photo by Norm Hall/NHLI via Getty Images)



    This week’s NHL GM meetings yielded chatter on everything from blueline cameras to goalie equipment, but the sexiest news nugget had to be the NHL revealing an outline for an expansion draft format.
    While nothing is set in stone until the NHL Players’ Association agrees on the details, we have a rough idea of how the process would work. As reported by TSN’s Frank Seravalli, each of the existing NHL teams would stand to lose one player if the league expands by one team and two if the league expands to include Las Vegas and Quebec City. Teams can protect (a) seven forwards, three defensemen and one goaltender or (b) eight skaters at any position and one goaltender.

    First-and second-year players on entry-level contracts would be exempt from the expansion draft. It remains to be seen if no-movement clauses would give veterans automatic amnesty. Every team would have to expose at least 25 percent of its salary cap, while the expansion squad(s) would have to reach a salary floor. Hello, high-profile money dumps. That situation would grant existing NHL teams the equivalent of compliance buyouts – especially if no-movement clauses are nullified.

    Commissioner Gary Bettman indicated at his All-Star Game press conference the earliest we could see an expansion team is the 2017-18 season. So if we assume the league announces one team by then, what players might we see changing addresses at a 2017 expansion draft, which would likely be held after the Stanley Cup final and before the entry draft?

    Time to examine potential targets. I won’t include any players who will be unrestricted free agents in summer 2016 or summer 2017. I’ll list more than 23 names, just to deeper explore candidates to get claimed. It’s difficult to imagine players with no-movement clauses will be ruled exempt, because, if they didn’t have to count toward a team’s protected list, too few quality players would be available to the expansion squad. A team loaded with clauses, like the Tampa Bay Lightning, would have most of its roster exempt and still have room to protect most of its other players. Also, as my colleague Ian Denomme pointed out, players with NTCs and NMCs tend to be expensive, so exempting them would make it harder for teams to clear 25 percent of their salary. So, for the sake of argument, let’s look at two groups: the players with clauses and the players without. Cap hits for 2017-18 are included for each name, courtesy of capfriendly.com.





    GOALTENDERS
    Exposable:
    Frederik Andersen (RFA 2016-17)
    Andrew Hammond ($1,350,000)
    Semyon Varlamov ($5,900,000)
    Andrei Vasilevskiy (RFA 2017-18)
    Andersen is the favorite to start in goal for Vegas. John Gibson is too young to earn a no-trade, plus he already signed an extension through 2018-19. That pretty much seals Andersen’s fate, no? I could see Ottawa exposing Hammond or Craig Anderson. By the end of next season, the Sens probably hope Matt O’Connor has improved enough in AHL Binghamton to become the backup in 2017-18. Varlamov could be expendable if the Avs want Calvin Pickard to take over the starting reins. The Lightning could find themselves in a true pickle with Vasilevskiy. They’ll have to protect Ben Bishop, and even if his next contract includes a no-movement clause, we don’t yet know if he’d be exempt from an expansion claim.
    No-trade/movement clauses:
    Jimmy Howard ($5,291,666)
    Even if it turns out no-trade clauses create exemptions, Howard might waive his anyway for a new chance to be an NHL starter.


