from Katie Strang of ESPN,

I'm a bit confounded by the news of several teams challenging the no-practice, no-travel mandate over the NHL's holiday break. As governed by article 16.5 of the collective bargaining agreement, Dec. 24-26 are supposed to be mandatory days off for players, during which they cannot be asked to practice or travel for any reason, yet we've seen several reports lately of teams potentially violating this rule.

Most recently, the Philadelphia Flyers were hit with a fine after it was revealed they traveled to Nashville on Dec. 26. First of all, where are the NHLPA representatives from each team on this? Seems that they should be raising a hand to prevent clubs from infringing upon their right to have time off, as spelled out explicitly by the CBA.

Secondly, if clubs are going to spurn the mandate anyway, holding "optional" practices -- ones that surely feel anything but optional -- then what was the point of including that in the CBA in the first place? It seems that both the NHL and the NHLPA need to take a hard look at why it's there and how enforcement can be improved.

more topics from the ESPN hockey writers including Custance on Connor McDavid and LeBrun on the Ducks...