Official: NHL expanding to Vegas for '17-18

[Randall Flagg]

I'd like it if they took the word "Black" out. The Vegas Knights. It's not bad as is though. Not a fan of "Aces"

[Hoss]

The owner has mentioned Black Knights because, as mentioned, he is a West Point grad (and owns Black Knights Financial Group), but he said he will be holding a naming competition like so many other teams have.

 

I wouldn't hate "Las Vegas Knights." Knights are mentioned for a name idea in EVERY new city these days, so we might as well finally get one.

I suggested "Las Vegas Nights." Light Vegas Lights and Las Vegas Aces are other popular ones. I imagine the league will push back against direct references to gambling, though.

 

 

Also, you can now do your own expansion draft on General Fanager:

http://www.generalfanager.com/teams/expansion

[TrueBlueGED]

The owner has mentioned Black Knights because, as mentioned, he is a West Point grad (and owns Black Knights Financial Group), but he said he will be holding a naming competition like so many other teams have.

 

I wouldn't hate "Las Vegas Knights." Knights are mentioned for a name idea in EVERY new city these days, so we might as well finally get one.

I suggested "Las Vegas Nights." Light Vegas Lights and Las Vegas Aces are other popular ones. I imagine the league will push back against direct references to gambling, though.

 

 

Also, you can now do your own expansion draft on General Fanager:

http://www.generalfanager.com/teams/expansion

Las Vegas Nights, eh? I like the whole thing, but calling a team the Nights for short would seem a bit odd. Edited June 15, 2016 by TrueBlueGED

[darksabre]

[Huckleberry]

generalfanager has an expansion tool.

 

I thought the hawks were screwed, but then I looked at the blue jackets.    Hartnell and Clarkson with a NMC ouch.  

Offcourse they protect Saad, but then I went for Jenner and Wennberg leaving Atkinson wide open.

 

On defense Tyutin also has a NMC, So I protected Jones and Murray leaving Jack Johnson wide open.

CBJ will be desperate to get rid of Hartnell or Tyutin.

 

http://www.generalfanager.com/teams/expansion

The wild are also a bit screwed on D, They'll have to leave two off Dumba, spurgeon, Scandella and Brodin exposed.

 

Vanek doesn't seem to have a NMC, so they can keep him dangling out there , sure he'd love Las Vegas.

For us Bogo is the only one with a NMC.   So we go Bogo, Risto, McCabe.    Leaving Pysyk out there.

 

Teams must expose 2 forwards and 1 D that play 40 games in 2016-2017 or 70 games in the last two years.

For us that is easy you leave Deslauriers, Moulson and Gorges out there for that.

 

Protected , Kane, O'Reilly, Girgensons, Larsson, Ennis and Foligno , I'm at 6/7 forwards and don't feel like I need to protect any others.

So we can Sign Stamkos or any other UFA and still be good.

Edited June 16, 2016 by Huckleberry

[beerme1]

generalfanager has an expansion tool.

 

I thought the hawks were screwed, but then I looked at the blue jackets.    Hartnell and Clarkson with a NMC ouch.  

Offcourse they protect Saad, but then I went for Jenner and Wennberg leaving Atkinson wide open.

 

On defense Tyutin also has a NMC, So I protected Jones and Murray leaving Jack Johnson wide open.

CBJ will be desperate to get rid of Hartnell or Tyutin.

 

http://www.generalfanager.com/teams/expansion

The wild are also a bit screwed on D, They'll have to leave two off Dumba, spurgeon, Scandella and Brodin exposed.

 

Vanek doesn't seem to have a NMC, so they can keep him dangling out there , sure he'd love Las Vegas.

For us Bogo is the only one with a NMC.   So we go Bogo, Risto, McCabe.    Leaving Pysyk out there.

 

Teams must expose 2 forwards and 1 D that play 40 games in 2016-2017 or 70 games in the last two years.

For us that is easy you leave Deslauriers, Moulson and Gorges out there for that.

 

Protected , Kane, O'Reilly, Girgensons, Larsson, Ennis and Foligno , I'm at 6/7 forwards and don't feel like I need to protect any others.

So we can Sign Stamkos or any other UFA and still be good.

 

 

Hmm. Swear I read that Tommy boy did have a NMC and in addition he now has a new head coach who will also probably bench him.

[Thorner]

generalfanager has an expansion tool.

 

I thought the hawks were screwed, but then I looked at the blue jackets.    Hartnell and Clarkson with a NMC ouch.  

Offcourse they protect Saad, but then I went for Jenner and Wennberg leaving Atkinson wide open.

