The one about Inactives on VHL Rosters and the S78 Cap

[Quik 4,113]

Hi all!

 

Many of you have looked at the number of players in both the VHLM and VHL, and wondered how the heck is that going to work? Many of you have hypothesized, incorrectly, that VHL Expansion is coming down the tunnel. Unfortunately, constant expansion is not a sustainable model, so the @BOG has looked at more creative ways to deal with the roster crunches that are forthcoming. Given that we are currently seeing a landscape where teams are struggling to fit players there are two strategies that will be implemented, effective immediately:

 

1) Inactive Restricted List

Starting with S78, teams will only be allowed to carry one Inactive player, of their choice, on their roster for the duration of a full season. Any other player deemed inactive, as of the VHLM TPE Cutoff date, will be placed on the Inactive Restricted List for the duration of their contract, and may not be activated until they have completed a TPE Update in the portal.

 

For the purposes of the Inactive Restricted List, players will be deemed inactive if they hold 0 TPE Updates between the most recent Trade Deadline and the VHLM TPE Cutoff Date (i.e. For S78, that would mean no TPE updates after April 18th through May 16th).

 

Any player activated from the Inactive Restricted List would have their full salary count against the Salary Cap, in the same way a VHLM Recall would work. Players may be traded while on the Inactive Restricted List, but cannot be activated without a new TPE Update. Once a player has been activated, they may be traded with the same salary retention rules in Section 6.5 - Trading Salaries.

 

2) Salary Cap for S78

One other way to free up some room for teams to operate is that we are re-instating a 2 tiered Salary Cap for S78, to be revisited following the season.

 

Soft Cap = $40M

Hard Cap = $45M

 

What this means is that, the $40M cap will operate as normal, with the roster minimum remaining at 6 Players. However, if a team would like to surpass the $40M cap, they have the ability to spend to $45M while icing a minimum roster consisting of 12 skaters and 1 goalie. The Back-up goalie exemption, up to $2M, will still apply.

 

Thank you

 

@Commissioner

@VHL GM

[Beketov 8,642]

1 minute ago, Quik said:

Many of you have hypothesized, incorrectly, that VHL Expansion is coming down the tunnel. Unfortunately, constant expansion is not a sustainable model, so the @BOG has looked at more creative ways to deal with the roster crunches that are forthcoming.

Of note these two changes are a stop-gap measure but we recognize are likely not enough to completely eliminate the issue. There are bigger things in the works but having them ready for right now is simply not realistic. More will come but this should help in the short term.

[Laine 1,361]

I feel like starting important announcement titles off with "The one about" is becoming tradition. Keep it going.

Edited May 14, 2021 by PatrikLaine

[Beketov 8,642]

1 minute ago, PatrikLaine said:

I feel like starting important announcement titles off with "The one about" is becoming tradition. Keep it going.

It has been tradition for awhile, ever since I complained that @Quik's titles were too vague.

[MMFLEX 191]

But what about the one about who my new boss is?

[Hank 67]

1 minute ago, MMFLEX said:

But what about the one about who my new boss is?

Yes

[hedgehog337 3,480]

Just now, Hank said:

Yes

 

No

[Quik 4,113]

1 minute ago, MMFLEX said:

But what about the one about who my new boss is?

[Hank 67]

7 minutes ago, hedgehog337 said:

 

No

Wtf bro

[MMFLEX 191]

8 minutes ago, Quik said:

The smile on his face makes me think you're coming back to be my daddy again. I was sad when you abandoned me and mom.

[Rayzor_7 741]

Wait so there's no penalty to going over the soft cap? Just a roster count requirement?

[hedgehog337 3,480]

2 minutes ago, Rayzor_7 said:

Wait so there's no penalty to going over the soft cap? Just a roster count requirement?

 

the team gotta have at least 12 players and 1 goalie in order to be eligible for the 45M cap. otherwise, it's 40M.

[Beketov 8,642]

3 minutes ago, Rayzor_7 said:

Wait so there's no penalty to going over the soft cap? Just a roster count requirement?

Correct. It's not an elegant or perfect solution but we needed something in the short term.

