yes please, lets use that cap circumvention before they change it

Anyone know how Val's NMC pertains to KHL loaning?

i don't think his NMC is the first concern here. For one, i don't know if you can loan a player like this.

but if you can, and if the cap doesn't count against you, I still feel like the NHL would make sure Nuke was not eligible to come back for the playoffs in that same season. It makes Vegas' cap circumvention look like nothing.

IF and only IF any of that is true, then yes, I guess Nuke could waive his NMC to play abroad.

Agreed. I was thinking more along the lines of him being loaned until a longer-term solution was found. Even if the NHL allows Val to come back for the playoffs, it sounds like the locker room has moved on.

In theory he could be loaned anywhere but he would have to pass through waivers to do it.

I don’t believe that is the case. Kovalenko was signed to a contract prior to the season and then loaned to his KHL team. This made him eligible to play in the playoffs for the Avs and he didn’t have to pass through waivers. (However he may have been waiver exempt).

The o’Reilly offer sheet from Calgary when he was playing in the KHL meant that if the Avs hadn’t matched it he would have to pass through waivers. Because he ultimately signed with a team that owned his rights he didn’t have to pass through waivers despite playing 10+ games overseas without a contract.

According to the snippet of the cba I read it is only the base salary that can be removed in the case of a player being loaned. However as all of Nuke’s AAV is base salary for next season I don’t see why it can’t happen. Loans happen every season however they tend to be younger players. Perhaps there is a difference between elc and normal contracts or an age limit?

Kovalenko was waivers exempt as an unsigned prospect going onto his ELC. Completely different. He's still waivers exempt now so in theory could be loaned back to Torpedo. I'm pretty sure that to be loaned elsewhere would be no different to being loaned to the AHL Eagles in Nuke's case. Waivers first. O'Reilly's situation was also only returning to his NHL team and IIRC re-entry waivers were gone by then so he didn't face the issues Nabokov did for example and neither would Nuke.

Edit: The only possible way around that I can think of would be if it could be considered a 'conditioning assignment' in which case I don't think a player has to pass through waivers but not sure off the top of my head if there isn't a time frame limit on that.

As far as I’m aware conditioning is limited to 3-5 games skaters vs goalies.

I think you make a great case with waivers… however how many teams are going to take a chance on a 6m x 5year player who can’t stay out of the player assistance program? My assumption was that even if he had to pass through waivers in November no one would take that risk.
Additionally if someone claimed him it would have the same result. Ie not on the Avs payroll.

Yeah I thought there was a limit but wasn't sure how many and if it varied on what the conditioning was for.

I wouldn't say I'm certain on waivers but I think it's the case. A parallel for O'Reilly would be Sampo Ranta going back to Finland (or going to Sweden I forget which). The Avs still hold his rights as he was an RFA so he'd have to come back to the Avs/Eagles if it happened before 2027. I don't think waivers would have been an issue with O'Reilly coming back to the NHL if the Avs hadn't matched unless re-entry waivers were still in place at that time but I can't remember without looking it up when exactly they went out.

The concern with Nuke would be that there is almost certainly one GM who would take the chance. That said, as you rightly mentioned, if the end intention is simply to 'be rid' then the end result is the same in which case it's of no concern if someone takes the chance.

Personally I'd love to see him get clean and healed and return to the Avs but I don't see how the latter part of that, at least, happens.

Edit: Of course the other element could be how his NMC is written. Can a player say he'll only waive his NMC to 'go back home'? I honestly have no idea as to the answer on that one.

Amen to that brother. I think he would have to have the mother of all apologies for the team and perhaps buy them all wasted Russian prostitutes. I kid about the prostitutes. Perhaps they would prefer AK47s?

On a serious note my thinking was if Nuke says he'll only waive his NMC to go home he'd still have to pass through waivers as that's the mechanism BUT there would really be no reason for anyone to take him off waivers if the NMC (or the waiving of it) supersedes the waivers, as all they'd be doing would be claiming a guy who might never come back. Maybe Vegas would if it presents a new way to circumvent the cap for them just for the novelty lol.

I believe that the waiving of the NMC for this a particular purpose would include an acknowledgment of the risk of being claimed and a willingness to accept the risk. It would be a convoluted legal nightmare otherwise but I’m not a lawyer for the NHL… or am I? I can attest to the fact that I have never passed the bar… without getting at least one drink.
Additionally the players association might be able to challenge being picked via waivers after the fact.