Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

canuck2xtreme

CDCGML 2012-13

10,336 posts in this topic

Yeah what Sharpie said. It's unfair that a team that waives Belanger can't just have him in his minors without being subject to waivers first, while a team claiming the player doesn't have to do the same. That's all I'm getting at.

If I was to propose a solution to this, it would be that if a team is claiming a player that is waiver eligible, he should have 24 hours following the claim to place him on the active roster (if he has room), make room for him (via trades or other minor league assignments), or the team must place him back on waivers. Should he go unclaimed for the next 24 hours, THEN he can be assigned to minors. This way, teams can't just hoard NHLers in the minors, and it make teams actually use their waiver claims without hoarding.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hoarding would be one reason.

'Player happiness' would be another.

Also, acquiring an NHL regular, like Belanger(since you brought him up) through the waiver process and then keeping them in the minors for the majority of the season because you already have a player playing on your 4th line in a full time capacity seems like an act of hoarding, since there are teams who may not have a 4th line center playing full time who could benefit. Now, they most likely will be the types of teams in the lower end of the league's standings.

The suggestion to set a time limit to move them via trade or through waivers means that they can't be kept by any one team for a long period of time if they already have that position filled on their main roster.

One way to help ensure that a waiver acquisition is used to fill in the gap for open spots as a result of trade or injuries to other players, is to submit a brief explanation, along with your waiver pickup request, as to where you will be inserting the player.

My previous caveat ensures that the GM has ample time to make room, or to trade the player for something in return, or to benefit from the acquisition as a temporary stop-gap measure until their original player returns from LTIR, but allowing that player to return back into circulation to be of use and benefit to another team.

At the end of the day, the team wouldn't lose anything by having that temporary fill or tradeable asset, or losing the veteran player back to the waiver wire, because he was unhappy in sitting out of the NHL level by being buried in the minors.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah what Sharpie said. It's unfair that a team that waives Belanger can't just have him in his minors without being subject to waivers first, while a team claiming the player doesn't have to do the same. That's all I'm getting at.

If I was to propose a solution to this, it would be that if a team is claiming a player that is waiver eligible, he should have 24 hours following the claim to place him on the active roster (if he has room), make room for him (via trades or other minor league assignments), or the team must place him back on waivers. Should he go unclaimed for the next 24 hours, THEN he can be assigned to minors. This way, teams can't just hoard NHLers in the minors, and it make teams actually use their waiver claims without hoarding.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, mowed my lawn and thought about this..almost lost a toe, haha..but i digress...

What if we went MORE like the NHL, rather than less like the NHL as a solution to waiver woes?

What if a player's state at the time of being placed on waivers determined the way the process worked?

Lets say you have Eric Belanger on your 4th line and waive him. 24 hours later he is now able to be re-assigned. In the meantime, you can play him, bench him or whatever you want, but he is still your player on your 23 man roster for 23 hours and 59 minutes. Then if he is claimed on his way presumably down, he MUST be placed on the claiming teams active roster within 24 hours. This way if they need to waive a player or make room in some other legal method for him, they have the time to do so after recieving him from waiver wire. If he is not claimed after the 24 hours, then he may be placed on the farm team or bought out or not moved at all by the team who waived him.

Next, if you want to call up Eric Belanger from the farm team and in his case he is waiver eligible, then you must declare your calling him up and he is waiver eligible: at this point teams may claim him, and he is still technically on the farm team and may be placed on the claiming teams farm team OR their regular lineup squad.

This way, its a two way waiver system like the NHL with some responsibility for the claiming team to in the case of a roster player, insert him in their lineup, and in the case of a non roster player being called up, more or less open season.

The one caveat I think is that a player may only be subject to re-entry waivers once in a 30 day cycle...as that is the time when he is most likely to be snatched up. So your go to 24th man would face re-entry waivers on November 1st, say, and be waived back down on the 12th...if he is called up befor the 30th agian he wouldn't need to go through re-entry waivers, but if 30 days has passed he would.

maybe this would help the situation of players being snagged on the way down, much like the real NHL doesn't see many waiver claims for players going down, but mostly for players coming up.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way it currently works is.

If a team claims a player on waivers - they have the option to place them in the minors or the NHL roster.

If said team were to recall the player (as the example suggests -- due to an injury to another player) -- then the recalled player would be subject to waivers when being sent BACK to the minors.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^ Yeah - it's a good point.

But given that this is a league that relies on PM and MSN... maybe a 24-48 hour grace period... where the team can make space for said player.

i.e. If Quebec claims player X.... I have 48 hours to make a roster spot..... otherwise he will go to the next lowest seeded team who claimed him....

During that timeframe - you cannot accumulate any points for player X, until he is placed on the active roster.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I wanted to use him as my example, because I know that I won't be offended by talking about him, so feel free to put in your two cents about him here for the sake of the discussion.

