HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The Business of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=124)
-   -   NHL/AHL Affiliates - How Does The Process Work? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1391969)

WYFR 04-01-2013 03:57 PM

NHL/AHL Affiliates - How Does The Process Work?
 
In light if the Canucks buying Peoria from the Blues, I'm trying to figure out how the buying/selling of AHL teams works. The 'Nucks already have the Chicago Wolves and I'm sure they're not allowed to own multiple AHL teams so what do they do now? Sell the Wolves, give them to the Blues, or what? Also I assume the players/coaches of Peoria still belong to the Blues, correct?

Hero 04-01-2013 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FolignofortheCalder (Post 62931423)
In light if the Canucks buying Peoria from the Blues, I'm trying to figure out how the buying/selling of AHL teams works. The 'Nucks already have the Chicago Wolves and I'm sure they're not allowed to own multiple AHL teams so what do they do now? Sell the Wolves, give them to the Blues, or what? Also I assume the players/coaches of Peoria still belong to the Blues, correct?

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2...se-from-blues/

The players/staff all still belong to the same NHL franchise. So all the Wolves players would move to Peoria and vise versa, if they do an official switch.

Might be some lag though as they sort out all the questions regarding Vancouver moving into the Heat's city and the following changes that would need to happen to sort everything out.

WYFR 04-01-2013 04:09 PM

so do the wolves go to peoria? or just no more AHL team there?

cheswick 04-01-2013 04:19 PM

I'm pretty sure that the Canucks don't own the Wolves. Prior to the Jets moving to Winnipeg the Canucks minor league affliate was the Manitoba Moose which wasn't owned by the Canucks either. It was owned by True North which bough the Jets and relcoated the Moose to St Johns to become the Jets farm team.

This necessitated the Canucks finding a new farm affliation which they signed with the Wolves, which were previously Atlanta's minor league affliate.



Quote:

Originally Posted by FolignofortheCalder (Post 62932319)
so do the wolves go to peoria? or just no more AHL team there?

The Canucks don't own the Wolves so it doesn't move them. The Wolves would now no longer be the farm team for the Canucks. They would need a new affliation, likely St. Louis.

As for Perioria, the Canucks could relocate that team. The Rumours are moving them to Abbotsford which would be closer to Vancouver, but there is currently a team there that would need to be relocated. The current Abbotsford team is owned by the Flames.

WYFR 04-01-2013 04:25 PM

oh ok so the Canucks went from working with the Wolves as an AHL affiliate to owning the Rivermen as an AHL affliate/farm team. never really understood the NHL-AHL relationships. thanks guys

Major4Boarding 04-01-2013 04:38 PM

Good spot for you to peruse through F4TC in the future

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=46

LadyStanley 04-01-2013 04:49 PM

Check the stickied BOH Reference thread. The franchise information table includes known ownership by NHL teams of their AHL (and/or ECHL) affiliates.

Chicago (and Abbotsford) AHL franchise(s) are owned by local interests.

HansH 04-01-2013 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyStanley (Post 62936397)
Check the stickied BOH Reference thread. The franchise information table includes known ownership by NHL teams of their AHL (and/or ECHL) affiliates.

Chicago (and Abbotsford) AHL franchise(s) are owned by local interests.

To make it more confusing, I think the Flames own 50% of the Heat, and 50% is owned by local interests -- or some kind of confusing franchise lease situation.

gstommylee 04-01-2013 08:23 PM

I'm curious to know if Seattle gets a team who's AHL farm system it be for them.

IU Hawks fan 04-02-2013 12:12 AM

The Wolves aren't owned by the Canucks, they're owned by 2 Chicago businessmen. Don Levin and Buddy Meyers.

Holden Caulfield 04-02-2013 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gstommylee (Post 62956447)
I'm curious to know if Seattle gets a team who's AHL farm system it be for them.

Well that would depend. If Seattle got Phoenix, they would inherit the agreement Phoenix has with Portland Pirates.

If Seattle were to get an expansion team, it's uncertain. It is likely the AHL would expand to stay even with NHL teams, but ownership and location would have to be found at that point.

gstommylee 04-02-2013 12:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holden Caulfield (Post 62992257)
Well that would depend. If Seattle got Phoenix, they would inherit the agreement Phoenix has with Portland Pirates.

If Seattle were to get an expansion team, it's uncertain. It is likely the AHL would expand to stay even with NHL teams, but ownership and location would have to be found at that point.

Thanks. Portland pirates i can see there being some confusion with that in the northwest for a while.

danishh 04-02-2013 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IU Hawks fan (Post 62991941)
The Wolves aren't owned by the Canucks, they're owned by 2 Chicago businessmen. Don Levin and Buddy Meyers.

which, btw, makes this new st. louis-chicago arrangement more interesting, because if levin ends up owning Seattle NHL (and it appears he's the frontrunner), he'd likely want them to affiliate with the wolves.

gstommylee 04-02-2013 12:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by danishh (Post 62993079)
which, btw, makes this new st. louis-chicago arrangement more interesting, because if levin ends up owning Seattle NHL (and it appears he's the frontrunner), he'd likely want them to affiliate with the wolves.

