|
Post by SteveUL on Jul 12, 2007 9:14:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Jul 12, 2007 9:22:49 GMT -5
I can live with the player having to clear OHL or WHL waivers first ... but I think it is pretty stupid that they also have to clear Q waivers - you could end up helping your rival by even trying to bring in an FA, which is silly.
|
|
|
Post by Cristobal Huet on Jul 12, 2007 9:26:31 GMT -5
It seems like the Q just bent over and took it up the ass on that one.
The kids will be the ones to suffer, especially the ones like DiDomenico that got an opportunity here that they may not have gotten in the OHL.
The CHL should have waivers for all 19 and 20 year olds that are cut, once a player passes OHL waivers at 19 or 20 he can then go to other leagues.
17 and 18 year olds not on protected lists should not have to pass waivers.
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Jul 12, 2007 9:36:59 GMT -5
I can live with the player having to clear OHL or WHL waivers first ... but I think it is pretty stupid that they also have to clear Q waivers - you could end up helping your rival by even trying to bring in an FA, which is silly. I have a feeling that rule won't make any difference. Stealing players like that will be frowned upon by GM's and GMs playing that greasy card may find themselves with no trading partners when the trading periods open. Its almost like reneging on a trade. Its also a two way street ... burn a team by stealing an ONT kid off waivers and you'll find the tables turned on your team when you are looking at bringing in an FA. Its a lot like what Edmonton just did to Buffalo with Vanek ... I don't think that type of thing is going to sit well in the NHL amongst the GMs ... sort of an unwritten rule even though it is perfectly within the rules to do so. I think Lowe may regret he did that ... but he was trying to make a point to the NHL and so it may be forgiven. Bobby Clarke did that last year and I don't think it sat very well with any of the GMs. The thing about waivers though is that you have to sign the kid to a card to get him off waivers ... you can't just grab him and let him practice with the team and then cut him ... you have to sign him ... and that burns a card and costs money ($600 or something like that to grab a player off waivers) ... and it also would mean you have to have room on your 50 man list. My understanding is that it is a CHL rule ... so the Q GM's can have their own unwritten rule that you don't grab a kid off waivers that another team has done all the legwork to bring in. I wouldn't put it past a few of the morally weak Q GMs though.
|
|
|
Post by seahawk on Jul 12, 2007 10:20:41 GMT -5
Wouldn't that be considered collusion? I am sure that if no other team claims players for a few years the CHL will look into it.
|
|
MikeC
Full Member
Posts: 454
|
Post by MikeC on Jul 12, 2007 10:24:05 GMT -5
The thing about waivers though is that you have to sign the kid to a card to get him off waivers ... you can't just grab him and let him practice with the team and then cut him ... you have to sign him ... and that burns a card and costs money ($600 or something like that to grab a player off waivers) ... and it also would mean you have to have room on your 50 man list. Isn't that only for 19 year olds that are claimed off waivers? However, I think you're right in that teams are NOT going to steal a FA just to block another team from getting him. If he doesn't want to play for that team, it will cost them a spot on their 50 man list plus the hatred of the team he stole him from.
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Jul 12, 2007 10:36:44 GMT -5
Wouldn't that be considered collusion? I am sure that if no other team claims players for a few years the CHL will look into it. And then what ? Fine each team for passing on a Jr A calibre kid ? Is the CHL going to force the Q teams to grab crappy players ? Nobody gets harmed in this type of collusion ... the OHL/WHL already passed on the player. Why would anybody care if there was collusion or not ? Collusion is not a crime ... its an issue when collusion causes unfairness to a certain individual or group.