It could be considered hoarding for sure in some cases, but there is no rule about hoarding: there are rules trying to limit the concept of hoarding: such as a minor league salary cap et cetera, but there is nothing that says you can't do it. In Eric's case, I acquired him before I made another signing of a player that slots in above him in my depth chart, but the case could be made that I am hoarding 5 centers. I admit it, I am. So are 21 other teams, so I am not that concerned about Eric's spot right now. If he was a bonafide NHL player, I reckon, he wouldn't have been waived in the offseason by a team that was under no pressure to waive him.

For the arguements sake, I agree with both your points, taking myself out of the equation, and looking at it generally Eric would be much happier in the CDCGML and not in the farm system, but so would every other player in every teams farm system. Redden is happily playing/coaching away on an AHL team making millions doing it. Obviously he is an exception, and Eric is no Redden but its a good example player.

What would we do to stop this hoarding from happening where it does happen? Time limits seem too management heavy...but I like the idea a little of adding a pitch to the waiver claim: although there is no basis at all for this in the NHL. Our system mirrors the NHL system exactly as it is...and I don't think its broken per se. Who did vancouver have last year all year on the minor league team? A guy almost identical to Eric Belanger...Steve Reinprecht and to a lesser degree Ryan Parent....it happens, players that could make some teams better are stuck in the minors on better teams or teams with more depth.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I don't mean to single you out either. I'm just looking at it with a player like Belanger. He's obviously a full-timer irl and is being kept in the minors as a reserve player.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think another point to consider is.

Things chance constantly.

For example - I have Michael Sauer as my #1 D in the minors... SOLELY because he is going on LTIR on day one of the next season. But I had to make sure that covered myself with another top 6 D.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

anaheim-ducks-mobile-wallpaper.jpg

Dustin Penner - Tomas Plekanec - Joffrey Lupul

Linus Omark - Tyler Bozak - Patric Hornquist

Gabriel Bourque - Zack Smith - Chris Thorburn

Ben Eager - Michael Haley - Cam Janssen

Brad Winchester*

Ryan McDonagh - PK Subban

Keith Ballard - ???

Chris Phillips - ???

Pekka Rinne

Jonathan Bernier

* Winchester is still a UFA

The Minors league system is still the same with the exception of Bourque's promotion.

Just waiting on offers for two defenders and one more NHL quality forward. I will fill out the minor league system accordingly... I haven't decided on Jonathan's situation as nothing has been really leaked out of LA (playing the waiting game).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for a specific anti hoarding rule: I think we already have some: salary cap, roster size limit and a minor league budget that can not exceed a maximum 35 million dollars. I believe, but can't find it anywhere yet, that we are capped at 50 contracts that a team may have at any one time.

I proposed earlier that we force teams to spend at least a minimum amount on each of the four front office articles, and that my proposal would then cap the Minor league budget at 15million, another cap to a hoarding situation which would further reduce the chances.

I still feel it isn't about hoarding, but more about who gets to hoard: as the concept we are questioning is who gets to claim off waivers and how do they get to use the player...meaning a player has to be on waivers to begin with. So does the originating team get to hoard the player and call him up at will? does the claiming team get to hoard the player? does another team who claimed him deserve a crack at inserting him into the big league lineup? Does a team who did not place a claim on him somehow feel like they are missing out?

For me, i like it as it is now. But I can see the possible need to address a perceived issue. Maybe a roster player who is waived should need to be inserted in a top team roster, and not be able to be inserted in a minor league roster, but I think that gives too much power to the initial team, who is already clearly 'hoarding' nhl talent if they have the 24th man on their farm team to begin with or has the need to waive him there. After all, waiver eligble means a certain age or after 100 games played in the NHL, right?

I would have to do some statistical look at the issue which i don't feel like doing to see if this is a real issue, or an issue of perception, as again, no one is waiving a 200 point getter, and if they do...duhhhhh of course someone else should get to claim him. My initial thought is this is a non issue, and my thought at the end of the day is this is really still a non issue, with one or two limited examples which wouldn't justify a major change to the way its done. However, as always, if that is the way we go, then I am good with it. The changes I would think could help are to make big league players who are waived have to be placed on the claimers big league, but if minor leaguers are being called up they are fair game to anyone, although my preference is no change at all.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind using Eric as the example at all,, I am not offended in the least, but i would like it to be perfectly well known that I acquired him off waivers to be on my fourth line, I then signed some players at a later date in time which made me reconsider who should be on my bottom line and who would be cut to the minor league Whale. Eric lost out in the battle, and was not just plucked off waivers and crammed into the minors for the coming year. For our examples though, lets keep pretending he was plucked off waivers to be a backup plan and sit in the minors, tis a good example that keeps anyone from being mad about their guy being an example. haha.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not a bad concept, but it has no connection to how the NHL works. We could require that callups and draftees walk to Mordor while balancing eggs, but there too, there is no factual tie to the NHL rules or system, so I don't know why we would require it.

-_-

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the proposal is that if a player is acquired by waivers, he must be waived rather than be sent down to the minor league affiliate, unless the team that claimed him can trade him away the day after they claim him off waivers..I don't like it, all funniness aside it doesn't fix any problems and adds more.

