Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

CDCGML 2012-13


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
10335 replies to this topic

#1441 y0shi

y0shi

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,816 posts
  • Joined: 01-May 09

Posted 10 August 2012 - 12:35 PM

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

CDCGML Posted Image - Tampa Bay Lightning


#1442 Primal Optimist

Primal Optimist

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,642 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 10 August 2012 - 12:53 PM

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.

I think a good point to make is - someone like Belanger could be happier (and better served) being a 4th line winger or 13/14th forward rather then being stuck in the minors.

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

1286820874m_THUMB.jpg
CDC GM League small.png General Manager

Happy Hockey Fan!!!


#1443 Primal Optimist

Primal Optimist

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,642 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 10 August 2012 - 12:58 PM

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.

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

1286820874m_THUMB.jpg
CDC GM League small.png General Manager

Happy Hockey Fan!!!


#1444 Primal Optimist

Primal Optimist

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,642 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 10 August 2012 - 01:25 PM

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

1286820874m_THUMB.jpg
CDC GM League small.png General Manager

Happy Hockey Fan!!!


#1445 _arby_18

_arby_18

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,338 posts
  • Joined: 05-August 05

Posted 10 August 2012 - 01:42 PM

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.


Maybe that is what needs to be addressed. If I'm not mistaken, if a team IRL claims a player they must place them on their active roster with the big club. If they wish to send them down, they themselves need to place that same player on waivers in order to do so, and if nobody except the original team re-claims that player, they are then able to be placed in the minors of the original team.

Following the Jets in real life and having Ben Maxwell on my CDCGML roster, this is what happened to him. The Jets placed him on waivers with the intention to of sending him down, the Ducks claimed him and he played a few games there, and when they placed on him waivers to try and send him down, the Jets re-claimed him. As they were the original team to send him down, he was then able to be placed in St. John's as every other team had passed.

2011/12/06 Assigned to St. John's (AHL).
2011/12/06 Claimed off waivers from the Anaheim Ducks.
2011/12/05 Placed on waivers by the Anaheim Ducks.
2011/11/10 Claimed off waivers from the Winnipeg Jets.
2011/11/10 Placed on waivers by the Winnipeg Jets.


I'm pretty sure the same thing happened with Brett McLean with the Jets and Coyotes.

2011/10/29 Assigned to Portland (AHL).
2011/10/29 Claimed off waivers from the Winnipeg Jets.
2011/10/28 Placed on waivers by the Winnipeg Jets.
2011/10/06 Claimed off waivers from the Phoenix Coyotes.
2011/10/05 Placed on waivers for the purpose of being assigned to Portland (AHL).


Edited by _arby_18, 10 August 2012 - 01:52 PM.

  • 0

Check out my blog on www.arcticicehockey.com, the Home of the Winnipeg Jets on SBNation!

CDCGML Montreal Canadiens
Posted Image
(Click Above to See About Me Page with Roster)


#1446 Squeak

Squeak

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,305 posts
  • Joined: 21-April 03

Posted 10 August 2012 - 01:53 PM

^^^ 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
Posted Image

#1447 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 10 August 2012 - 01:53 PM

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.


Well, as I mentioned before, the suggestion is being raised expressly to address 'hoarding' and dealing with it without having to go the measure of codifying it as 'hoarding' per se. Although, i'd have no objections to a 'hoarding' rule, if Curt wants to spend the time and adding that to the new CBA.

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. I don't want to open Pandora's box either.....god knows the last time she bathed, so if it's too much of a problem, i'm ok with leaving it as is. I don't think it would be too much of a problem though. It would expand 'player satisfaction' to another area, and not just where players are placed on what lines or pairings. It would keep the waiver wire much more active and increase the ability of bottom half teams to pickup regular roster player with more frequency, and it would lend a hand, if even a small one to parity issues as well.

As much as i'm not a bottom half team, I empathize with their situation and their desire to be more competitive and increase their fun factor. I'm perfectly fine with keeping the status quo, because i'll continue to trade and sign players, but I think having another dynamic to the minor system would increase the amount of actual NHL players available to be acquired by teams struggling to fill their rosters with NHL regular players, whilst teams who are chock-a-block with full time NHL players keep player, beyond their 'reserve' players in the minor system.

After all, what's the point of 'reserves' if you have them, plus reserves for your reserves?

