HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Andrew Raycroft signed - One Year, $500k

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-07-2009, 12:10 PM
  #301
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
Well, if you want to be technical, I don't believe the word "two-way" is ever mentioned in the CBA, so the definition could just as easily mean "a contract under which a player doesn't have to go through waivers".

The point is that people should be able to make a point without others being ***** about it. You want to be on your high horse about technicalities in the CBA, but I can't ever remember you making a point that was actually interesting and relevant. You're wasting my time and everyone else's with this nonsense.
that's not correct, as "two-way" is mentioned throughout the entire CBA... I believe there are at least 10 times that the word "two-way" is actually mentioned in the CBA... and yes, I've read it before.

and there's no contract under which a player doesn't have to go through waivers - it's all about experience in the NHL - number of games played + age of player.

Maybe this is all just "nonsense" to you... but IMO the CBA is a huge part of the game, and opinions based on knowledge of the game, without knowledge of the CBA, will ultimately be flawed.

But I agree with your last point - people should be able to make a point - but they should also accept when their point is incorrect.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 12:48 PM
  #302
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
But I agree with your last point - people should be able to make a point - but they should also accept when their point is incorrect.
now a mod is wading in too?

that's great. I made a simple point, a very accurate point - that a player will have to be able to shuttle back and forth if Schneider will be going the other way - and some people jump all over the exact term of phrase I used describe it and how that affects the roster Vigneault will be using. Now I admit I lowered myself to their level when I bothered to respond, but to have a mod jump in and ALSO miss the point, as Fruity point out on the last page, puhleeze.

Although, the fact that nfito is jumping in here actually clears up a lot about why his posts are so long and hard to read. When you've got to go into length about every single little detail related to a point you're trying to make, the overall message gets drowned out. Not that you don't go in with good ideas - you just get so caught up in the details that you spend the whole time writing about them. Writing 101.

I find that it doesn't help the conversation when some of the way below average posters around here (seriously, when has anyone here seen these guys say anything interesting?) feel that the only way they can participate is by nipping at the heels of others. I'm sure the level of their cap-geekdom adds to their own deluded sense of self-worth, but it would be nice if they'd respect that some people here are trying to have an intelligent and interesting conversation, and if they can't contribute in a meaningful way, just butt out.

I would have hoped that a moderator would have a similar sentiment.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 01:06 PM
  #303
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
now a mod is wading in too?

that's great. I made a simple point, a very accurate point - that a player will have to be able to shuttle back and forth if Schneider will be going the other way - and some people jump all over the exact term of phrase I used describe it and how that affects the roster Vigneault will be using. Now I admit I lowered myself to their level when I bothered to respond, but to have a mod jump in and ALSO miss the point, as Fruity point out on the last page, puhleeze.

Although, the fact that nfito is jumping in here actually clears up a lot about why his posts are so long and hard to read. When you've got to go into length about every single little detail related to a point you're trying to make, the overall message gets drowned out. Not that you don't go in with good ideas - you just get so caught up in the details that you spend the whole time writing about them. Writing 101.

I find that it doesn't help the conversation when some of the way below average posters around here (seriously, when has anyone here seen these guys say anything interesting?) feel that the only way they can participate is by nipping at the heels of others. I'm sure the level of their cap-geekdom adds to their own deluded sense of self-worth, but it would be nice if they'd respect that some people here are trying to have an intelligent and interesting conversation, and if they can't contribute in a meaningful way, just butt out.

I would have hoped that a moderator would have a similar sentiment.
first of all, I HATE - absolutely HATE - when anything I have to say here brings up the point that I'm a mod... that has NOTHING AT ALL to do with the discussions I'm posting here.

I know you don't like my writing style. You've made this clear in the past when you said before you had me on your ignore list. That's fine, I couldn't care less really. But realize that you're not the only poster here that I'm here to discuss hockey with - there are many posters on this board that appreciate the details I try to bring. If you don't like it, continue to ignore me, like you had for so long here! But when you bring up a completely incorrect point - such as saying that "two-way" deals are something other than what the CBA defines it as, then I feel every right to comment on it!

But I do think that details are very important. That's the nature of my day-job and I can't ignore that. Understanding the CBA is very important, IMO, to understanding the business of hockey.

And the point I made initially, which you ignored when you just took the last sentence of my post, shows that you were incorrect in your assumptions here - the CBA clearly defines "two-way" and is explained throughout the CBA.

It may bother you to read details, which you may find useless here, but I do think this is all part of the game of hockey, and gives us a better understanding of the reality of this game. If you don't care for those, that's your prerogative, but I would hope that when I've said things incorrectly, they are explained to me because I prefer to have a better understanding of the game, then go off on incorrect assumptions. I like details, because details tell you a lot more about the reality of a situation than just clinging to your assumptions, and to me, including these details are a part of having "an intelligent and interesting conversation"

but again, please do not bring up the fact that I'm a mod as some reason why I shouldn't add correct details to a discussion. It bothers me to no end that people expect that just because I'm a mod I shouldn't get involved in discussions!

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 01:15 PM
  #304
KDizzle
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Japan
Posts: 8,171
vCash: 500
It's funny how such a trivial matter got so overblown just because people can't stand being corrected.



