elvis15 Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 The first bolded part would seem to be in agreement with the point regarding being able to assign Markstrom to Utica in the summer. It would appear to contradict the principle of being waiver eligible, but regarding players that are not waiver eligible, what would be the point of defining a waiver period if the dates outside that period don't in fact apply to players otherwise waiver eligible within that period? Stanton and Dalpe were both picked up on Sept 29 - 9 days before opening night, once the waiver period applied. Sure they were, but if you thought you might have to send them down, why not do so 3-4 days earlier, before the waiver period started? Clearly Stanton didn't clear, and Carolina thought Dalpe wouldn't so dealt him before they had to put him on waivers. As for the other part, that's my counter-point. There's a waiver period, and being able to assign a waiver eligible player to the AHL outside of that somewhat defeats the purpose. Why not just have it during the actual season then, or just have it apply all year round? Why have it that one day earlier in the middle of training camp is ok, but the day after isn't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniwaki Canuck Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 My source was also post lockout and the same information, but with that little tidbit added in. I could look it up again, but it's another blog site the same as yours and it won't make any difference to prove anything either way. And a clear definition of the waiver period could just as easily be a clear definition of the only time a waiver eligible player can be sent down (much like the strict periods for buyout waivers). My point is this, nowhere on that site or others (or the CBA) have I found specifically that waiver eligible players can be assigned to an AHL roster outside of the waiver period. In my recollection of past camps as well, it's all been junior/overseas/waiver exempt players that get sent down that early. Our pickups like Stanton and Dalpe are players I'm sure Chicago and Carolina would have liked to keep instead of losing on waivers or being forced to trade, but it still happened despite people saying there's been another option all along. Absence of that information isn't confirmation and I'm asking for someone to show me something that proves that Markstrom can be sent down before as fact. You're right that there are a couple preseason games before the waiver eligible period starts Sept 27, so he would get some time, but he still gets sent down early and is at least a borderline NHL goalie. If no one can find anything definitive and he's still here in late September, then I guess we'll find out. You can add Linden Vey to that list of Stanton and Dalpe. I think Oldnews should let Lombardi and Bowman know that they've been misunderstanding the new collective agreement all along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinphase Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Didn't know Markstrom was so sensitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuckseeesh Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 The best thing for Markstrom is to play in the AHL for "1 more" season. no yo-yoing between the AHL and NHL. Just 1 season to fully develop and really hone his skills, while learning from our goalie coaches. After the year we will finally see what Markstrom's value as a potential goalie in the NHL is and from that point, management can assess how they'll move forward with regards to Markstrom. If he does well that makes one of the 3 goalies expendable in Miller(unlikely), Lack, and Markstrom(value boosted). If he doesn't perform well we throw him in the AHL again or simply trade him for whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puck'nAnimal Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 Simple fact is that the Canucks can choose to have three goalies on the roster and lose a forward or defence spot on the roster. That may be their option with Markstrom. Montreal is doing it with Budaj, Tokarski and Price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 You can add Linden Vey to that list of Stanton and Dalpe. I think Oldnews should let Lombardi and Bowman know that they've been misunderstanding the new collective agreement all along. I'm not sure how Vey fits into it, as LA drafted him. Unless you mean they've traded him (albeit much earlier than the Dalpe trade) to avoid losing him on waivers this coming season, as I guess that's true to an extent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 My source was also post lockout and the same information, but with that little tidbit added in. I could look it up again, but it's another blog site the same as yours and it won't make any difference to prove anything either way. And a clear definition of the waiver period could just as easily be a clear definition of the only time a waiver eligible player can be sent down (much like the strict periods for buyout waivers). My point is this, nowhere on that site or others (or the CBA) have I found specifically that waiver eligible players can be assigned to an AHL roster outside of the waiver period. In my recollection of past camps as well, it's all been junior/overseas/waiver exempt players that get sent down that early. Our pickups like Stanton and Dalpe are players I'm sure Chicago and Carolina would have liked to keep instead of losing on waivers or being forced to trade, but it still happened despite people saying there's been another option all along. Absence of that information isn't confirmation and I'm asking for someone to show me something that proves that Markstrom can be sent down before as fact. You're right that there are a couple preseason games before the waiver eligible period starts Sept 27, so he would get some time, but he still gets sent down early and is at least a borderline NHL goalie. If no one can find anything definitive and he's still here in late September, then I guess we'll find out. I remember reading