I saw this discussion on a Leafs forum but feel it would be better here with people from all backgrounds.

With Rodion passing away earlier today the Leafs lost a 1st round pick.

If Rodion hadn't been signed to an ELC then the Leafs would have got a 2025 1st round pick as compensation (last pick of the 1st round #33).

Since Dubas singed him and had him on the NHL roster so that his family could collect an NHL paycheck (Leafs have paid him over $1M despite him never playing an AHL or NHL game) the Leafs don't qualify for compensation.

Do you think the league should make an exception given the circumstances and compensate the Leafs?

There's a time and place for everything, this isn't the time to really discuss this.

No, Leafs signed him so it doesn't apply in this case.

Nope, Leafs signed Rodion so they aren’t eligible for compensation

(Also if the Leafs didn’t sign him, they’d have gotten pick 47 of the 2nd round, compensation is a 2nd round pick exactly 1 round later than the original spot he was picked)

No.

What the flyers got for Jay O’Brien doesn’t apply to Toronto because unlike Amriov, O’Brien was never signed to an ELC

its just a question bruh

The kid just passed. I don't think this is the time to discuss whether or not the Leafs should get a pick for his death.

I understand that, but its an interesting question

Does not have to happen now nor does it have to apply to Toronto especially now but the Cherepanov rule should be updated for the betterment of the NHL

As even if a 1st round prospect signs their ELC if they pass away before it was up due to an unfortunate disease or circumstance and have played 0 NHL games I argue a team should be compensated. As they essentially lost the prospect for nothing same as if a team didnt sign their prospect and he left or passed away

Does not need to be high like if they dont sign an ELC could just be a 3rd round pick.

But rn is a time for mourning a debate can come later still it can be argued to be a fascinating question. I do not care if they get compensated what's important is Amirov who was taken way to soon RIP Amirov

I don't intend any disrespect to Amirov or to simplify his life down to a draft pick. I simply think its an interesting moral question to ask.

I don't expect us to have a massive debate over where the pick should be or anything but even on a human level. Dubas put the kid on the NHL roster knowing he could die and that this would give his family over $1M+ incase that did happen. In retrospect I'm sure we can say that Dubas did right by the Amirov family.

The moral question is interesting because the leafs could have left him unsigned or could have tried to distance themselves from him in the hopes of getting a pick under the Cherepanov rule but instead they stood by him. It would seem that maybe the rule would encourage other teams to act in their interest instead of the players? I know the Leafs have money but would Arizona for example have just given a prospect $1M+ to make sure his family was financially secure if he died?

Just an interesting question. To me it almost seems like the league needs to change the rule to ensure that other teams do what the Leafs did and to avoid encouraging teams to hold off on signing ELC until players are AHL/NHL ready and healthy.

I like aadoyle's idea. Would love to hear more.

There's your answer.

And why should there be an exception exactly?

Do you want teams in future who have ill players to refuse to sign them, leaving their families without any money when they die? Or do you want them doing what the Leafs did and putting them on the NHL roster paying them $1M+ to never play for you do the family is financially secure?

Sooo you want to change the rule for the future? Great, let's discuss that. Still not sure how the Leafs magically get this exception in the past.

And for the record, they signed him almost a year before he was diagnosed. So we can drop the whole Mother Theresa story. That's not how it happened, bud.

The decision to out him on the NHL team's LTIR instead of keeping him on loan to the KHL or having him in the NHL cost the Leafs $1M and was the morally right thing to do.

Also everytime something like this has happened (like with NY) they retrospectively change the rule.

Huh? You claimed he was signed after being diagnosed. This is incorrect. But by all means, continue pressing this right after the kid passed. Yikes, man.

This is what I said. never said he was signed after being diagnosed.

Also not pressing anything, just interested in hearing other people's opinions. It's definitely going to become an issue at some point. I'd be shocked if the Leafs didn't file a request for compensation.

I don't believe the Leafs will request compensation because there isn't any grounds for it in the CBA.

The answer to your question is "no".

I feel like you aren't actually engaging with the question.

I'm not asking whether the CBA says they should get it. I'm asking whether the league will/should give them compensation.

When Cherepanov died there was no rule about compensation and the Rangers asked for it and got the 47th overall pick as compensation. They weren't legally entitled to that, it was just what the NHL felt was the right thing to do.

I know the CBA won't give the Leafs anything, I'm just asking if people think the league should compensate them when the leafs request it.

I'd be shocked if the leafs don't request compensation. They lost a 15th overall pick for nothing, he never played an AHL or NHL game for them. They will feel that they are due something.

And I feel like you're not accepting that the answer is "no".

Cherepanov's case is different because a) he was not signed by the New York Rangers when he passed away and b) he would've been eligible for the upcoming 2009 draft. Their request was in line with the CBA awarding compensatory picks to teams if their first round pick were left unsigned or re-entered the draft.

Amirov was signed with Toronto so this doesn't apply; there would have to be some sort of clause in the CBA delineating a signed player passing away or sustaining some sort of injury preventing them from playing justifying the signing team getting compensation. Maybe you can look that up since you're very interested in the case.

Honestly the last point is what I argue needs to be discussed next CBA meeting. There should be a clause for this kind of situation

As to me even if a 1st round prospect signs their ELC if they play 0 NHL games and/or pass away before it is completed said team should be compensated. Not arguing it for us but it seems the Cherepanov rule needs a bit of updating or an additional clause that handles this kind of situation. As the only difference between this situation and that was an ELC was signed.

That's completely inaccurate.

The Rangers argued that he was eligible (which he wasn't cause he was dead, you can't draft someone who isn't alive).

Hence why the NHL rejected that argument and instead passed a new rule that awarded NY a pick.

Also there is a rule with European leagues where specifically for players drafted in the 1st round even if they sign an ELC if the player is loaned to Europe for 5 seasons and doesn't play a single AHL or NHL game sthe contract is voided and 2 years later (7 years after they are drafted) they become a UFA and the team can get compensation. That's a big reason why someone like Matvei Michckov fell to #7 cause he is already signed for 3 years in the KHL, he just needs to extend that deal 4 more years where he will get paid more than an ELC then he can walk to any competitive NHL team in free agency. Play on a one year ELC then get a big money deal still in his late 20s while fully controlling where he plays.

Honest no. I know this might sound a bit hard and I mean no disrespect to the player, his family, or the leafs, but rules are there for a reason. No acceptions

Fair take, don't think it's disrespectful at all.

In many ways I agree with you. One of the biggest problems with the league is they seems to invent rules on the fly. Especially when it comes to this type of stuff.