Should waiver rules be amended?

[Matt_T83]

Title says it all.  I'll use the example of Frank Corrado, since this is a Canucks forum and we're most familiar with his example (but other players have faced this issue as well).  For those who live under a rock, the Canucks waived Corrado because his development is slow and he needs to play to develop (in the AHL).  Because Corrado was waiver eligible, he had to clear waivers to be sent to the Canucks farm team, the Utica comets.  He did not clear waivers, and was claimed by the Maple Leafs.

The present situation:  Frank Corrado has yet to play a game for the Leafs over one month later.  Not only that, the Leafs sent him down to the AHL for a "conditioning assignment", which was of questionable legality.  Ultimately the league did nothing and allowed it.  But now his conditioning assignment is over, and he's sitting in the press box.

The hockey writers recently wrote this article: http://thehockeywriters.com/leafs-daily-frank-corrado-getting-bad-deal-game-preview/ in which they talk about Corrado's 'raw deal'.  They raise the question that perhaps the waiver rules should be amended.  The entire purpose of the waiver rules is to give players every chance to play in the NHL.  In theory, if you claim a player off waivers, you are supposed to play them.  But this is merely the understanding, and there are no actual rules enforcing this.

Thus, should the waiver rules be amended?  Perhaps 1) players claimed off waivers are ineligible for conditioning assignments for a 2-3 month period after they are claimed and 2) you must play players claimed off waivers in 50% of your games (for the first 20-30 games).  This would force teams to play players claimed by waivers.  If you fail to meet these conditions, then player may be re-claimed by the team that lost them and, if the player's original team wishes, be sent directly to the AHL.  Also, teams failing to make these conditions should face a penalty (because players are real people, and Frank Corrado is actually suffering from this situation; I guarantee he'd much rather play in the AHL for Utica than his current situation).

TLDR: Should the waiver rules be amended? Perhaps players claimed off waivers should be ineligible for AHL 'conditioning assignments' for a period of months after being claimed.  Also, perhaps there should be a requirement that teams play a claimed player in 50% of their games, assuring NHL play time.  Teams failing to meet this condition would have to relinquish the player and would face penalties.

[Western Red]

Frank? Are you still wanting to be a Canuck?

[Matt_T83]

Yes of course I do.  How did you know I was Frank Corrado?  Was it that obvious?

[Alflives]

Title says it all.  I'll use the example of Frank Corrado, since this is a Canucks forum and we're most familiar with his example (but other players have faced this issue as well).  For those who live under a rock, the Canucks waived Corrado because his development is slow and he needs to play to develop (in the AHL).  Because Corrado was waiver eligible, he had to clear waivers to be sent to the Canucks farm team, the Utica comets.  He did not clear waivers, and was claimed by the Maple Leafs.

The present situation:  Frank Corrado has yet to play a game for the Leafs over one month later.  Not only that, the Leafs sent him down to the AHL for a "conditioning assignment", which was of questionable legality.  Ultimately the league did nothing and allowed it.  But now his conditioning assignment is over, and he's sitting in the press box.

The hockey writers recently wrote this article: http://thehockeywriters.com/leafs-daily-frank-corrado-getting-bad-deal-game-preview/ in which they talk about Corrado's 'raw deal'.  They raise the question that perhaps the waiver rules should be amended.  The entire purpose of the waiver rules is to give players every chance to play in the NHL.  In theory, if you claim a player off waivers, you are supposed to play them.  But this is merely the understanding, and there are no actual rules enforcing this.

Thus, should the waiver rules be amended?  Perhaps 1) players claimed off waivers are ineligible for conditioning assignments for a 2-3 month period after they are claimed and 2) you must play players claimed off waivers in 50% of your games (for the first 20-30 games).  This would force teams to play players claimed by waivers.  If you fail to meet these conditions, then player may be re-claimed by the team that lost them and, if the player's original team wishes, be sent directly to the AHL.  Also, teams failing to make these conditions should face a penalty (because players are real people, and Frank Corrado is actually suffering from this situation; I guarantee he'd much rather play in the AHL for Utica than his current situation).

TLDR: Should the waiver rules be amended? Perhaps players claimed off waivers should be ineligible for AHL 'conditioning assignments' for a period of months after being claimed.  Also, perhaps there should be a requirement that teams play a claimed player in 50% of their games, assuring NHL play time.  Teams failing to meet this condition would have to relinquish the player and would face penalties.

if it includes punishing the Leafs, I'm all for it.

[Matt_T83]

if it includes punishing the Leafs, I'm all for it.

Unfortunately I think even if the waiver rules were amended to include penalties, the Leafs would still somehow get a pass when they broke said rules.  They make the NHL too much money, and we all know Bettman is a whore for money.

[Alflives]

Unfortunately I think even if the waiver rules were amended to include penalties, the Leafs would still somehow get a pass when they broke said rules.  They make the NHL too much money, and we all know Bettman is a whore for money.

that's a rather nice metaphor.  

[elvis15]

Your previous thread wasn't good enough?

Another imperfect NHL process - waivers

[RonMexico]

As it's part of the collective agreement, you need both sides agreeing to change it....for that matter you need both sides to care. I haven't heard one peep out of either side claiming the process is bunk or that they have a problem with it.

In other words, if the league and it's PA have yet to raise an issue with it, why do you care so passionately to make the same thread twice?