I;d suggest docking them a pick, maybe a 4th rounder due to the seriousness of the infraction and since there is literally nothing the Board can do to fix this. Forcing them to give up Murray is far too harsh a punishment imo.

We aren't forcing them to do anything. They forced us. The only decision we can make is that Murray must be left exposed.
The required exposures aren't something you can avoid and pay a penalty for. If you don't meet those requirements, your protected list won't be accepted.

This is a strange case because the Pens have no goalie they can expose. Jarry, Maguire and Desmith are all exempt. I'm thinking docking between a second and fourth rounder is fair. To not have ONE expansion eligible goalie is a serious oversight, but forcing them to expose Murray is far too harsh a penalty imo.

We are still allowing everyone else to edit their lists tho?

You can't look at it as a penalty that we are imposing. You have to look at it as "If you expose these 4 players, we will allow you to protect these 10 players."
If Pittsburgh submitted this to league offices, that is exactly what would happen. It would be returned to them, and they would have to resubmit it with Murray exposed.
The only other option I see is to void his protected list completely since it is invalid.

Now that I had a few minutes to consider it, I think this would indeed be best.

You have one chance to edit your post to correct any errors.
We will inform teams that they have errors on their team thread(s).
Once those GM's make the necessary corrections, we will quote their post in the discussion thread.
No further changes will be permitted.
Teams that are not compliant by the deadline for submission of protected lists (Saturday, 12pm EST), will have their lists corrected by the BOG.

1. ALL NMC PLAYERS MUST BE PROTECTED.*
2. YOU MUST EXPOSE THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF QUALIFIED PLAYERS.
3. WE CAN'T STRESS THIS ENOUGH. ASK FOR HELP IF YOU ARE NOT SURE!
*(Bobby Ryan is the ONLY exception due to the terms of his contract.)

Errors will be corrected by the BOG according to a standard procedure:
1. We will move the incorrect player where he belongs.
2. We will expose the qualified player(s) that is/are listed last in order in your protected list.

Example1 : You have an error in the players that meet exposure requirements.
- We will remove the player that doesn't meet the requirements.
- We will add the first unprotected player that qualifies in his place.
- If you have no qualified, unprotected players. We will add the last protected player in his place.

Example2: You failed to protect a player with an NMC.
- We will add that player to your protected list.
- We will expose the last protected player listed at that position that does not have an NMC.

Regardless of the error, the player you list last, that qualifies to correct the error, will be used.
We don't care even if it is Crosby or McDavid. So SUBMIT YOUR LIST CAREFULLY and ASK FOR HELP IF YOU ARE UNSURE.

Easiest solution.

Make him/her/alien lose a 2nd or 3rd rounder.

Or Murray.

This is what I'm referring to.

One counter-argument i see is, every team has to protect a goalie right? Pens don't have a goalie to protect now.

No. Every team MAY protect up to 1 goaltender. Pittsburgh may not.

By the rules, it appears he has to expose Murray unfortunately... sucks for him but that's the way it is.

I know I'm here illegally again (Donald Trump don't deport me), but if Murray is exposed, Pens would need a goalie. I could trade him the rights to Budaj for a 1st!

Yeah I already posted this in the new "News and important info thread"

Umm. For rules or new procedures, we should agree in here before they end up outside this thread. Just so we don't put something out and then end up drawing it back.


This part of those rules covers the Pittsburgh situation.

I know I'm here illegally again (Donald Trump don't deport me), but if Murray is exposed, Pens would need a goalie. I could trade him the rights to Budaj for a 1st!

Shouls I pull whats in the news thread out for now? and just put in the expansion dates?

Until we agree that we are doing this (allowing people to fix their errors) and we will have to go inform teams of their errors as well.

Now that I had a few minutes to consider it, I think this would indeed be best.

You have one chance to edit your post to correct any errors.
We will inform teams that they have errors on their team thread(s).
Once those GM's make the necessary corrections, we will quote their post in the discussion thread.
No further changes will be permitted.
Teams that are not compliant by the deadline for submission of protected lists (Saturday, 12pm EST), will have their lists corrected by the BOG.

1. ALL NMC PLAYERS MUST BE PROTECTED.*
2. YOU MUST EXPOSE THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF QUALIFIED PLAYERS.
3. WE CAN'T STRESS THIS ENOUGH. ASK FOR HELP IF YOU ARE NOT SURE!
*(Bobby Ryan is the ONLY exception due to the terms of his contract.)

Errors will be corrected by the BOG according to a standard procedure:
1. We will move the incorrect player where he belongs.
2. We will expose the qualified player(s) that is/are listed last in order in your protected list.

Example1 : You have an error in the players that meet exposure requirements.
- We will remove the player that doesn't meet the requirements.
- We will add the first unprotected player that qualifies in his place.
- If you have no qualified, unprotected players. We will add the last protected player in his place.

Example2: You failed to protect a player with an NMC.
- We will add that player to your protected list.
- We will expose the last protected player listed at that position that does not have an NMC.

Regardless of the error, the player you list last, that qualifies to correct the error, will be used.
We don't care even if it is Crosby or McDavid. So SUBMIT YOUR LIST CAREFULLY and ASK FOR HELP IF YOU ARE UNSURE.

We may have to reconsider making a new official expansion draft thread. The current one looks like a freaking disaster.

Yeah. We will have to transfer anyone that doesn't resubmit ourselves at the deadline though. They did what we asked and may not be back on in time to do it.
We'll also have to point out the errors GM's need to address, and then go fix those at the deadline if they don't resubmit with a correct list.

I don't know how much more I can emphasize that people should ask for help or have others verify their lists before submitting them either.