|
|
MikeC
Full Member
Posts: 454
|
Post by MikeC on Jul 12, 2007 10:40:56 GMT -5
The kids will be the ones to suffer, especially the ones like DiDomenico that got an opportunity here that they may not have gotten in the OHL. I really don't think it would have hurt a guy like DiDo or Giroux. They had just been passed over in their 2nd consecutive draft. I don't think a team is going to claim him on waivers a couple of months later. As for getting through Q waivers, I think it will depend a lot on how long that process is. If it's a 24hr waiver period, I think most teams will pass on the player without even giving it a second look. Imagine this situation in, say, Baie Comeau: "Mr Dubois, Gatineau wants to bring in a FA from Ontario" "Who?" "Paul Byron" "Who the hell is that?" "I dunno, some small 140lbs kid who went undrafted twice in the OHL" "Screw it. Let him go". Now if they have a few days or a week to look it over, they could probably talk to some scouts, dig up a few years worth of stats, get some video on the player, and really go over it with a fine-toothed comb. Even then though, they'd still have to think the player is better than someone who they already have on their 50 man roster. I think a lot of teams won't bother with the hassle. Now a guy like Matt Marquardt would have been snapped up by the first team in the Q waiver draft. Then again, he probably would have just signed with the OHL team of his choosing if he knew he would have to get by 11 Q teams before he could go to Moncton.
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Jul 12, 2007 10:45:03 GMT -5
The kids will be the ones to suffer, especially the ones like DiDomenico that got an opportunity here that they may not have gotten in the OHL. Now a guy like Matt Marquardt would have been snapped up by the first team in the Q waiver draft. Then again, he probably would have just signed with the OHL team of his choosing if he knew he would have to get by 11 Q teams before he could go to Moncton. Marquardt would have never cleared OHL waivers.
|
|
MikeC
Full Member
Posts: 454
|
Post by MikeC on Jul 12, 2007 10:45:45 GMT -5
Now a guy like Matt Marquardt would have been snapped up by the first team in the Q waiver draft. Then again, he probably would have just signed with the OHL team of his choosing if he knew he would have to get by 11 Q teams before he could go to Moncton. Marquardt would have never cleared OHL waivers. He was 18, he wouldn't have had to.
|
|
|
Post by forrest on Jul 12, 2007 11:06:46 GMT -5
I can live with the player having to clear OHL or WHL waivers first ... but I think it is pretty stupid that they also have to clear Q waivers - you could end up helping your rival by even trying to bring in an FA, which is silly. I have a feeling that rule won't make any difference. Stealing players like that will be frowned upon by GM's and GMs playing that greasy card may find themselves with no trading partners when the trading periods open. Its almost like reneging on a trade. Its also a two way street ... burn a team by stealing an ONT kid off waivers and you'll find the tables turned on your team when you are looking at bringing in an FA. Its a lot like what Edmonton just did to Buffalo with Vanek ... I don't think that type of thing is going to sit well in the NHL amongst the GMs ... sort of an unwritten rule even though it is perfectly within the rules to do so. I think Lowe may regret he did that ... but he was trying to make a point to the NHL and so it may be forgiven. Bobby Clarke did that last year and I don't think it sat very well with any of the GMs.The thing about waivers though is that you have to sign the kid to a card to get him off waivers ... you can't just grab him and let him practice with the team and then cut him ... you have to sign him ... and that burns a card and costs money ($600 or something like that to grab a player off waivers) ... and it also would mean you have to have room on your 50 man list. My understanding is that it is a CHL rule ... so the Q GM's can have their own unwritten rule that you don't grab a kid off waivers that another team has done all the legwork to bring in. I wouldn't put it past a few of the morally weak Q GMs though. The difference is Lowe made an offer that made sense and was pretty much a no brainer for Buffalo to match. Vanek was worth 7 Million a year by NHL standards. The offer Bobby Clarke made for Ryan Kelser was different, Kelser wasn't worth the 1.9 million he offered. He tried to buy a player from a team who had salary cap issues. However, I agree it will probably be frowned upon to take an out-of-territory player from a team. Besides, usually, out-of-territory players are gamble and we only see 1 every 4 or 5 ends up having a big impact.
|
|