If you have 2 reserves for your forward positions and 1 or 2 for your defence, then that should be ample. We shouldn't have more than that extending into our minor systems. OR, another option instead of having no such players in your minor system is to limit it to 1 forward and 1 dman, who can sit in your minors on top of the reserves. I think that's be the middle ground of the free for all now versus having none.
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#1448 Primal Optimist

Primal Optimist

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,642 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 10 August 2012 - 02:19 PM

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.


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

1286820874m_THUMB.jpg
CDC GM League small.png General Manager

Happy Hockey Fan!!!


#1449 Squeak

Squeak

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,305 posts
  • Joined: 21-April 03

Posted 10 August 2012 - 02:21 PM

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
Posted Image

#1450 Dion Phaneuf

Dion Phaneuf

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,645 posts
  • Joined: 05-May 12

Posted 10 August 2012 - 02:35 PM

Posted Image


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

gallery_47851_23_84084.png

medium.png - CDCGML 483288048.png - EHL medium.png - STHS medium.png - CDCFL


#1451 Primal Optimist

Primal Optimist

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,642 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 10 August 2012 - 02:36 PM

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

1286820874m_THUMB.jpg
CDC GM League small.png General Manager

Happy Hockey Fan!!!


#1452 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 10 August 2012 - 02:42 PM

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.


Fair enough.

And one of the points that I was trying to raise was, in situations such as yours, after the injured player comes back, there should be some mechanism that allows the player to be returned to the minor if they lose out on a spot on your team but are still playing full time on an NHL roster.

So, if you've found a replacement for him, then great.....be it via signing, trade or other waiver acquisition.....the point I'm putting forth is that instead of Belanger now sitting in your minors in the off-season, you should be given the time and opportunity to trade him or he should be allowed to circulate once more in the waiver system so that a team who does not have a player such as a full-timer like him, can have the opportunity to acquire him and fill out their roster as well, in order to be more competitive this upcoming season.

You can benefit by receiving something in return for him if you trade him and another team can negotiate with you for him in order to not risk losing out on him through waiver acquisition by another team, or a struggling team can finally have some access to players to help them get out of the basement.

There's a potential win-win for all....is all i'm saying.
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#1453 Primal Optimist

Primal Optimist

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,642 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 10 August 2012 - 02:58 PM

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

1286820874m_THUMB.jpg
CDC GM League small.png General Manager

Happy Hockey Fan!!!


#1454 Primal Optimist

Primal Optimist

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,642 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 10 August 2012 - 03:03 PM

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.

Edited by Primal Optimist, 10 August 2012 - 03:09 PM.

  • 0

1286820874m_THUMB.jpg
CDC GM League small.png General Manager

Happy Hockey Fan!!!


#1455 y0shi

y0shi

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,816 posts
  • Joined: 01-May 09

Posted 10 August 2012 - 03:14 PM

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?


My argument has everything to do with hoarding... I'm basically arguing for provisions that would prevent ANY team from claiming players only to throw him in the minors. It has nothing to do with who gets to do what, but it is a measure that would protect players who have met the minimum games/age requirements that they earn to prevent them from being buried.

Maybe that is what needs to be addressed. If I'm not mistaken, if a team IRL claims a player they must place them on their active roster with the big club. If they wish to send them down, they themselves need to place that same player on waivers in order to do so, and if nobody except the original team re-claims that player, they are then able to be placed in the minors of the original team.

Following the Jets in real life and having Ben Maxwell on my CDCGML roster, this is what happened to him. The Jets placed him on waivers with the intention to of sending him down, the Ducks claimed him and he played a few games there, and when they placed on him waivers to try and send him down, the Jets re-claimed him. As they were the original team to send him down, he was then able to be placed in St. John's as every other team had passed.



I'm pretty sure the same thing happened with Brett McLean with the Jets and Coyotes.


Exactly


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.


No... The proposal is that if you want to claim a player that is waiver eligible, and send him to minors, he has to go back on waivers to make sure that 28 other teams who want to keep him on an active roster gets that chance. :picard:

It's basically saying this. Say in the future you have a player like Belanger on your roster that you want to send to your minor league affiliate. You would have to place him on waivers because he is over age/games played threshold. Now supposed I claim Belanger and let's say Sharpie wanted Belanger. Sharpie is also ahead of me in the standings and in a race for a playoff spot while I know I'm out of it.