Makes sense to me.

CHRDANHUTCH 04-03-2013 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by danishh (Post 62993079)
which, btw, makes this new st. louis-chicago arrangement more interesting, because if levin ends up owning Seattle NHL (and it appears he's the frontrunner), he'd likely want them to affiliate with the wolves.

not under the current scenario, danishh:

If Levin moves up he inherits the existing PDC w/ Portland, just as TNSE DOES WHEN THEY acquired Atlanta AND SHIFTED the Moose to NFLD/Labrador (existing 2 yr PDC) IRREGARDLESS of the lease w/ the arena. Levin loses his rights to the WOLVES if he shifts leagues.

wildcat48 04-03-2013 08:56 AM

Oh boy... :shakehead

HamiltonOHL 04-03-2013 10:39 AM

the person who asked about spliting ahl teams, remember back when oilers didint have a ahl squad they had i believe 2-3 farm teams to split their players between, wilkes, iowa stars and milwaukee i believe it was

danishh 04-03-2013 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH (Post 63114219)
not under the current scenario, danishh:

If Levin moves up he inherits the existing PDC w/ Portland, just as TNSE DOES WHEN THEY acquired Atlanta AND SHIFTED the Moose to NFLD/Labrador (existing 2 yr PDC) IRREGARDLESS of the lease w/ the arena. Levin loses his rights to the WOLVES if he shifts leagues.

obviously, like TNSE did, he'd try to work out a 'trade' with st. louis, where they shift to portland and seattle signs a new deal with chicago.

CHRDANHUTCH 04-04-2013 02:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by danishh (Post 63138779)
obviously, like TNSE did, he'd try to work out a 'trade' with st. louis, where they shift to portland and seattle signs a new deal with chicago.

Why would St. Louis want to be further away, than IL, WHETHER it lands in Rosemont or not, danishh, Phoenix has no interest in being bought out of its contract, and there's the caveat of the existing team has to find the next one before paying Portland wht's outstanding, just as Washington did in 2005, Anaheim paid when they pulled out after 3, and Buffalo did when they returned to Rochester when they bought them.

you forget PORTLAND HAS BEEN PRIVATELY OWNED SINCE ITS INCEPTION in 1977.

saskganesh 04-04-2013 06:37 PM

yeah, I don't know either.

IU Hawks fan 04-04-2013 06:48 PM

The Blues won't have much a choice. Twice now, the Wolves have just taken 'the leftovers' after some switching due to AHL owners buying NHL teams and then vice versa. Once they're the ones in position to do the same, they will.

If the Blues wanted to guarantee that their affiliate would be close they should have not sold theirs. There is no reason for the Wolves to be stuck with the Blues still were Levin to buy an NHL franchise.

HansH 04-04-2013 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FolignofortheCalder (Post 62931423)
In light if the Canucks buying Peoria from the Blues, I'm trying to figure out how the buying/selling of AHL teams works. The 'Nucks already have the Chicago Wolves and I'm sure they're not allowed to own multiple AHL teams so what do they do now? Sell the Wolves, give them to the Blues, or what? Also I assume the players/coaches of Peoria still belong to the Blues, correct?

Addressing the OP's question in the thread title:

The key to understanding the relationship between NHL teams and AHL teams is understanding that there are two key aspects to any minor-league team -- the _franchise_, which is the right to play as a team in a specific league, and the _affiliation_, which in the AHL's case is "the supplier of players to the team".

So what's happened here is that the Rivermen had an affiliation with the Blues, AND the Rivermen _franchise_ was also owned by the Blues. In this transaction, the FRANCHISE is what was sold from the Blues to the Canucks. The Blues are now free to negotiate an AFFILIATION agreement with any AHL FRANCHISE holder. Where that gets complicated is that there are exactly 30 AHL franchises, which means a game of musical chairs where the last person, instead of being totally left out, ends up likely "stuck" with the last available chair, even if it's not the one that's most comfortable for that person.

OK, it's not a perfect analogy, because in theory any NHL team could decide (as Anaheim did a few seasons ago, before the AHL finally made its way up to 30 teams, IIRC) that they're not going to sign an AHL affiliation agreement with anyone, and just sprinkle their prospects among various AHL teams that would accept the "loan" of the player, or sometimes just working with their ECHL affiliation(s). But the key is that the affiliation provides the players. What else any given affiliation provides is detail left up to the specifics of the negotiating parties -- so Vancouver's agreement with the Wolves, for example, is likely VERY different from Ottawa's agreement with Binghamton, in terms of who hires the coach, who GM's the team outside NHL-assigned players, and who decides the details of playing time and on-ice approach.

