Lee called up

Age?

hemlock wrote:

asq2 wrote:Bernier was signed in October of 2006.

Ok, but like I said, he's never hit the magic 10 games in the NHL, yet his ELC has started, so why is Karlsson any different?

I'm trying to establish why Karlsson seems to be exempt from this, but not other (quite a few actually) players.

The 'first year' of your contract can only slide the first year of the deal (if you don't play 10 games), and no other year. The standard 3-year ELC can stretch out to 4 years, but no more. It's that simple.

For instance:

We signed Brian Lee to his ELC for the 2007-08 season. He played 6 regular season games, and 4 post season games. As a result, the first year of his ELC was burnt -- in hindsight, probably a big mistake here. That's why, now, 2 years later, he's in the last year of his deal.

Jonathan Bernier, by contrast, signed for the 2006-07 season, too. However, here's the catch: goalies sign 4-year ELC deals, not 3, with the option to 'slide' the first year. Bernier didn't play at all in 2006-07; as a result, the first year of his contract 'slid' to the next year. Hence 2007-08 was the first year of his ELC; and even though he didn't play 10 NHL games, he still burnt off the first year of his 4-year contract because the 'sliding' loophole only works once, for year one. Hence, he's now in the 3rd year of his 4-year ELC.

The pro seasons thing you mention is different. After accumulating 7 seasons at the pro level (AHL, NHL, etc.), a player becomes eligible for UFA, regardless of what level he plays those seasons at. That's what you're thinking of, I think. JBo was one of the earliest guys to benefit from this rule change -- he was eligible for UFA at the very young age of 25 because he started playing pro at 18.

I dont think it's any mistake for Lee's ELC to come off Ottawa's books at all. I dont think there is any chance Murray doesnt deal that kid for a 3rd or 4th round pick at some point in the next year.

We actually drafted Lee over Staal and Kopitar, like, that actually happend.

Not kidding when I say this, Lee would be a 2nd round bust at this point. He wont be a full time NHL D man for at least 2 or 3 more years and it wont be in Ottawa. Sending him down to Bingo isnt even doing the job because he's not motivated at all.

If we get a 2nd or 3rd rounder for him, I would be pleased. Derek Smith is the guy that might actually make it by the looks of things at this point.

N4L wrote:I dont think it's any mistake for Lee's ELC to come off Ottawa's books at all. I dont think there is any chance Murray doesnt deal that kid for a 3rd or 4th round pick at some point in the next year.

We actually drafted Lee over Staal and Kopitar, like, that actually happend.

That fact never grows any less painful, regardless of how many times I hear it. Where's the big red Easy Button when you need it?

rooneypoo wrote:

N4L wrote:I dont think it's any mistake for Lee's ELC to come off Ottawa's books at all. I dont think there is any chance Murray doesnt deal that kid for a 3rd or 4th round pick at some point in the next year.

We actually drafted Lee over Staal and Kopitar, like, that actually happend.

That fact never grows any less painful, regardless of how many times I hear it. Where's the big red Easy Button when you need it?

I know why drugs were a problem in Ottawa now though.

N4L wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

N4L wrote:I dont think it's any mistake for Lee's ELC to come off Ottawa's books at all. I dont think there is any chance Murray doesnt deal that kid for a 3rd or 4th round pick at some point in the next year.

We actually drafted Lee over Staal and Kopitar, like, that actually happend.

That fact never grows any less painful, regardless of how many times I hear it. Where's the big red Easy Button when you need it?

I know why drugs were a problem in Ottawa now though.

What? To dull the pain of stupid Muckler draft decisions? LOL!

Exactly.

Feel like smoking a joint there just thinking about it...

N4L wrote:Exactly.

What's really amazing is how much better Lee looked at the end of the 2007-2008 season than he does now, two years later, at the start of the 2009-2010 season. I don' think he was nearly as bad as you went on about tonight, but for sure he's not only not gotten better, he's actually gotten worse.

Still, I'm willing to give him a few games to see how he does. He can't have many more games like tonight, tho'.

It was bad considering he had every reason to be as motivated and up for this game as possible. He was pushed around worse then Karlsson was at any point this short season. Lee also has close to 40 Lbs on the Karlsson.

The 4th line scored twice on him and Campoli. He's just brutal. (Campoli got off the ice for the 2nd goal and Phillips was on the ice for it.)

rooneypoo wrote:

hemlock wrote:

asq2 wrote:Bernier was signed in October of 2006.

Ok, but like I said, he's never hit the magic 10 games in the NHL, yet his ELC has started, so why is Karlsson any different?

I'm trying to establish why Karlsson seems to be exempt from this, but not other (quite a few actually) players.

The 'first year' of your contract can only slide the first year of the deal (if you don't play 10 games), and no other year. The standard 3-year ELC can stretch out to 4 years, but no more. It's that simple.