 

On defense Tyutin also has a NMC, So I protected Jones and Murray leaving Jack Johnson wide open.

CBJ will be desperate to get rid of Hartnell or Tyutin.

 

http://www.generalfanager.com/teams/expansion

The wild are also a bit screwed on D, They'll have to leave two off Dumba, spurgeon, Scandella and Brodin exposed.

 

Vanek doesn't seem to have a NMC, so they can keep him dangling out there , sure he'd love Las Vegas.

For us Bogo is the only one with a NMC.   So we go Bogo, Risto, McCabe.    Leaving Pysyk out there.

 

Teams must expose 2 forwards and 1 D that play 40 games in 2016-2017 or 70 games in the last two years.

For us that is easy you leave Deslauriers, Moulson and Gorges out there for that.

 

Protected , Kane, O'Reilly, Girgensons, Larsson, Ennis and Foligno , I'm at 6/7 forwards and don't feel like I need to protect any others.

So we can Sign Stamkos or any other UFA and still be good.

I don't believe Bogosian has a NMC, he waived it coming to Buffalo.

[Huckleberry]

I don't believe Bogosian has a NMC, he waived it coming to Buffalo.

 

Bogo's NMC kicks in after the 2016-2017 season I thought, anyway everywhere I read he is the only one on the team with an NMC.

[TrueBlueGED]

Bogo's NMC kicks in after the 2016-2017 season I thought, anyway everywhere I read he is the only one on the team with an NMC.

Because it kicked in after he was traded here, we are not obligated to honor it. Murray himself said during one of his WGR interviews that he couldn't think of anyone with a NMC on the team, so I'm assuming we did not opt to honor it.

[Thorner]

Because it kicked in after he was traded here, we are not obligated to honor it. Murray himself said during one of his WGR interviews that he couldn't think of anyone with a NMC on the team, so I'm assuming we did not opt to honor it.

It's interesting that Murray even has that option, which he appears to have exercised , when he took on the contract and it's terms knowingly.

[spndnchz]

I don't believe Bogosian has a NMC, he waived it coming to Buffalo.

 

 

Because it kicked in after he was traded here, we are not obligated to honor it. Murray himself said during one of his WGR interviews that he couldn't think of anyone with a NMC on the team, so I'm assuming we did not opt to honor it.

 

 

CBA 11.8 (a) says pretty much: "it is up to the acquiring team whether they honor any NMC of the acquired player and will be evidenced in writing".

[Hoss]

John Shannon @JSportsnet

NHL Board of Governors have been sent the agenda for June 22nd. Included are the Las Vegas expansion proposal and expansion draft plan.

[beerme1]

I don't believe Bogosian has a NMC, he waived it coming to Buffalo.

 

 

Have you listened to WGR? Tomorrow I'm kind of expecting someone to say we HAVE to protect JackSam. 

[Thorner]

Have you listened to WGR? Tomorrow I'm kind of expecting someone to say we HAVE to protect JackSam.

 

Looks like I was initially wrong, in that he didn't waive it, it wasn't yet in effect. But apparently Murray indeed chose not to honour it, so Bogo in fact does not have a NMC.

[dudacek]

I think the NHL rule book makes it very clear: Bogo was traded before his clause kicked in, meaning the Sabres do not have to honour it. Given what Murray said on WGR, it does not sound like they chose to honour it. Not sure why WGR is now reporting otherwise, but I am assuming they are wrong until an authoritive source - Murray, or Bogo, or his agent - says otherwise.

 

Excerpt (NHL CBA ARTICLE 11.8):

11.8 Individually Negotiated Limitations on Player Movement.

 

(a) The SPC of any Player who is a Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agent under Article 10.1(a) may contain a no-Trade or a no-move clause. SPCs containing a no-Trade or a no-move clause may be entered into prior to the time that the Player is a Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agent so long as the SPC containing the no-Trade or no-move clause extends through and does not become effective until the time that the Player qualifies for Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agency. If the Player is Traded or claimed on Waivers prior to the no-Trade or no-move clause taking effect, the clause does not bind the acquiring Club. An acquiring Club may agree to continue to be bound by the no-Trade or no-move clause, which agreement shall be evidenced in writing to the Player, Central Registry and the NHLPA, in accordance with Exhibit 3 hereof.

Edited June 18, 2016 by dudacek

[Hoss]

Officially official as Bettman announced Vegas will join in 2017-18.

Approval was unanimous, including the strippers.

 

League said it was for three reasons:

- league not ready to welcome two new teams at the same time

- Canadian dollar

- lack of geographical balance

 

Said they are a prime candidate for future expansion.