    DEFENSEMEN
    Exposable:
    Justin Braun ($3,800,000)
    Simon Despres ($3,700,000)
    Ryan Ellis ($2,500,000)
    Nick Holden ($1,650,000)
    Thomas Hickey ($2,200,000)
    Jack Johnson ($4,357,142)
    Kevin Klein ($2,900,000)
    Andrew MacDonald ($5,000,000)
    Brayden McNabb (RFA 2016-17)
    Adam McQuaid ($2,750,000)
    John Moore ($1,666,666)
    Brooks Orpik ($5,500,000)
    Luca Sbisa ($3,600,000)
    Marco Scandella ($4,000,000)
    Justin Schultz (RFA 2016-17)
    Jared Spurgeon ($5,187,500)
    Trevor van Riemsdyk ($825,000)
    Interesting hodge-podge of names here. Some are victims of playing on good teams, none more than Despres. There’s no way Anaheim holds onto him if it must protect Hampus Lindholm, Sami Vatanen and Cam Fowler first. It would have to expose a lot of forwards if it wanted to protect four D-men. Scandella and Spurgeon find themselves in similar situations, as the Wild would likely commit to Ryan Suter, Jonas Brodin and Matt Dumba. Same goes with Ellis and Nashville, which would protect Shea Weber and Roman Josi and likely have to choose between Ellis and Mattias Ekholm. Klein’s a guy I only see going unprotected if a no-movement clause saves Dan Girardi. Orpik is a perfect expansion draft player. He has no contract restrictions, and he’s expensive enough to boost Vegas’ salary floor number while still playing competent enough defense to be an asset. Braun over Paul Martin in San Jose? My apologies. I’m drinking the Kool-Aid because Martin and Brent Burns make such lovely music together.
    No-trade/movement clauses:
    Zdeno Chara ($6,916,667)
    Dan Girardi ($5,500,000)
    Josh Gorges ($3,900,000)
    Mike Green ($6,000,000)
    Alexei Emelin ($4,100,000)
    Toby Enstrom ($5,750,000)
    Dion Phaneuf ($7,000,000)
    Dennis Seidenberg ($4,000,000)
    Fedor Tyutin ($4,500,000)
    Vegas’ defense corps improves dramatically if NMC and NTC guys aren’t exempt. Guys like Chara and Girardi check off every box. They’re expensive enough to weigh their current teams down and would help those teams expose at least 25 percent of their salary cap commitments. They’re past their primes, so their teams wouldn’t mind getting them off the books. They’re established leaders who could wear the ‘C’ on an expansion club. And they’d help Vegas reach its salary floor.




    FORWARDS
    Exposable:
    Jay Beagle ($1,750,000)
    Lance Bouma ($2,200,000)
    Matt Calvert ($2,200,000)
    Kyle Clifford ($1,600,000)
    Blake Comeau ($2,400,000)
    Derek Dorsett ($2,650,000)
    Jesper Fast (RFA 2017-18)
    Marian Gaborik ($4,875,000)
    Mikhail Grabovski ($5,000,000)
    Jimmy Hayes ($2,300,000)
    Mark Letestu ($1,800,000)
    Cody McLeod ($1,333,333)
    Jean-Gabriel Pageau (RFA 2017-18)
    Benoit Pouliot ($4,000,000)
    Matt Read ($3,625,000)
    Antoine Roussel (2,000,000)
    Craig Smith ($4,250,000)
    This list looks like, well, every expansion team ever. It’s a collection of serviceable third-line types, with a few exceptions. Gaborik is a rare expensive top-six forward dangling in the wind without a NTC or NMC. Vegas would need someone to put the puck in the net, so he’d be an ideal claim. A decent young forward like Jimmy Hayes feels odd to expose, but Boston has too many other important players locked up long-term up front, and Brad Marchand likely re-signs when his deal ends next summer.
    No-trade/movement clauses:
    Tyler Bozak ($4,200,000)
    Dustin Brown ($5,875,000)
    Ryan Callahan ($5,800,000)
    David Clarkson ($5,250,000)
    Andrew Cogliano ($3,000,000)
    Valtteri Filppula ($5,000,000)
    Scott Hartnell ($4,750,000)
    Marian Hossa ($5,275,000)
    Ryan Kesler ($6,875,000)
    Phil Kessel ($6,800,000)
    Joffrey Lupul ($5,250,000)
    Clarke MacArthur ($4,650,000)
    Matt Moulson ($5,000,000)
    Rick Nash ($7,800,000)
    Jason Pominville ($5,600,000)
    Jordan Staal ($6,000,000)
    Matt Stajan ($3,125,000)


    Here’s where things get really interesting. First, we’d get plenty of teams putting aside their pride and saying, “Yes, we want a do-over with that contract.” Brown, Jordan Staal and Callahan come to mind and could be veteran leaders for Vegas. Might the odd team expose a massive name with a ton of years left on his deal, just to clear the books? What if the Pittsburgh Penguins are truly in transition by summer 2017 and decide they’ll never find a trade partner willing to take on Kessel’s cap number? And might the Rangers decide they’re better off signing two players totalling Nash’s cap hit? Lastly, would a few beloved veterans get nudged out the door? Kesler and Hossa raise my eyebrows. By summer 2017, they’ll each have two more (potentially deep) playoff runs on their tire treads. Maybe they become casualties because of their teams’ depth.
    Muscular Development Forum Rules :.

