HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Edmonton Oilers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=38)
-   -   Recalled/Assigned: Oilers Reclaim Taylor Chorney; Assigned to OKC (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1025685)

oilers4life5 11-09-2011 01:27 PM

Oilers Reclaim Taylor Chorney; Assigned to OKC
 
Chorney is on waivers from St.Louis would you guys claim him and send him to OKC?
I would the D in OKC could use some help and he may become a servicable D-man in the future.

Your thoughts?

This was on twitter from Dan Tencer today about 1 hour ago!

Section337 11-09-2011 01:28 PM

As he has been passed by many prospects, it is not worth adding his contract.

joestevens29 11-09-2011 01:32 PM

If they think they can use help in OKC I don't see why not.

Krut 11-09-2011 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joestevens29 (Post 39187183)
If they think they can use help in OKC I don't see why not.

Agreed, and he's not too bad of an option on a call up if it came down to it either.

aspin 11-09-2011 01:41 PM

After 30 days the Oilers no longer have the right of first refusal. The Oilers are in the pecking order just like everyone else and if the Oilers claim him and send him down he will be on waivers again. This is exactly what St. Louis had in mind all along. They knew that if they put Chorney on waivers prior to the 30 days that Edmonton would just take him back and he would not have to pass through waivers to go through OKC. St. Louis can them just grab him and send him to the AHL with no problems.

Perfect_Drug 11-09-2011 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aspin (Post 39187489)
After 30 days the Oilers no longer have the right of first refusal. The Oilers are in the pecking order just like everyone else and if the Oilers claim him and send him down he will be on waivers again. This is exactly what St. Louis had in mind all along. They knew that if they put Chorney on waivers prior to the 30 days that Edmonton would just take him back and he would not have to pass through waivers to go through OKC. St. Louis can them just grab him and send him to the AHL with no problems.

Saint Louis are a bunch of sons of *****es.

:/

OneMoreAstronaut 11-09-2011 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aspin (Post 39187489)
After 30 days the Oilers no longer have the right of first refusal. The Oilers are in the pecking order just like everyone else and if the Oilers claim him and send him down he will be on waivers again. This is exactly what St. Louis had in mind all along. They knew that if they put Chorney on waivers prior to the 30 days that Edmonton would just take him back and he would not have to pass through waivers to go through OKC. St. Louis can them just grab him and send him to the AHL with no problems.

You've got it backwards, I think. The Oilers waived him first, St Louis claimed and then waived again... therefore, as I understand it, the Oilers have first crack at him and can send him straight down.

Reimer 11-09-2011 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneMoreAstronaut (Post 39187595)
You've got it backwards, I think. The Oilers waived him first, St Louis claimed and then waived again... therefore, as I understand it, the Oilers have first crack at him and can send him straight down.

Unless this 30-day rule actually exists, then he's got a valid point.

joestevens29 11-09-2011 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aspin (Post 39187489)
After 30 days the Oilers no longer have the right of first refusal. The Oilers are in the pecking order just like everyone else and if the Oilers claim him and send him down he will be on waivers again. This is exactly what St. Louis had in mind all along. They knew that if they put Chorney on waivers prior to the 30 days that Edmonton would just take him back and he would not have to pass through waivers to go through OKC. St. Louis can them just grab him and send him to the AHL with no problems.

We placed him on waivers on the 10th though, he was claimed on the 11th. Is that 30 days in the CBA?

aspin 11-09-2011 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneMoreAstronaut (Post 39187595)
You've got it backwards, I think. The Oilers waived him first, St Louis claimed and then waived again... therefore, as I understand it, the Oilers have first crack at him and can send him straight down.

Sorry, I don't have it backwards man. This was talked about a few weeks ago. Check it out:


http://bluenotezone.com/2011/10/11/c...-depth-issues/


http://www.coppernblue.com/2011/10/1...taylor-chorney

Reimer 11-09-2011 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joestevens29 (Post 39187839)
We placed him on waivers on the 10th though, he was claimed on the 11th. Is that 30 days in the CBA?

Yeah I would think it would. He was added to their roster on the 11th and today is the 9th and with October having 31 days today would be the 30th day he's been on their roster.

spot 11-09-2011 01:54 PM

Who cares. We don't need to add contracts, we need to subtract them.
Chorney is not a fit for this org anymore. IMO Plante should be out the door really soon as well.

aspin 11-09-2011 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spot (Post 39188059)
Who cares. We don't need to add contracts, we need to subtract them.
Chorney is not a fit for this org anymore. IMO Plante should be out the door really soon as well.

I have always been rooting for Plante. Not sure he will ever become a regular in Edmonton (not likely) but he is exactly what OKC needs. He is their most physical defenceman and becoming a leader down there.

nvan97 11-09-2011 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oilers4life5 (Post 39187027)
Chorney is on waivers from St.Louis would you guys claim him and send him to OKC?
I would the D in OKC could use some help and he may become a servicable D-man in the future.