How many times does any team in all truth get to claim a guy anyways, without having to shed some guys in return, thus leveling out the field as it rolls down the chain? I feel like I claim a lot of waived players, certainly well above the average for claimants and I have a guy who only got 125 points last year, a guy who is no longer in the NHL and the Belanger centerman. So if I am one of the guys who takes the most advantage of waiver claims, and I think I am, and my big advantage is a 34 year old fourth liner on the worst team in the NHL: You see where I am going with this...its a non issue. haha.

Okay, was a good afternoon chat, I have way overspoken my place though, so I will turn the mic over to other folks and I hope some of my early morning points are considered, I think i made five of them in the list..which by now has been overshadowed by waiver talk..but its good to talk things out. Glad we had the discussion, and i hope more people add to it. I am stepping away from the keyboard though. Take care everyone.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand, and I am not trying to be obtuse, but your arguement has nothing to do with hoarding players in the minors, your argument is to do with what team gets to do the hoarding: the original team that currently has to waive a player, OR a team that is generally low in the standings and claims the player off waivers. If either team, the original or the claiming team would as an end result have the player in the minors, then your hoarding issue is a nonstarter...as its really about who gets to do the hoarding. See what I am saying?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

okay so team A waives Belanger. Team B claims him, but realizes they don't have room for him on the main roster and wants to send him down. Team B then must waive him in order to assign him to the farm team, and teams C through Z have a chance then to claim him and put him on their main roster?

That could work, it would lead to less claims in general being placed on players who are sent on waivers and so I predict more players making through waivers and being assigned to their original clubs farm team, since there are very few teams with a spare roster spot, but they do exist, so this idea is kind of neat. I don't think it has changed my opinion on the need to change the current system, but thank you for explaining it better to me. I get it now, and the idea has merit.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thinking about the above waiver situation: What if we simply reverted back to wavier claims being made in thread; if only one team claims that team can do what they like with a player, minors or main roster: if 2 or more claim a player then in addition to lowest team in the standings rule...the player would also have to go to the team who would utilize him in the pro's.

Team's A B and C claim player Wiznewski

team A has 900 points

team B has 875 points

team C has 850 points

Team C has first rights to claim the player, but doesn't intend to insert him into active lineup within 24 hours, team B wants him and has room to insert him in lineup, Team B gets player Wiznewski and must insert him in lineup.

The main reason I don't like changing to a system where a waived player must always go to a team that will put him on the main roster is that this will lead to less waiver claims, which is kind of a back door means to protect deeper teams. Waiver claims is a good way to transfer talent from deeper teams to worse off teams, and decreasing waiver claims, for me, is not good for the league, as it would aid in consolidating and perpetuating top end teams dominance over several seasons. We can not overlook the basic fact of waivers is that the first team in the chain: the team waiving the player is doing so because it has decided that the player won't fit on the team, or is not worth having on the team, or is otherwise unworthy of a starting job on the team. All of the reasons for waiving a player tie back to the idea that a team is full of talent already, thus the waived player is surplus. Changing the way we deal with waivers in a fashion that makes it less likely for claims to be made, allows for surplus players to more frequently remain in the original teams system, as minor league depth. I think we can all agree that if a player claimed off waivers MUST be put on the main roster, this will decrease claims overall, and so will add to the 'hoarding' phenomenon of the waiving team, generally speaking.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a separate idea from here down that I added in an edit:

Perhaps, the only change should be to allow re-entry waivers, but on RE-ENTRY waivers only: the claimed player must join the pro team's roster in order to be claimed. This way, waiving a player to go to your minor team's roster is still dealt with normally as we do now, but teams in need of talent for their main roster can snag callups that are waiver eligable and place them right away on their main roster. If those teams ever do send that player down again, he would be sent on waivers..and could be claimed back or by another team and placed on either roster, main or minor.

This would not limit or reduce the number of claims made as would the other style proposed, and would allow for teams in need of talent to fill their main rosters via the re-entry waivers protocol.

Thoughts?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot to add that we can't lose sight of the fact that people waive players for a variety of reasons. I claimed Stortini off waivers, from what I recall, knowing full well he is done as an NHL'er...but that he did have a two way contract last year, and may again this year. I claimed him because if he gets called up again for a last hurrah it will be to punch anything that skates past him...and that means points.

The waiving team was simply done with him, and wanted to clear the contract, I don't think anyone else wanted him either...so if we change to a 'must use him in the lineup' rule..teams won't be able to waive players that they simply want to get rid of. Its a double edged sword, imo, that is not the correct solution to the perceived problem.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not a bad concept, but it has no connection to how the NHL works. We could require that callups and draftees walk to Mordor while balancing eggs, but there too, there is no factual tie to the NHL rules or system, so I don't know why we would require it.

-_-

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a serious note, good debate with some interesting ideas. My thought is that so far all the presented ideas make me think of one thing, a line of dominos. If a change to the waiver system is made then I think people will be calling for more changes to try and re balance the game. I think the waiver system is just part of the game that we as gm's have to plan for.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.