For instance:

We signed Brian Lee to his ELC for the 2007-08 season. He played 6 regular season games, and 4 post season games. As a result, the first year of his ELC was burnt -- in hindsight, probably a big mistake here. That's why, now, 2 years later, he's in the last year of his deal.

Jonathan Bernier, by contrast, signed for the 2006-07 season, too. However, here's the catch: goalies sign 4-year ELC deals, not 3, with the option to 'slide' the first year. Bernier didn't play at all in 2006-07; as a result, the first year of his contract 'slid' to the next year. Hence 2007-08 was the first year of his ELC; and even though he didn't play 10 NHL games, he still burnt off the first year of his 4-year contract because the 'sliding' loophole only works once, for year one. Hence, he's now in the 3rd year of his 4-year ELC.

The pro seasons thing you mention is different. After accumulating 7 seasons at the pro level (AHL, NHL, etc.), a player becomes eligible for UFA, regardless of what level he plays those seasons at. That's what you're thinking of, I think. JBo was one of the earliest guys to benefit from this rule change -- he was eligible for UFA at the very young age of 25 because he started playing pro at 18.

Ahh ok, thanks for the clarification.

hemlock wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

hemlock wrote:

asq2 wrote:Bernier was signed in October of 2006.

Ok, but like I said, he's never hit the magic 10 games in the NHL, yet his ELC has started, so why is Karlsson any different?

I'm trying to establish why Karlsson seems to be exempt from this, but not other (quite a few actually) players.

The 'first year' of your contract can only slide the first year of the deal (if you don't play 10 games), and no other year. The standard 3-year ELC can stretch out to 4 years, but no more. It's that simple.

For instance:

We signed Brian Lee to his ELC for the 2007-08 season. He played 6 regular season games, and 4 post season games. As a result, the first year of his ELC was burnt -- in hindsight, probably a big mistake here. That's why, now, 2 years later, he's in the last year of his deal.

Jonathan Bernier, by contrast, signed for the 2006-07 season, too. However, here's the catch: goalies sign 4-year ELC deals, not 3, with the option to 'slide' the first year. Bernier didn't play at all in 2006-07; as a result, the first year of his contract 'slid' to the next year. Hence 2007-08 was the first year of his ELC; and even though he didn't play 10 NHL games, he still burnt off the first year of his 4-year contract because the 'sliding' loophole only works once, for year one. Hence, he's now in the 3rd year of his 4-year ELC.

The pro seasons thing you mention is different. After accumulating 7 seasons at the pro level (AHL, NHL, etc.), a player becomes eligible for UFA, regardless of what level he plays those seasons at. That's what you're thinking of, I think. JBo was one of the earliest guys to benefit from this rule change -- he was eligible for UFA at the very young age of 25 because he started playing pro at 18.

Ahh ok, thanks for the clarification.

18 year old's that sign their first contract can have their ELC slip twice if they don't play 10 NHL games in their first year and again in their second year, but that's the limit. Karlsson was 19 when he signed so his can only slip one year. Not sure if that's ever happened...

shabbs wrote:
18 year old's that sign their first contract can have their ELC slip twice if they don't play 10 NHL games in their first year and again in their second year, but that's the limit. Karlsson was 19 when he signed so his can only slip one year. Not sure if that's ever happened...

Huh. I didn't know that. Does that work the same for goalies and players? 'Cause that would mean that, hypothetically, a goalie who signs his 4-year ELC at 18 could actually be 24 (6 years later!) before that contract was up -- 1 year removed from UFA. Which would be very weird.

The longest ELC is 3 years is it not? So, at 18, if it slipped twice, they would be 23 when they finished their ELC 5 years later.

shabbs wrote:The longest ELC is 3 years is it not? So, at 18, if it slipped twice, they would be 23 when they finished their ELC 5 years later.

The standard ELC for goalies is 4-year. The contract is designed to acknowledge that goalies usually take longer to develop than players at any other position.

rooneypoo wrote:

shabbs wrote:The longest ELC is 3 years is it not? So, at 18, if it slipped twice, they would be 23 when they finished their ELC 5 years later.

The standard ELC for goalies is 4-year. The contract is designed to acknowledge that goalies usually take longer to develop than players at any other position.

Hmmmm... then I'm not sure if the dual slip rule applies to goalies as well. The CBA section 9 only talks about "players", which I assumed included goalies.

shabbs wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

shabbs wrote:The longest ELC is 3 years is it not? So, at 18, if it slipped twice, they would be 23 when they finished their ELC 5 years later.

The standard ELC for goalies is 4-year. The contract is designed to acknowledge that goalies usually take longer to develop than players at any other position.

Hmmmm... then I'm not sure if the dual slip rule applies to goalies as well. The CBA section 9 only talks about "players", which I assumed included goalies.

You know, I'm looking through the CBA section on ELCs right now, and I don't see that distinction between players and goalies any more. It used to be there, I swear. I've been looking at the 2005-06 version for so long that I might be out of date on this one.