somewhere that teams can still make claims for players outside of the "in season" period that starts 12 days prior to the start of the season. I have no idea where I read that though but this debate was going on a few years back on CDC and I remember specifically searching for a long time trying to clarify this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 That would be fair to people who wonder about his future here, or are speculating that he may be moved.... but Botchford on the other hand, to be accurate, stated that Markstrom requested a trade, something Benning has flat out refuted. http://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/533580 "Vancouver Canucks goaltender Jacob Markstrom requested a trade in light of the signing of Ryan Miller to a 3-year, $18-million contract, according to Jason Botchford of The Province." Botchford has a history of inaccurate claims of this nature - to be fair - he is a meddling clown with no credibility. Believe me Botchford isn't the first sports writer, or hockey analyst for that matter, to jump to a conclusion. It wasn't much of a leap that Markstrom would want out of this situation. A sports writer got something wrong? OMG! I don't get my panties in a knot over these things as it happens throughout sports journalism throughout the year. If I did I have crushed nuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2SKATES1STICK Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 I honestly had a hard time believing that THIS happy-go-lucky kid could be such trouble. the full video is super creepy. I feel molested after watching how awkward this is. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvHOy2UUfoM#t=130 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AK_19 Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 the full video is super creepy. I feel molested after watching how awkward this is. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvHOy2UUfoM#t=130 Goalies are freaking weird....I swear Schneider was the only normal one I could think of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2SKATES1STICK Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 regards, G. sweet ego Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2SKATES1STICK Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 Goalies are freaking weird....I swear Schneider was the only normal one I could think of. nah i think mainly the other two actors and whoever made them do this like gosh...its just all very to catch a predator. I feel like "ron cherry" is one of those guys who puts together boy bands in miami and puts them all up in a house and never really gets around to makin music its just kinda his personal boy toy playground. or something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyking Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 It's not a loop hole - it's looks a lot more like a pretty clear definition of the waiver period, and the terms and dates by which a player must be loaned to their AHL club. The lockout was what preceded the new CBA - it appears the Litter Box Cats site I posted is more up to date on the new terms than you are, which makes me wonder why you are disputing it as opposed to finding actual information that might refute their research. Training camp opens on Sept 11 - preseason games start on Sept 16th - leaving up until the 27th before Markstrom would need to be assigned to Utica, as the regular season starts for Vancouver on Oct 8. How Markstrom would feel isn't really something I care to speculate about. I'll leave the baseless speculation to Botchford. What you said is true but according to the cba and waiver eligible player cannot be loaned to another team until it has passed regular waiver. All this means that he cannot be loaned to another team until waiver period starts. 13.1 A Club shall not dispose of the services of any Player in which it has a proprietary interest by Loan to a club of another league without first having complied with the provisions of this Article. The Waivers that are recognized by this Agreement are Regular Waivers and Unconditional Waivers. 13.2 The "Playing Season Waiver Period" shall begin on the twelfth (12th) day prior to the start of the Regular Season and end on the day following the last day of a Club's Playing Season. Subject to the provisions of this Article, the rights to the services of a Player may be Loaned to a club of another league, upon fulfillment of the following conditions, except when elsewhere expressly prohibited: (a) Regular Waivers were requested and cleared during the Playing Season Waiver Period; and b. the Player has not played in ten (10) or more NHL Games cumulative since Regular Waivers on him were last cleared, and more than thirty (30) days cumulative on an NHL roster have not passed since Regular Waivers on him were last cleared. 13.12 Transfers To/From Minors. In the case of a Club moving a Player either to or from a minor league club, the following procedure shall be followed: (j)A Player may be Loaned to a club of any league affiliated with the League at any time up to 3:00 p.m. New York time of the fortieth (40th) day immediately preceding the final day of the Regular Season (the "Trade Deadline"). Following this period, no Player may be Loaned http://cdn.agilitycms.com/nhlpacom/PDF/NHL_NHLPA_2013_CBA.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucksnhl Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 This is good news, I hope he can come into camp and make this team. I'd still want Miller to succeed. But if somehow Lack and Markstrom were our only NHL goalies, I would compare Lack to James Reimer and Markstrom to Jonathan Bernier. Very similar goaltending situation I would say. Both young guys competing for the #1 position with one of them having a season under his belt. These two guys have the potential to become NHL starters, if not Elite goaltenders. It's really up to them to train harder and push their limits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 What you said is true but according to the cba and waiver eligible player cannot be loaned to another team until it has passed regular waiver. All this means that he cannot be loaned to another team until waiver period starts. 