Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

It'll be interesting to see if a team can "protect" a certain amount of salary, or if the expansion team can "draft" a certain amount. Or both. It'd be an interesting equation for the expansion team, do you draft a few higher value players and fill in with FA, or more cheaper, already in the NHL players.

 

Yeah, I'd imagine that on top of the number limit, each team would have a some sort of salary cap for what could be protected.  How RFAs who haven't yet signed a new deal would factor into that is a major complicating factor... that or guys who have signed a new extension but it doesn't take effect until the following offseason.  All interesting stuff to think about.

 

Has any of the salary cap leagues held an expansion draft while the cap was in place?

Edited by shrader
Posted (edited)

Custance:

Under expansion draft plan presented to executive committee, there would be minimum requirements on how much salary has to be exposed.

 

League believes that the ability to expand and do an expansion draft would override any no-trade or no-move clauses. Will work w/PA on that.

Edited by Hoss
Posted

Custance:

Under expansion draft plan presented to executive committee, there would be minimum requirements on how much salary has to be exposed.

 

League believes that the ability to expand and do an expansion draft would override any no-trade or no-move clauses. Will work w/PA on that.

 

He's too grumpy to work on that today.

Posted

Vegas as an expansion team and Quebec as a relocation site (Florida, Carolina, Arizona) makes sense to me. NHL would like to be 16 in the east and west, but would have to wait for a Pacific Northwest group to step up to the plate. The hefty expansion fee may be scaring a potential owner off or they are willing to play the waiting game on a relocation.

 

There would still be an imbalance between east and west, especially if Arizona relocates. I think Quebec is different, not a pure expansion, but righting a wrong. They should be more competitive immediately in this scenario. They would rather pay for a relocation, like Winnipeg, than the full expansion fee. Vegas would prefer that option as well, but may not be able to pull it off.

  • 1 month later...
Posted

Andrew Peters (yes that one) on twitter:

 

NHL announcing relocation to Las Vegas for 16-17 season?

Carolina Hurricanes maybe?

 

 

 

Sounds like he's hearing something.

  • 1 month later...
Posted

"NHLPA has been informed that Quebec City is excluded from the NHL expansion" - @GeorgesLaraque #919sport #lnh #ch #habs #hockey #nhl

 

Unbelievable.  All that public money just flushed.

 

What a freaking waste.

Posted

Unbelievable.  All that public money just flushed.

 

What a freaking waste.

 

I am staunchly anti-expansion and still I feel bad about this.

Posted (edited)

Yet another reason sports league's should be banned from acquiring public funding for these stadiums outside of a strict limit... And the money they do get within that limit should be required to be paid back by the team over the period of the first lease.

 

But I do believe the league is going to secure QC for relocation efforts.

Edited by Hoss
Posted

"NHLPA has been informed that Quebec City is excluded from the NHL expansion" - @GeorgesLaraque #919sport #lnh #ch #habs #hockey #nhl

 

Looks like Vegas.

My bet is it's more about the Canadian dollar.

Posted

Unbelievable.  All that public money just flushed.

 

What a freaking waste.

 

 

The Carolina Quebecois Nordiques

Posted

Yet another reason sports league's should be banned from acquiring public funding for these stadiums outside of a strict limit... And the money they do get within that limit should be required to be paid back by the team over the period of the first lease.

 

But I do believe the league is going to secure QC for relocation efforts.

 

Well, the state/federal/provincial law is an interesting idea, but I think it will always come down to elected officials making decisions based on personal political priorities -- i.e. whether pushing through public expenditures will gain them votes vs costing them votes.  It's also hard to see federal legislators getting interested enough to push this through at the federal level, since almost all of the cash is state and local.

 

As for relocation -- why would the NHL be more inclined to give QC a relocated team as opposed to an expansion team?  If the economics aren't there for an expansion team (which is most likely the reason they are getting passed over now), why would they be any better for a relocation?

Posted

Freeman - the league will want to have a city ready (with a stadium) so they can threaten relocation of struggling teams in order to guarantee public funding for said struggling teams. It's a game the leagues like to play.

Posted

Freeman - the league will want to have a city ready (with a stadium) so they can threaten relocation of struggling teams in order to guarantee public funding for said struggling teams. It's a game the leagues like to play.

 

This is certainly true, but the NHL already has this hammer in both QC and KC -- and without making any promises to either.  There is no reason for the NHL to make those promises, because the NHL knows that at least QC will eagerly snap up a relocation team whenever the NHL decides to allow it to happen.

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...