Edited June 22, 2016 by Hoss

[Hoss]

Expansion rules released. Teams must submit their lists by June 17, 2017 at 5 pm.

Expansion draft will take place over two days - June 20th and 21st, 2017.

 

 

Team, as reported, will have the third odds in the draft lottery. They will pick third in every round outside of the first regardless of lottery results.

 

Players with injuries that may be deemed career threatening are exempt, including those with MMC (David Clarkson, for one). To qualify the player has to have missed at least the 60 previous games.

 

The Vegas franchise will get to pick one player per team, but they MAY be allowed to select more than one player if a team violates the expansion draft rules.

 

14 forwards, 9 dmen and 3 goalies are the positional requirements for the team.

 

They need to take 20 players under contract through 2017-18.

 

They need to fill at least 60% of the previous season's (meaning this coming season) salary (which is only $43.8 million).

 

No players taken in the expansion draft can be bought out until the following offsesson.

 

Teams can protect seven forwards, three dmen and one goalie OR eight skaters and one goalie.

 

NMC MUST be protected and will count against the protection number UNLESS a player waives it.

 

First and second year pros exempt (and unsigned draftees) and will NOT count against protected number.

 

All clubs MUST expose one dman who is under contract through 2017-18 and has played 40 or more games in the previous season or 70 in the previous two.

 

All clubs MUST expose two forwards who are under contract through 2017-18 and has played 40 or more games in the previous season or 70 in the previous two.

 

All clubs MUST expose one goalie who is under contract for 2017-18 OR is a restricted free agent.

 

 

 

I know most of this was known but this is from the NHL's OFFICIAL release.

 

 

The Las Vegas team, per owner Bill Foley, is planning to have an official name, logo and jerseys by the beginning of this coming season so they can start selling jerseys.

 

 

Vegas NOT guaranteed lottery pick beyond next offsesson. It will be determined based on standings.

Edited June 23, 2016 by Hoss

[Thorner]

Hate to say it, still some ambiguity in the official rules.

 

"First and second year pros exempt (and unsigned draftees) and will NOT count against protected number."

 

I thought it was originally worded as players who have COMPLETED 2 pro seasons or less. If you are entering your third season, are you a third year pro?

 

"NMC MUST be protected and will count against the protection number UNLESS a player waives it."

 

What about players in their final year with a NMC?

 

Btw, we still have no official clarification on the status of Bogosian's NMC :p

[Hoss]

You're still a second year pro if you completed your second season and the date is June 20th or 21st in 2017. That's not ambiguity, that's failure to understand.

 

The league year doesn't end until July 1st.

 

And NMCs expiring on July 1, 2017 don't have to be protected per reports but the league's official release actually doesn't clarify. I'm still operating under the assumption that they do not. That one is on the league for not clarifying.

Edited June 22, 2016 by Hoss

[Thorner]

I suppose I failed, then.

 

I also wonder just out of curiosity what a player like, say, Eric Cornel would be considered as, if the expansion draft was this year. Obviously he would be exempt, but he's not technically an unsigned draftee as he's under contract now. I suppose he would still be classified as such for the purposes of an expansion draft as that's how he began this season, as an unsigned draftee.

[Hoss]

It's whatever you are at the time of the expansion draft, but it's not relevant for Cornel since he would still be in the two (or less) year pros.

 

Our only "prospect" that could be exposed is William Carrier.

Edited June 22, 2016 by Hoss

[Huckleberry]

Owner wants to name them the Black Knights -  Something to do with him attending Westpoint in the past.

[Hoss]

Owner wants to name them the Black Knights - Something to do with him attending Westpoint in the past.

Yes, but he said they have other options and isn't sure if that's the right name for the hockey club. He also said during a live interview on NHL Network that they need league approval for names (which might mean the league is hesitant to approve Black Knights). He backed off the name today during the initial presser so it seems only somewhat likely at best.

 

They also backed off the initial announcement that black, gold and silver will be their colors. Some have indicated that the success of vibrant-colored teams like the Ducks and Sharks having early success and being well received may be the reason they're reconsidering colors.

[Thorner]

It's whatever you are at the time of the expansion draft, but it's not relevant for Cornel since he would still be in the two (or less) year pros.

Our only "prospect" that could be exposed is William Carrier.

I get that, was just mentioning it cause the new rules listing doesn't include the "or less" language.

[Hoss]

That was my wording, not the league. Their official ruling clarifies first or second year pros. I think we all know it would obviously include first-year pros, too...