13.1 A Club shall not dispose of the services of any Player in which it has a proprietary interest by Loan to a club of another league without first having complied with the provisions of this Article. The Waivers that are recognized by this Agreement are Regular Waivers and Unconditional Waivers. 13.2 The "Playing Season Waiver Period" shall begin on the twelfth (12th) day prior to the start of the Regular Season and end on the day following the last day of a Club's Playing Season. Subject to the provisions of this Article, the rights to the services of a Player may be Loaned to a club of another league, upon fulfillment of the following conditions, except when elsewhere expressly prohibited: (a) Regular Waivers were requested and cleared during the Playing Season Waiver Period; and b. the Player has not played in ten (10) or more NHL Games cumulative since Regular Waivers on him were last cleared, and more than thirty (30) days cumulative on an NHL roster have not passed since Regular Waivers on him were last cleared. 13.12 Transfers To/From Minors. In the case of a Club moving a Player either to or from a minor league club, the following procedure shall be followed: (j)A Player may be Loaned to a club of any league affiliated with the League at any time up to 3:00 p.m. New York time of the fortieth (40th) day immediately preceding the final day of the Regular Season (the "Trade Deadline"). Following this period, no Player may be Loaned http://cdn.agilitycms.com/nhlpacom/PDF/NHL_NHLPA_2013_CBA.pdf Thanks for clearing that up hockeyking. It would appear then that the Canucks either intend to carry three goaltenders, deal Markstrom by July 27th, or (less likely) - believe he will clear waivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 Believe me Botchford isn't the first sports writer, or hockey analyst for that matter, to jump to a conclusion. It wasn't much of a leap that Markstrom would want out of this situation. A sports writer got something wrong? OMG! I don't get my panties in a knot over these things as it happens throughout sports journalism throughout the year. If I did I have crushed nuts. That's very interesting Baggins - and would be both more interesting and more effective apologism if Botchford had speculated that Markstrom may want out as a result of acquiring Miller. That's not what he did though - what he did was put words in Markstrom's mouth and claim that he requested/demanded a trade. Soft soap it all you want - it's mickey mouse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 I remember reading somewhere that teams can still make claims for players outside of the "in season" period that starts 12 days prior to the start of the season. I have no idea where I read that though but this debate was going on a few years back on CDC and I remember specifically searching for a long time trying to clarify this issue. For a team to make a claim outside the waiver eligibility period, a team would have to loan a player to their affiliate outside that period, which it appears they can't based upon what hockeyking has posted. There may be a crafty way around the problem though, which would be to keep an eye on the rosters of the other NHL teams hoping to find an opportune time when teams don't have room on their NHL rosters. Stanton might be a case in point. Chicago did subject him to waivers, and no doubt did not want to, but may have thought they'd done so at a time where he may slip through - and he did fall all the way to Vancouver before being claimed - about a half dozen spots from clearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbadcanucks Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 the full video is super creepy. I feel molested after watching how awkward this is. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvHOy2UUfoM#t=130 The execs at Upper Deck must be embarrassed by these clips...they are brutal. Who is this clown playing the Ron Cherry character? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brick Tamland Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 Believe me Botchford isn't the first sports writer, or hockey analyst for that matter, to jump to a conclusion. It wasn't much of a leap that Markstrom would want out of this situation. A sports writer got something wrong? OMG! I don't get my panties in a knot over these things as it happens throughout sports journalism throughout the year. If I did I have crushed nuts. however, just like the crazy lady last night who likely reads Botched, that's what happens to people when lies are spread. If we can stop it, why not. she asked about santo and said we will love you and hate you, depending on what lies botched spreads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 To be accurate,it is not what Benning publicly states that defines what Markstrom actually said or wants OR what Benning actually plans or wants to do with Markstrom. Additionally,without a Benning trade or Markstrom quote denying and/or affirming any trade request there is nothing left but Markstrom showing up for training camp. Yeah,he is expected to be at camp unless he is traded. Botchford reports the team has received interest from at least three teams, and general manager Jim Benning stated the Canucks are working towards finding a suitable deal, but with no guarantees. "That situation could work itself out over the summer,” Benning said. “The teams that are interested may have to move out another guy. We’re exploring that for Jacob. But if that doesn’t happen, Jacob comes to camp. He has a good attitude. He understands the situation." "Benning previously stated the team was "exploring" a trade for Markstrom, but perhaps the market simply wasn't there for a $1.2 million goalie with a career .896 save percentage." Ian McLaren http://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/534024 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.