Under the current rules, I could just claim Belanger, bury him in the minors, so I don't gain fantasy points and screw with Sharpie. There are ZERO benefits for this system, and for guys like Belanger. Thus with the new rules. If I want to do this, Belanger would go back on waivers, and Sharpie would get a chance to claim Belanger. This system is much fairer, as the player stays in the NHL.
  • 0

CDCGML Posted Image - Tampa Bay Lightning


#1456 Primal Optimist

Primal Optimist

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,642 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 10 August 2012 - 03:31 PM

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

1286820874m_THUMB.jpg
CDC GM League small.png General Manager

Happy Hockey Fan!!!


#1457 Primal Optimist

Primal Optimist

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,642 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 11 August 2012 - 08:18 AM

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?

Edited by Primal Optimist, 11 August 2012 - 08:35 AM.

  • 0

1286820874m_THUMB.jpg
CDC GM League small.png General Manager

Happy Hockey Fan!!!


#1458 Primal Optimist

Primal Optimist

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,642 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 11 August 2012 - 10:24 AM

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

1286820874m_THUMB.jpg
CDC GM League small.png General Manager

Happy Hockey Fan!!!


#1459 zenflamesfan

zenflamesfan

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 280 posts
  • Joined: 03-December 10

Posted 11 August 2012 - 11:42 AM

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.

-_-

Posted Image
  • 0

Posted Image

CDC GML: GM Calgary Flames


#1460 zenflamesfan

zenflamesfan

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 280 posts
  • Joined: 03-December 10

Posted 11 August 2012 - 11:56 AM

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

Posted Image

CDC GML: GM Calgary Flames


#1461 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 11 August 2012 - 04:41 PM

Anyone heard from or seen Mike V?
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#1462 Bombastik der Teutone

Bombastik der Teutone

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,037 posts
  • Joined: 11-January 07

Posted 11 August 2012 - 11:45 PM

Anyone heard from or seen Mike V?


good question...
  • 0

#1463 Primal Optimist

Primal Optimist

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,642 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 12 August 2012 - 10:11 AM

He was actively posting deals on the 29th of July in our thread, so my guess is vacation time?
  • 0

1286820874m_THUMB.jpg
CDC GM League small.png General Manager

Happy Hockey Fan!!!


#1464 Primal Optimist

Primal Optimist

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,642 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 12 August 2012 - 10:17 AM

curious: not that it would happen, but if you want to cut a player who has say a league minimum deal with signing bonus'...lets say 600k per year over three years with a 400k per year signing bonus..for a total cap hit of 1m to make it easy, and he has two years left on the contract: when you buy him out, does the cap hit of the buyout be based on 1m or on the base salary?

This doesn't affect me in any way at all, but I am curious what would happen if we restricted the total number of contracts a team may have in its entire system to somewhere less than current, if teams were forced to buyout guys they couldn't get rid of...what would happen, and then this question popped into my head....

The idea may not happen, the reduction in allowed total contracts, but the question is still valid: what happens if you buyout a player whose cap hit is half salary and half signing bonus?
  • 0

1286820874m_THUMB.jpg
CDC GM League small.png General Manager

Happy Hockey Fan!!!


#1465 zenflamesfan

zenflamesfan

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 280 posts
  • Joined: 03-December 10

Posted 12 August 2012 - 10:54 AM

I'm pretty sure Curt takes the cap hit total as the base for doing the buyout calculations. So it's the total after all bonuses that's used primal.
  • 0

Posted Image

CDC GML: GM Calgary Flames


#1466 canuck2xtreme

canuck2xtreme

    Canucks All-Star

  • Assistant to Regional Manager
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,056 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 06

Posted 12 August 2012 - 01:42 PM

I'm pretty sure Curt takes the cap hit total as the base for doing the buyout calculations. So it's the total after all bonuses that's used primal.

This. It's the cap hit number.

Base salary is there solely for the purpose of determining an RFA's required qualifying offer.
  • 0

CDCGML Commissioner/Winnipeg Jets <---Click For Roster!
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
Support Canuck Place Childrens Hospice - http://www.canuckplace.org/

This is what hockey should be. A lot of chances, a lot of hitting, no cheap shots, no chirping after whistles."