 

Assuming I'm reading this right anyway. If you mean penalty to going over without the roster amount then yeah, normal penalties apply. if teams don't have the required 12 skaters at at least 1 goalie and they go over $40M they will be punished.

[fromtheinside 1,278]

WELL DONE! I have loathed that inactives eat up roster spots in the VHL, where the good players are supposed to be showcased. This is a great solution to that problem. Really nice job guys thank you.

[Rayzor_7 741]

11 minutes ago, Beketov said:

Correct. It's not an elegant or perfect solution but we needed something in the short term.

 

Assuming I'm reading this right anyway. If you mean penalty to going over without the roster amount then yeah, normal penalties apply. if teams don't have the required 12 skaters at at least 1 goalie and they go over $40M they will be punished.

Yeah was just trying to confirm the stipulations for a 45M cap.

I think I would've rather seen everyone get the increased cap and just seen a pick docked for it, this feels real jank.

[Beketov 8,642]

2 minutes ago, Rayzor_7 said:

Yeah was just trying to confirm the stipulations for a 45M cap.

I think I would've rather seen everyone get the increased cap and just seen a pick docked for it, this feels real jank.

The problem with doing it across the board is you could have a team like Chicago that, when this was announced, had only 8 skaters. Give them an extra 5M in cap and are they likely to pick up 4 more guys or just 1 really good one? Not saying Jeff would have done this, just an example.

 

The main issue was roster space, not really cap. So to increase that we're offering the incentive of having more cap to play with. It's definitely got a certain amount of jank but it's needed.

[DMaximus 1,045]

I like the inactive player rule change.
 

But I will open the betting on how long it takes for there to be a dust up about tampering when a GM trades peanuts for an inactive restricted player, only to have that inactive player magically return the day they’re traded.

 

Over/Under: 2.5 weeks

[McWolf 3,111]

7 minutes ago, Beketov said:

Not saying Jeff would have done this

he would definitely have done that 

[Enorama 1,980]

1 minute ago, DMaximus said:

I like the inactive player rule change.
 

But I will open the betting on how long it takes for there to be a dust up about tampering when a GM trades peanuts for an inactive restricted player, only to have that inactive player magically return the day they’re traded.

 

Over/Under: 2.5 weeks

 

That was always a possibility. I've done it at least once myself (without the tampering of course). This rule change won't affect trading for inactives that you think you can make active again at all other than reducing the risk of that player not coming back.

[Red 499]

40 minutes ago, Hank said:

Wtf bro

hank

[McWolf 3,111]

1 hour ago, Quik said:

What this means is that, the $40M cap will operate as normal, with the roster minimum remaining at 6 Players. However, if a team would like to surpass the $40M cap, they have the ability to spend to $45M while icing a minimum roster consisting of 12 skaters and 1 goalie. The Back-up goalie exemption, up to $2M, will still apply.

I'm assuming if a team goes from 11 to 12 players in the middle of a season, they'd unlock that extra 5mil from the hard cap at that point, right? And vice versa.

[Hank 67]

18 minutes ago, RedSus said:

hank

Yes? RedSuS who even are you, cause I haven't interacted with you before.

[lil OG z 1,556]

4 minutes ago, Hank said:

Yes? RedSuS who even are you, cause I haven't interacted with you before.

 

Top rookie in Riga, guy is a stud..

Edited May 14, 2021 by 16z

[Spartan 3,997]

17 minutes ago, McWolf said:

I'm assuming if a team goes from 11 to 12 players in the middle of a season, they'd unlock that extra 5mil from the hard cap at that point, right? And vice versa.

Yeah this is a question of mine as well, mainly for the opposite side - if a team meets requirements and spends to the $45 mil cap but then drops under the 12 skater requirement and doesn't drop to/under the soft cap, what happens then? Does any trade involving a team dropping under 12 skaters mean that the trade must make the team soft cap compliant? I'd assume that's the case.

[a_Ferk 760]

1 hour ago, PatrikLaine said:

I feel like starting important announcement titles off with "The one about" is becoming tradition. Keep it going.

Friends episodes have exactly the same naming scheme, which I thought they were a reference to.