As others have already pointed out, the Wolves are not owned by the Canucks -- the Canucks were, up to this point, simply getting paid by the Wolves' ownership to supply the Wolves with an AHL roster. With the purchase of the former Rivermen _franchise_, the Canucks now only have to negotiate with themselves when it comes to the affiliation. However, they do still have to, as owners of the _franchise_, negotiate an arena lease somewhere. Maybe Peoria, maybe Abbotsford (if Calgary can be convinced to vacate, or to do some complicated franchise ownership transfer that means the Canucks trade the Rivermen franchise to Calgary in return for the Heat, potentially leaving the Heat's AMAZINGLY sweet lease in place for the Canucks/Rivermen to take advantage of), maybe elsewhere that doesn't currently have a hockey tenant or may be about to lose one (Houston? Kansas City? Seattle (Key Arena)? Tacoma? San Diego? Long Beach? Des Moines?)

So, here's the parties as they stand, and what they have to do before next season:

VANCOUVER CANUCKS:
*Know which AHL franchise they're affiliating with (the former Rivermen, over which they now have full control)
*Haven't announced where that franchise will play in 2013-14 (may know it, but it hasn't been made public)
*Must either sign a lease somewhere for next season, announce a signing that has already taken place, or announce they will take the Rivermen franchise dormant for a season.

ST. LOUIS BLUES:
*Have not indicated for certain which AHL franchise they're affiliating with - rumors point towards the one apparently newly-available opening in Chicago, which was made available by the Canucks not renewing their affiliation for next season.
*Must conclude an affiliation agreement for next season with SOME AHL team, or try to find alternate "homes" for their AHL players for 2013-14.

CALGARY FLAMES:
*As of this moment, know which franchise they're affiliating with, as they own the Heat (or have at least 50% ownership).
*Don't _have_ to do anything for next season, unless they are deciding to move the Abbotsford franchise. If they do move the franchise, they will need to agree to a lease and announce it.

CHICAGO WOLVES:
*As of this moment, do NOT know for sure which NHL team they will affiliate with in 2013-14 -- the most likely partner may be St. Louis and the Blues, but they have the option of negotiating an affiliation agreement with any willing partner, and if I'm not mistaken, there is more than one affiliation agreement that is up for renewal or transfer after this 2012-13 season.
*COULD in theory play the 2013-14 season without any NHL affiliation, but the league's replies to whether a team would be allowed to do so seem to always say "technically yes, but we don't think any owner would put themselves under that much of a financial burden to have to pay ALL of their players themselves instead of getting them supplied relatively cheaply through the NHL parent". So, it's a technical possibility, but a longshot.

PEORIA RIVERMEN:
*Non-player character - controlled by the Canucks now.

ABBOTSFORD HEAT:
*Non-player character - controlled by the Flames.

Hope this helps!

IU Hawks fan 04-05-2013 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HansH (Post 63323275)
CHICAGO WOLVES:
*As of this moment, do NOT know for sure which NHL team they will affiliate with in 2013-14 -- the most likely partner may be St. Louis and the Blues, but they have the option of negotiating an affiliation agreement with any willing partner, and if I'm not mistaken, there is more than one affiliation agreement that is up for renewal or transfer after this 2012-13 season.
*COULD in theory play the 2013-14 season without any NHL affiliation, but the league's replies to whether a team would be allowed to do so seem to always say "technically yes, but we don't think any owner would put themselves under that much of a financial burden to have to pay ALL of their players themselves instead of getting them supplied relatively cheaply through the NHL parent". So, it's a technical possibility, but a longshot.

Someone smarter than me will know more, but I'm pretty sure an affiliation is a requirement ever since the expansion to 30 teams.

CHRDANHUTCH 04-05-2013 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IU Hawks fan (Post 63338941)
Someone smarter than me will know more, but I'm pretty sure an affiliation is a requirement ever since the expansion to 30 teams.

YEAH, IT IS IU, it's why St. Louis was coerced into buying the then Ice Cats after Boe went to Bridgeport. There are three bylaws: there are no Independents, no duals after all 30 franchises are spoken for now that OKC was activated 3 years ago, and a requirement that a PDC be in place w/ an NHL Partner...

the question is who else other than Vancouver has an expiring PDC If Young is to be believed that the Wolves are down to 4 potential partners, who are the other 3 besides St. Louis?

CHRDANHUTCH 04-05-2013 01:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HamiltonOHL (Post 63122109)
the person who asked about spliting ahl teams, remember back when oilers didint have a ahl squad they had i believe 2-3 farm teams to split their players between, wilkes, iowa stars and milwaukee i believe it was

the 5 way affiliation was an anomaly, Hamilton, Anaheim went through the same thing when Iowa was terminated and transferred to replace the conditional franchise in Cedar Park per league agreement otherwise, Texas wouldn't be in the league, because the other option would've been wht's now OKC.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:08 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.