#1467 da.moose

da.moose

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 977 posts
  • Joined: 14-May 09

Posted 13 August 2012 - 04:53 AM

Hey guys I'm back for good now.

Terrible news about the possible lockout. Especially right after getting the Jets back!!!

Anyways, I agree that the waiver wire system could use a change for the better and should more closely resemble the waivers system in the real NHL.

I was also wondering what you guys think about starting contract extension negotiations right at the beginning of the season? It would only give all General Managers more flexibility in trading if they know that a player doesn't want to re-sign or wants too much money closer to the beginning of the season as opposed to right at the deadline.
  • 0

#1468 Mattias Ohlund.2

Mattias Ohlund.2

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: 29-November 09

Posted 13 August 2012 - 06:44 AM

Hey guys I'm back for good now.

Terrible news about the possible lockout. Especially right after getting the Jets back!!!

Anyways, I agree that the waiver wire system could use a change for the better and should more closely resemble the waivers system in the real NHL.

I was also wondering what you guys think about starting contract extension negotiations right at the beginning of the season? It would only give all General Managers more flexibility in trading if they know that a player doesn't want to re-sign or wants too much money closer to the beginning of the season as opposed to right at the deadline.


I really agree with this. Would be so much better to have an understanding earlier on in the season, especially if you know they won't re-sign, and you want a greater trade value.

PS. How was your trip moose?
  • 0

Proud GM of Edmonton-CDCGML



Posted Image


Credit to Intoewsables!


#1469 Primal Optimist

Primal Optimist

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,642 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 13 August 2012 - 07:56 AM

I kind of like that we are forced not to worry too much about contract extensions from September to January, its like a little breather where you can focus on the on ice product, rather than the front office, but its one of those tweaks that would affect everyone equally, and not be of much consequence, so I am easy either way.

I have been reading a lot on the NHL's waiver system and oddly enough I can't find their stance on what a claiming team must do with the waived player....anyone have a link?

EDIT: found the full CBA and its in article 13....reading now, thanks.

Edited by Primal Optimist, 13 August 2012 - 07:59 AM.

  • 0

1286820874m_THUMB.jpg
CDC GM League small.png General Manager

Happy Hockey Fan!!!


#1470 Primal Optimist

Primal Optimist

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,642 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 13 August 2012 - 08:22 AM

So, in the CBA an NHL team is referred legally after the pre-amble as the "Club". Note the capital C. Minor league affiliates in the AHL are referred to as 'minor league club' note that there are no capitals when this phrase is used in the entirety of Article 13, the waivers section of the CBA. So then, this exact paragraph of the CBA states, I believe, that a claimed player is in fact assigned to the NHL CLUB when claimed:

13.19 If only one Club makes a claim for the Player on whom Waivers have been
requested, such Player shall be transferred to that Club. In the event that more than one
Club makes a claim for such Player, he shall be transferred to the claiming Club having
earned the lowest percentage of possible points in the League standing at the time of the
request for Waivers or, if Waivers are requested outside the playing season, then to the
Club having earned the lowest percentage of possible points in the preceding season's
schedule of Regular Season Games. If the successful Waiver claim is made before
November 1st then the priority shall be determined by the final standing in the League's
Regular Season schedule in the preceding season.


So, after reading the CBA section regarding waivers, my understanding of NHL waivers has improved, and where we are aiming for a fantasy league that is as close to authentic as possible, my opinion on our waiver rules has changed. More or less, I agree with Yoshi and Sharpshooter. I was wrong, I can admit that.

I think that if a waiver claim is made in our league, the claimed player should be assigned to the claiming teams main roster, if there is no room, then room must be made inside the 24 hour waiver period, or the claim is invalidated. I think this is an easy change to make, and I would go one further: I support re-entry waivers for any player who is waiver eligible, and I think this re-entry waivers would offset any loses to parity that would occur under the proposed changes.

EDIT: Forgot to say that in the interest of keeping it simple, if a player is claimed on re-entry: there should not be any salary splitting in our league, that would simply be too much work for the executive and without any real benefit to the enjoyment of the game.

Edited by Primal Optimist, 13 August 2012 - 08:24 AM.

  • 0

1286820874m_THUMB.jpg
CDC GM League small.png General Manager

Happy Hockey Fan!!!





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.