Matt_T83 Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Ok, so I made a similar thread a year ago when the leafs claimed Corrado off waivers. However, I think it came off as a little bitter that we lost an asset, rather than seriously discussing the issue of waiver abuse and prospect hoarding. It's time the NHL made a rule for claiming players off waivers: they must play in 50% of games until they are UFA's, as well as 41 out of every 82 consecutive healthy games, with at least 10 minutes of ice time for a game to be counted as 'played'. If the team is not complying with this rule, the player would be allowed to demand assignment to the AHL, where they would then be exposed to waivers. This would give said player a chance to find a new home with a new team Obviously injuries would except this situation. If a player is injured for 22 out of 82 games, then must play in 30 out of the 60 healthy games. Some people might say this is harsh to 'force' teams to play a player... but they chose to pick that player up off waivers. No one is forcing teams to pick up players off waivers. If you don't want the player, you don't take them. If you change your mind, then you just waive them yourself. If you want them, you play them. Simple as that. The Frank Corrado situation makes it obvious that players in his situation need to be protected. He wants to play, but the leafs refuse play him or waive him (because they know he will be taken). They are just hoarding an asset and hurting his career growth. Also, he was an RFA and had no choice but to re-sign with the leafs. He's still an RFA next year, meaning he still can't control his own fate. EDIT: As 3KBieksa and a couple others have pointed out, you wouldn't want such a rule to hurt depth players. You could change this rule to a non-mandatory option for the player. Say if the player isn't in 25-50% of games, they have the option of forcing an AHL assignment. This way if a player is happy with their role and deployment, they can stay with the team as long as they like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3KBieksa Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Ummm I like your idea... But we do have a concept of depth player in the NHL so..... I don't think you 50% rule would work well, it would almost make these player's life harder as they keep hitting waiver then they would be travelling the whole season. 25% would be a better number I believe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerrDrFunk Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Weren't you the dude that wanted to go to war with the Leafs over claiming a #8 D-man off waivers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABNuck Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 It's an excellent idea...one I am certain that some of these players agents will bring up with the union reps before the next CBA...sadly, due to contract law, no changes would be made until this CBA expires (unless it get tossed into the ring as an Olympics negotiation red herring). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canada Hockey Place Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 I'm less concerned with the player more about the team getting compensated for a bogus waiver claim. If teams can claim players and lock them in the press box, what's to stop them from claiming players just for the sake of messing with another team's depth? It's intentional circumvention. On any other team I think they would play the player x amount of games just for optics and to avoid looking like they're just hording assets. But in TOR.... they don't even need to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerrDrFunk Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 25 minutes ago, Canada Hockey Place said: I'm less concerned with the player more about the team getting compensated for a bogus waiver claim. If teams can claim players and lock them in the press box, what's to stop them from claiming players just for the sake of messing with another team's depth? It's intentional circumvention. On any other team I think they would play the player x amount of games just for optics and to avoid looking like they're just hording assets. But in TOR.... they don't even need to do that. If that was actually an issue in the league, I would agree. But how many waiver pick-ups can you point to and honestly say "that was just to f**k with the other team"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Vandelay Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Problem with this specific situation is Toronto is Corrado's childhood team. I'm positive that has made Corrado less active in pursuing options outside of Toronto. IMO, the leafs have ruined his career. Played about 5-10 NHL games the last two seasons, hurting his chances of signing elsewhere next year. Islanders have done the same thing with Berube. I think the best way to fix the problem is to allow players to put themselves on waivers if they aren't being played (have a metric of games played in the last 30 days, whatever works). I don't care if teams get hurt by the current rules, but I do believe players are getting hurt because GMs are treating players like physical assets rather than employees/contractors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aqua59 Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 17 minutes ago, HerrDrFunk said: If that was actually an issue in the league, I would agree. But how many waiver pick-ups can you point to and honestly say "that was just to f**k with the other team"? Agreed, a team can't afford extra roster space just to f##k with another team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canada Hockey Place Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, HerrDrFunk said: If that was actually an issue in the league, I would agree. But how many waiver pick-ups can you point to and honestly say "that was just to f**k with the other team"? Kind of what I'm getting at. Generally teams don't mess with other teams. Out of respect, fear of retaliation or reprimand from the league. Not saying it's something to get upset about. But it was fishy at the time of the pick-up. And it's clearer now, ultimately this "waiver" pick-up messed with our team and did not benefit Corrado or the Leafs in anyway because they had more than ample D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckster19 Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Who waived Corrado? Gillis or Benning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saucypass Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Just now, canuckster19 said: Who waived Corrado? Gillis or Benning? Benning I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, canuckster19 said: Who waived Corrado? Gillis or Benning? Jim Benning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerrDrFunk Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 29 minutes ago, canuckster19 said: Who waived Corrado? Gillis or Benning? Benning. From what I understand, Carrado was almost a sure bet to make the team in the off season but then Hutton came in and outplayed him so noticeably that it forced management's hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 I don't mind the concept, but 50% seems a tad high and the ice time bit would likely have quite a bit of push back. I do agree that when it comes to waiver claims the players should have some level of protection in regards to their careers. I don't care that we lost Corrado, but I feel for him. Could see the NHLPA pushing for some kind of protection when the CBA expires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 i think this is a lot of energy and thought wasted over a marginal prospect the waiver concept is to ensure players do not get buried by a team but can move on corrado was moved on leafs claimed him but did not really use him who cares? do you really want him back? he'd be in utica if the canucks still had his rights as pointed out hutton out played him and so he became redundant corrado had ample time to develop and make the canuck team he even played at the end of one season and into the playoffs he failed to make that final development step he still is not an nhl player / regular let's not make more rules to somehow regulate marginal players it's really not important except in the minds of a few people who still believe in corrado Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 If Toronto wants to waste a roster spot on Corrado let them. He's a fringe NHLer and is being treated as such. Move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerrDrFunk Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 1 hour ago, Canada Hockey Place said: Kind of what I'm getting at. Generally teams don't mess with other teams. Out of respect, fear of retaliation or reprimand from the league. Not saying it's something to get upset about. But it was fishy at the time of the pick-up. And it's clearer now, ultimately this "waiver" pick-up messed with our team and did not benefit Corrado or the Leafs in anyway because they had more than ample D. Not really....the Leafs were actually pretty thin on D when he was picked up and it was looking like Corrado was going to be #7-8 on the Canucks at best. I really don't see how losing a fringe NHLer messed with us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Coming up with a rule here is just overthinking the issue. This totally sucks for Corrado and I would not blame him if he asked to be moved somewhere to play, be it the NHL or AHL. 23 is too young to be an 8th defenseman, IMO. Preferably it's someone you bring in, knowing their role (Alberts, Biega). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NHL'er Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 If Corrado was truly good to enough to play in the NHL on a regular basis, he would be playing in the NHL on a regular basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammertime Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Hahaha the league would never make a ruling against Toronto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.