View Single Post
Old
08-15-2006, 11:40 PM
  #1
colonel_korn
Luuuuuuuuuu....lay?
 
colonel_korn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: St John's, NL
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,362
vCash: 500
CBA question re: waivers and re-entry waivers

Some confusion has come up for me in looking at the Canucks' roster recently and I was wondering if someone could clear things up for me.

Rumor has it that the Canucks are about to sign Rory Fitzpatrick, which means (assuming Luc Bourdon stays with the team) that he and Yannick Tremblay are going to be vying for the #7 defenseman spot on the team. I was trying to figure out which was more likely to get the spot, and one thing I think is going to be important is waiver eligibility.

First question: Does it matter if someone is on a one-way contract or a two-way contract? My understanding is that this does not affect eligibility anymore. Last season it would have made a difference because of that rule about guys who were making over $75K in the AHL being subject to re-entry waivers - so a guy with only a one-way deal would be subject to them by virtue of making at least $450K in the AHL, while someone with a two-way deal for less than $75K in the AHL would not. However, I heard that this rule has been done away with, so I don't think a one-way or two-way deal has anything to do with waivers. Is this correct?

I was trying to figure out whether Tremblay and Fitzpatrick would have to pass through waivers if they were called up or sent down to Manitoba. Section 13.4 in the CBA (ref: http://www.nhl.com/cba/2005-CBA.pdf ) describes rules for waiver exemption, but both Fitzpatrick and Tremblay are over 25 so these don't apply.

I also found this in section 50.9 (g) of the CBA:

Quote:
The Re-Entry Waiver procedure will not, however, be applicable to
Veteran Minor League Players defined as follows: (i) for goaltenders, Players who
have: (A) played in 180 or more professional games in North America (NHL, AHL
and ECHL), and (B ) not spent more than 80 NHL games on NHL roster over the
prior two (2) seasons or more than 40 NHL games on NHL roster in the
immediately prior season; and (ii) for defensemen and forwards, Players who have:
(A) played in 320 or more professional games in North America (NHL, AHL and
ECHL), and (B ) not spent more than 80 NHL games on NHL roster over the prior
two (2) seasons or more than 40 NHL games on NHL roster in the immediately
prior season.
Tremblay has 378 games in the NHL, but has been over in Europe for the past 2 years so I think he meets these criteria. Fitzpatrick, on the other hand, does not because he's played more than the maximum number of games in the NHL over the past two seasons.

This initially led me to believe that Tremblay was waiver-exempt and Fitzpatrick wasn't, which would give Fitzpatrick a bit of an inside track for that #7 position since Tremblay could be called up and down without any problems. But then I got confused because:
a) This only refers to Re-entry waivers, not 'normal' waivers, and
b) This was right under the section describing that $75K rule that just got taken out, so I'm not sure if it's applicable anymore.

So this raised a few more questions for me. Does this mean Tremblay would be exempt from re-entry waivers, but not from 'normal' waivers? i.e. A team could claim him on the way down but not on the way up? Or are both these guys subject to waivers going up and going down?

Basically if someone could clarify for me what the situation with these two would be WRT both types of waivers, I'd appreciate it.

Yannick Tremblay: http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/p...id%5B%5D=21502
Rory Fitzpatrick: http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/p...php3?pid=10170

colonel_korn is offline   Reply With Quote