Vegas' latest dangerous Bruce Cassidy decision could force the NHL to take action

That's what turns this from coaching chatter into an NHL pressure point.

Toronto fired Craig Berube on May 13 and still had no replacement in place as of May 18. Edmonton fired Kris Knoblauch on May 14 and also left the job open.

So when word gets out that Vegas denied permission on Cassidy, the league optics get ugly fast.

The first post laid out the core issue: Los Angeles was just denied permission, and Toronto had not asked as of yet.

The second post pushed it into league territory by arguing Vegas was still playing games 50 days after Cassidy was fired.

The third post went even harder, calling for a fine and lost draft picks. That's where this stopped feeling like normal front-office maneuvering.

Vegas made its coaching decision on March 29, when Kelly McCrimmon fired Cassidy and hired Tortorella. That part is settled.

What isn't settled is why a club that already replaced its coach would still want to choke off access while rival teams sit with vacancies.

That's the risk here. The Golden Knights may see contract leverage. Around the league, it can read as obstruction.

And Cassidy benefits from that contrast. He's no longer the coach who got moved out. He becomes the proven bench boss other teams want badly enough to push this into public view.

If the NHL does nothing, it tells every club that firing a coach doesn't always mean letting him work. That's why this story has legs well beyond Vegas.

Also read on House Of Hockey :
Bowen Byram decision adds new tension before crucial Game 7