Your thoughts?

This was on twitter from Dan Tencer today about 1 hour ago!

Why do the 9-2-1, 1st place Barons need any help on D? They have the 4th best GA in the league.

Vik 11-09-2011 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aspin (Post 39187849)
Sorry, I don't have it backwards man. This was talked about a few weeks ago. Check it out:


http://bluenotezone.com/2011/10/11/c...-depth-issues/


http://www.coppernblue.com/2011/10/1...taylor-chorney

I'd say both of those are misinformed. I'm guessing they're misreading the one passage of the CBA because the only thing 30 days has to do with anything is after players have passed through waivers they can be called up and sent down without being subject to waivers again until they reach 30 days and 10 games cumulative. There's nothing about a team owning a player after 30 days (or not that I've seen). If you want proof, look at Steve MacIntyre. We claimed him from the Panthers on September 30th, they claimed him back on November 10th and sent him straight to the AHL.

oilers4life5 11-09-2011 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nvan97 (Post 39188391)
Why do the 9-2-1, 1st place Barons need any help on D? They have the 4th best GA in the league.

Just in terms of depth if Injury's were to occur

aspin 11-09-2011 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vik (Post 39188563)
I'd say both of those are misinformed. I'm guessing they're misreading the one passage of the CBA because the only thing 30 days has to do with anything is after players have passed through waivers they can be called up and sent down without being subject to waivers again until they reach 30 days and 10 games cumulative. There's nothing about a team owning a player after 30 days (or not that I've seen). If you want proof, look at Steve MacIntyre. We claimed him from the Panthers on September 30th, they claimed him back on November 10th and sent him straight to the AHL.


Not exactly sure how to interpret 13.5 in the link below, however, do you really think it is just a coincidence that it is exactly 30 days when St. Louis sent him down?

http://www.nhlfa.com/CBA/cba_agreement13.asp

Actually read 13.20.

joestevens29 11-09-2011 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aspin (Post 39188843)
Not exactly sure how to interpret 13.5 in the link below, however, do you really think it is just a coincidence that it is exactly 30 days when St. Louis sent him down?

http://www.nhlfa.com/CBA/cba_agreement13.asp

Actually read 13.20.

Why is that article talking about a waiver draft and season from the mid-90's.

Ya that link is ****ed. Waivers don't last 48 hours. It's 24 hours.

Neilio 11-09-2011 02:21 PM

I was never sold on Chorney. St. Louis likes him, let them have him.

Good skater, poor defense and not much in the way of point production. It always surprised me how long he was able to hang around.

Vik 11-09-2011 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aspin (Post 39188843)
Not exactly sure how to interpret 13.5 in the link below, however, do you really think it is just a coincidence that it is exactly 30 days when St. Louis sent him down?

http://www.nhlfa.com/CBA/cba_agreement13.asp

Actually read 13.20.

13.20 is exactly what I assume people are misinterpreting. What that's saying is that if Team B claims a player off waivers from Team A and, within the same season, places him back on waivers and he is successfully claimed back by Team A, Team A can send him directly to their a minor league affiliate without subjecting him to waivers again. They (Team A) may also keep him on their active roster for up to 30 days and 10 games cumulative without having to place him back on waivers. Basically, if you re-claim the player, they can be treated as having cleared waivers.

OneMoreAstronaut 11-09-2011 02:27 PM

[deleted]

oilers4life5 11-09-2011 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vik (Post 39189209)
13.20 is exactly what I assume people are misinterpreting. What that's saying is that if Team B claims a player off waivers from Team A and, within the same season, places him back on waivers and he is successfully claimed back by Team A, Team A can send him directly to their a minor league affiliate without subjecting him to waivers again. They (Team A) may also keep him on their active roster for up to 30 days and 10 games cumulative without having to place him back on waivers. Basically, if you re-claim the player, they can be treated as having cleared waivers.

This is also how I understand this article :handclap:

Tarpit* 11-09-2011 02:53 PM

Does OKC need D, from the looks of things they haven't been doing too bad. Also I could see a couple of other teams taking a shot at him. I would pass, the Oilers need the contract space.

Reimer 11-09-2011 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vik (Post 39189209)
13.20 is exactly what I assume people are misinterpreting. What that's saying is that if Team B claims a player off waivers from Team A and, within the same season, places him back on waivers and he is successfully claimed back by Team A, Team A can send him directly to their a minor league affiliate without subjecting him to waivers again. They (Team A) may also keep him on their active roster for up to 30 days and 10 games cumulative without having to place him back on waivers. Basically, if you re-claim the player, they can be treated as having cleared waivers.

This of course is based on no other team putting in a claim for said player.

Seachd 11-09-2011 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reimer (Post 39190431)
This of course is based on no other team putting in a claim for said player.

Yes. A team losing a player on waivers does not get first crack at him when he's waived again later in the season. It's a common myth though.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:32 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.