Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

CDCGML 2012-13


canuck2xtreme

Recommended Posts

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol..this whole waiver thing confuses me ::D

only thing that disturbs me is the older than 24 years rule and that we dont use 2 way contracts ..well may to much for this leaguee

i signed brandon bollig for an example..he´s 25 , has a total of 18 regular nhl games and he has a 2 way contract in real..so he cant be claimed in the real nhl

example...if one of my roster playes gets injured ...brandon will get the call ..and if the roster player returns..i have to send down brandon and anyone will claim him...all efforts to sign him are gone in this case

i m not against the 100 games rule..but the over 24 years rule is not a thing that i really like

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As good as it is for our league to be close as possible in how the NHL operates, i can't say that i'd like to see re-entry waivers implemented.

It's one thing to lose a player if you don't have a need for them any longer or space for him to actually 'play' on the main roster, however, it's another thing to lose a player when you are bringing a player up in order to fill a pressing need, due to injury or trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So our current rule for waivers says this:

5.3 – Waivers

To place a player on waivers, you simply post in the thread that you are placing that player on waivers. Players will remain on waivers for 24 hours. In order to claim a player, send a PM to canuck2xtreme indicating your desire to claim the player. The claim must be made within the 24 hour window. After the 24 hour period expires, canuck2xtreme will post whether the player has cleared waivers, or if they have been claimed. Players that are claimed by more than one team will be awarded to the team that is ranked lowest in the overall league standings at that time. Unclaimed players can either be placed into your clubs minor league system or back onto the active roster. Your team must designate where your player is to go either at the time of being placed on waivers, or shortly after the 24 hour waiver period has expired. Players who are 24 years of age or younger and have played in fewer than 100 NHL games can be sent to your minor league system without being subjected to waivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As good as it is for our league to be close as possible in how the NHL operates, i can't say that i'd like to see re-entry waivers implemented.

It's one thing to lose a player if you don't have a need for them any longer or space for him to actually 'play' on the main roster, however, it's another thing to lose a player when you are bringing a player up in order to fill a pressing need, due to injury or trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol..this whole waiver thing confuses me ::D

only thing that disturbs me is the older than 24 years rule and that we dont use 2 way contracts ..well may to much for this leaguee

i signed brandon bollig for an example..he´s 25 , has a total of 18 regular nhl games and he has a 2 way contract in real..so he cant be claimed in the real nhl

example...if one of my roster playes gets injured ...brandon will get the call ..and if the roster player returns..i have to send down brandon and anyone will claim him...all efforts to sign him are gone in this case

i m not against the 100 games rule..but the over 24 years rule is not a thing that i really like

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a reminder that '2 way contracts" has nothing to do with waiver eligibility, it only governs how much a team pays a guy to play in the AHL or the NHL. a so called 'one way contract' just means the player gets his millions no matter where he plays, and a so called 2 way contract means he will be paid much less in the AHL than in the NHL. Either type of contract has no bearing on waiver status.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear you on that, and my team would be on the losing end of such a change, even though I support it. The reason I would want re-entry waivers is that if we tighten up waivers to say that a player must be assigned to a claiming teams main roster, then we will inherently see much less waiver claims made. Being able to move depth up and down with less risk is a dramatic change in favour of higher ranked teams, and therefore the re-entry waivers, while also helping to mimick the NHL better, would offset the changes that would otherwise simply aid higher end teams in maintaining their depth. I totally support claimed players having to play in the big league if they are claimed, but for me, the other side of that coin is that callups would then have to be subject to waivers if they are waiver eligible. It maintains the status quo, so to speak. I think the two fold changes offset each other well enough that our league would move closer to NHL style rules, without the changes benefiting anyone in particular. Claiming teams of re-entry players would still after all have to have room or make room on their rosters, so there will still be fewer claims, and those claims made would be by teams in desperate need of making them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well we have to keep perspective on this: we are most definitely talking about the chafe, and not the wheat of the NHL here. Also, your supposed loop hole of keeping a roster spot open is silly at best, and at worst, you could pull that trick off once or twice a year, while there are literally 100 waived players a year in our league. 2% of the time you would have this so called loop hole available..over time it would balance out and be the norm.

I am very positive that changing the one rule, that a claimed player must be on the main roster will substantially limit claims, that is obvious, I think. So to change the one without adding the other is not a good deal for the bottom half of the league. It only helps top half teams to keep talent until the playoffs, while bottom half teams need that talent in order to try to even make the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am curious to know if anyone actually feels they got burned in previous years by the current rules? Did this happen just once or continuously to your team? how did your team fare after the 'burn' compared to before it..et cetera...what are the real examples that lead to the feeling that we should address a rule change that makes it harder for anyone to make a claim?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well we have to keep perspective on this: we are most definitely talking about the chafe, and not the wheat of the NHL here. Also, your supposed loop hole of keeping a roster spot open is silly at best, and at worst, you could pull that trick off once or twice a year, while there are literally 100 waived players a year in our league. 2% of the time you would have this so called loop hole available..over time it would balance out and be the norm.

I am very positive that changing the one rule, that a claimed player must be on the main roster will substantially limit claims, that is obvious, I think. So to change the one without adding the other is not a good deal for the bottom half of the league. It only helps top half teams to keep talent until the playoffs, while bottom half teams need that talent in order to try to even make the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...