    This Post May be found offensive & may contain offensive material, consider yourself advised.

  9. #26
    Forum Legend UkrainianGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    57,572
    Gender
    Male

    Default Salary cap could rise to $74 million with ‘escalator,’ expansion to be determined by draft



    A rising salary cap could impact free agent negotiations, like those with Steven Stamkos (Photo by Dave Sandford/NHLI via Getty Images)


    The salary cap could rise as much as $2.6 million next season, but any increase is going to require the NHLPA taking action.



    At the third day of GM meetings Wednesday in Florida, NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly offered up salary cap projections for the 2016-17 season. The outlook, Daly told ESPN’s Pierre LeBrun, is little to no increase in the upper limit unless the NHLPA chooses to use their growth factor. If they choose to use the growth factor, often referred to as the ‘escalator’ clause, the cap could rise to as much as $74 million next season, but the players would then have to deal with an increase in escrow.



    The $74 million projection with the escalator is actually below what the first proposed figure for the 2016-17 cap was back in December at the Board of Governors meeting, however. At that point, the belief was the salary cap could climb as high as $74.5 million, which would have been an increase of $3.1 million over the current $71.4 million cap.


    The cap rising would be great news for teams such as the Chicago Blackhawks, Pittsburgh Penguins, Minnesota Wild, Los Angeles Kings and New York Rangers, each of which will have to clear some salary cap hurdles in the off-season.


    A potentially increasing salary cap wasn’t the only news to come out of the third day of GM meetings, however. There was further news on expansion, as well as the potential for an expansion draft.
    According to TSN’s Darren Dreger, teams should know whether the league has decided to grant teams to one, both or neither of Las Vegas and Quebec City by the 2016 draft, which takes place June 24-25 in Buffalo. Teams are to know by June in order for them to have a full calendar year — from draft to draft — to set their rosters up for a potential expansion draft in time for the 2017-18 season. Dreger added that “most GMs” have the feeling only one team will be granted, and that will be the Las Vegas franchise. The next step in the expansion process will be the executive committee of the Board of Governors making a recommendation on how the NHL should proceed.



    As for the expansion draft, the potential rules appear to be set. Per Dreger, teams would be allowed to choose one of two options: 1) protect three defensemen, seven forwards and one goaltender, or 2) protect eight skaters of any position and one goaltender. Gone is the option to protect two goaltenders. One expansion team would mean the loss of one player, while two expansion franchises would mean two players would be plucked from each roster.



    In addition, Sportsnet’s Elliotte Friedman reported “(a)nyone with fewer than three years of professional experience is exempt. You don’t have to worry about losing them.” However, even a player who has the necessary experience in the AHL can be selected, so there’s potential for NHL clubs to protect minor-league players, if it comes to that.


    However, still undecided is what will happen with players who have no-movement clauses. Friedman said the likely answer is they won’t be available for selection, but there’s no word whether that means teams must use one of their protection slots for each no-move clause or if the no-move clause would make protection redundant.


    Because of the salary cap, though, any expansion draft would be different than those that have happened in the past. The NHL has thought about that, too, and according to LeBrun teams will have to “expose enough players which total at least 25 percent of previous season’s payroll.”


    That’s an interesting wrinkle, and one that could see some solid depth talent end up available at an expansion draft. Now all that’s left is to find out if Las Vegas and/or Quebec City will be plucking players to build their NHL rosters.
    Muscular Development Forum Rules :.

    This Post May be found offensive & may contain offensive material, consider yourself advised.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •