[Waivers] 23 players - Sept. 26, 2017 (1 claimed)

[JM_]

1 minute ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said:

I think the rule is once you make a claim on waivers, the player has to stay active on the roster for 30 days before he can be sent down again.  And because he didn't clear the first time, or by waiver rules has spent 30 days on the NHL roster, he would have to go through waivers again to go down to the minors. Thus meaning he would be taking a spot from someone like Brock, Jake, Anton or others

unless we go with 7D for the first 30 days. I know, its a stretch. Slow day. 

[CRAZY_4_NAZZY]

2 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

unless we go with 7D for the first 30 days. I know, its a stretch. Slow day. 

its possible haha, but considering how Benning is emphatic about keeping 8D because of our traveling schedule, I would assume he would only take on 13 forwards.  

[JamesB]

5 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Couldn't we claim him and then turn around and try to send him to Utica anyway? If someone else gets him fine but he could be back in our system. If he could elevate his game the way no one in Calgary thought Baer could it would be a nice thing for us. 

I think you are right about this and I did consider it. I checked out the rule about obligations of of the claiming team and came up with this:

 

"Once a team claims a player from waivers, it may not trade that player unless it first offers him to any other teams who made waiver claims for him. If the claiming team places the player on waivers in the same season and his original team claims him, the team may send the player to the AHL without placing him on waivers again unless he meets the criteria for waiver expiration below."

 

In other words, there is nothing that stops the Canucks from attempting what you suggest. However, there are two negatives. First, I think it p**** offs other GMs. Picking up a guy a promptly putting him on waivers (as the Canucks would have to do with Shink) would probably be viewed as violating the GM "gentleman's agreement". I also don't think it is good for anyone's moral to do that and it is not really Benning's style. Shink would probably feel pretty bad about it. I think the idea is that when you pick up a guy off waiver you are kind of obligated to give him a good look before sending him down, and I don't think the Canucks have roster room for that.

 

But I admit that your suggestion is appealing.

[oldnews]

In fairness to Shinkaruk, Calgary acquired him when he fit their greatest need - and then wound up drafting Tkachuk, which somewhat sealed his fate as a tweener that would have a hard time making the Flames.

 

Of that list, Poirier is the most interesting imo - if there were no Vanek/Burmistrov in the picture, I'd consider taking him (pretty skilled, gritty guy for a bottom six) - and would still give it a thought (just haven't seen any of him this year).

[Gaudette Celly]

it would be a hilarious for Benning (if he were that sort of guy) to claim both Corrado and Shinkaruk, to throw it in the face of the #assetmanagement buffoons like TMZ1040 (Sekeres in particular), "Triple-S Granlund" Tony Gallagher, and the whole fan subculture that rode their whinging.

 

...then immediately toss them both on waivers to assign them to Utica, for someone else to pick up.  If they aren't, then we just have more Utica depth.  But moot point -- Benning has been vindicated and wouldn't do such a thing.  And yes, two out of the three Calgary 1st rounders are now busted, only Klimchuk remains.

[JM_]

7 minutes ago, JamesB said:

I think you are right about this and I did consider it. I checked out the rule about obligations of of the claiming team and came up with this:

 

"Once a team claims a player from waivers, it may not trade that player unless it first offers him to any other teams who made waiver claims for him. If the claiming team places the player on waivers in the same season and his original team claims him, the team may send the player to the AHL without placing him on waivers again unless he meets the criteria for waiver expiration below."

 

In other words, there is nothing that stops the Canucks from attempting what you suggest. However, there are two negatives. First, I think it p**** offs other GMs. Picking up a guy a promptly putting him on waivers (as the Canucks would have to do with Shink) would probably be viewed as violating the GM "gentleman's agreement". I also don't think it is good for anyone's moral to do that and it is not really Benning's style. Shink would probably feel pretty bad about it. I think the idea is that when you pick up a guy off waiver you are kind of obligated to give him a good look before sending him down, and I don't think the Canucks have roster room for that.

 

But I admit that your suggestion is appealing.

plus he's the kind of player that Calgary seems to like to fail on. Baer, Shink, Granny... its actually a potential line for us  I guess I have more hope for HS to ultimately be an NHL player than Boucher as well. Rodin's knee also concerns me, he may be pain free but I wonder how much range of motion he's lost, so far he hasn't really looked great but lets see what he does in the last 2 pre-season games, he may just need some more conditioning. 

[Toews]

Poirier has had issues with substance abuse which he appears to now have put behind him. There is some promise there but he needs time to figure things out in the AHL.

[Down by the River]

I'd be happy to see Jordan Nolan never in the NHL again. 

 

Bracken Kearns belongs on the all-name team.

 

Poirier, Wotherspoon, and Shink all AHL'ed by Calgary 

[PhillipBlunt]

[Trebreh]

Pick up Nolan or Randell plssss! 

[Kurt Nirvanagut]

56 minutes ago, ThaManbeast said:

For who???

 

The Canucks shouldn't claim any of these players. Are we really going to claim Shinkaruk to take a spot from guys like Boeser or Virtanen?

AHL? I dunno. I DON'T KNOW. 

[Xbox]

Can we give Benning some credit plz? He read that Shinkaruk situation perfectly and fleeced CGY of an actual NHL player.

[nergish]

14 minutes ago, zzbottom said:

AHL? I dunno. I DON'T KNOW. 

Claim him. Immediately put him on waivers. Watch him clear.

Play him with Dahlen. 



Profit?....

[JM_]

11 minutes ago, Xbox said:

Can we give Benning some credit plz? He read that Shinkaruk situation perfectly and fleeced CGY of an actual NHL player.

to be fair, Jim didn't think Shink was garbage, but needed AHL seasoning.

 

 

[pluralsight]

37 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

it would be a hilarious for Benning (if he were that sort of guy) to claim both Corrado and Shinkaruk, to throw it in the face of the #assetmanagement buffoons like TMZ1040 (Sekeres in particular), "Triple-S Granlund" Tony Gallagher, and the whole fan subculture that rode their whinging.

 

...then immediately toss them both on waivers to assign them to Utica, for someone else to pick up.  If they aren't, then we just have more Utica depth.  But moot point -- Benning has been vindicated and wouldn't do such a thing.  And yes, two out of the three Calgary 1st rounders are now busted, only Klimchuk remains.

And Klimchuk has yet to play a game in the NHL, nearing bust status himself. 

[Xbox]

20 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

to be fair, Jim didn't think Shink was garbage, but needed AHL seasoning.

 

 

Well he isn't going to come right out and say it lol. If he thought Shinkaruk was a career AHLer he isn't going to straight up say that. You trade the player while he has value which is exactly what he did.

[EagleShield]

If Calgary have offered Shinkaruk to the league for nothing, we have won the trade and essentially got Granlund and Baertschi for a 2nd (that we probably would have taken Brisebois with anyway).

 

I was one of the people who was horrified by the trade, but how wrong I was.

[Wilbur]

1 hour ago, ThaManbeast said:

For who???

 

The Canucks shouldn't claim any of these players. Are we really going to claim Shinkaruk to take a spot from guys like Boeser or Virtanen?

Bingo.  I think sometimes people forget waivers isn't for picking people up for AHL depth, it's to give veterans one last shot at sticking to a NHL team.  So, unless one is planning to keep the player on the NHL roster, might as well forget about it.

[Ossi Vaananen]

No claims yet. Though NYR and FLA still have only 11 NHL forwards. I'm waiting on them before we can consider exposing Rodin. 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

Think Shinkaruk had a bad camp so he probably earned that demotion - but don't lose sight of the fact making the squad of a team that just finished 10th overall in the league is a bit different that one that might be a lottery pick team this upcoming season.  

 

In the end, the Canucks got a NHL player out of the deal that is still has room to grow - which is the important thing (other than the joy in seeing the Flames come out on the short-end of the stick in a trade).