Anyway.
Does anybody know if Raycroft has a 2-way deal? As Pensfan has mentioned, the Moose wouldn't want to pay Raycroft an NHL salary to play and I'm sure Aquilini, should he be paying, isn't exactly thrilled to be forking the bill for another minor leaguer that's doing no good for the Canucks.

KDizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 01:17 PM
  #305
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDizzle View Post
It's funny how such a trivial matter got so overblown just because people can't stand being corrected.



Anyway.
Does anybody know if Raycroft has a 2-way deal? As Pensfan has mentioned, the Moose wouldn't want to pay Raycroft an NHL salary to play and I'm sure Aquilini, should he be paying, isn't exactly thrilled to be forking the bill for another minor leaguer that's doing no good for the Canucks.
I believe his agent already confirmed that it is a 1-way deal.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 01:17 PM
  #306
dhabums*
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FruityPants3 View Post
What a stupid argument over semantics.

This just in: teams don't like paying their players $500,000+ to play in the minors. They would much rather pay them a minor league salary, which is exactly why Ernie's point about a 2-way contract was a valid one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
So at least one of the regular extra forwards would have to be on a two way deal this season so they can be sent the other way.
As honourable as it may seem to come to the aid of the fair maiden, there is no validity to the statement. This is not a discussion over semantics, it is a discussion over being wrong. Really it's about a poster being wrong, not accepting it, getting upset, then wondering why everyone is being so mean to him. Rather than just shrug it off, it became this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
what isn't?

enlighten me, oh knowledgeable one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
oh, was I not specific enough for you?

I'm so sorry.

When I said two-way I implied that it meant he could be brought up and down. There are several different ways that could happen, obviously, and I don't think that there's any reason to spit out the whole CBA every time I make a point. So take your little *****-fest elsewhere, please.
You can't wish away errors screaming semantics! and syntax!. It was a oddly funny backpedalling defence.

dhabums* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 01:17 PM
  #307
Wayne Maki
Registered User
 
Wayne Maki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,767
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDizzle View Post
It's funny how such a trivial matter got so overblown just because people can't stand being corrected.



Anyway.
Does anybody know if Raycroft has a 2-way deal? As Pensfan has mentioned, the Moose wouldn't want to pay Raycroft an NHL salary to play and I'm sure Aquilini, should he be paying, isn't exactly thrilled to be forking the bill for another minor leaguer that's doing no good for the Canucks.
Raycroft's agent said it was a one way deal.
Posted via Mobile Device

Wayne Maki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 01:42 PM
  #308
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
first of all, I HATE - absolutely HATE - when anything I have to say here brings up the point that I'm a mod... that has NOTHING AT ALL to do with the discussions I'm posting here.

I know you don't like my writing style. You've made this clear in the past when you said before you had me on your ignore list. That's fine, I couldn't care less really. But realize that you're not the only poster here that I'm here to discuss hockey with - there are many posters on this board that appreciate the details I try to bring. If you don't like it, continue to ignore me, like you had for so long here! But when you bring up a completely incorrect point - such as saying that "two-way" deals are something other than what the CBA defines it as, then I feel every right to comment on it!

But I do think that details are very important. That's the nature of my day-job and I can't ignore that. Understanding the CBA is very important, IMO, to understanding the business of hockey.

And the point I made initially, which you ignored when you just took the last sentence of my post, shows that you were incorrect in your assumptions here - the CBA clearly defines "two-way" and is explained throughout the CBA.

It may bother you to read details, which you may find useless here, but I do think this is all part of the game of hockey, and gives us a better understanding of the reality of this game. If you don't care for those, that's your prerogative, but I would hope that when I've said things incorrectly, they are explained to me because I prefer to have a better understanding of the game, then go off on incorrect assumptions. I like details, because details tell you a lot more about the reality of a situation than just clinging to your assumptions, and to me, including these details are a part of having "an intelligent and interesting conversation"

but again, please do not bring up the fact that I'm a mod as some reason why I shouldn't add correct details to a discussion. It bothers me to no end that people expect that just because I'm a mod I shouldn't get involved in discussions!
I have said that I do find your posts long and windy, to their detriment. Though I don't believe I've ever had you on my ignore list. I hope I wasn't nasty about it.

I seem to have been wrong about 'two-way' not being in the CBA - though I'd appreciate it if you'd link to the relevant definition.

I find that the over-emphasis on small permutations of the CBA, in addition to the over-reliance of statistics in this forum isn't all that meaningful. I realize that sometimes that it's as deep as outside observers can go, which most of us are, especially when there is no hockey on TV. Are both things part of the game? Absolutely. But not nearly as important as most around here make out.

Quote:
You can't wish away errors screaming semantics! and syntax!. It was a oddly funny backpedalling defence.
Backpeddling? I said way back there that I could have been more clear about the phrase I used. But it's kind of like people who go around correcting grammar mistakes. Get a life.

Quote:
It's funny how such a trivial matter got so overblown just because people can't stand being corrected.
It's not that I care about being corrected. If buddy had have replied and said "you probably meant waiver in-eligible instead of two-way, but good point about Grabner or Shirokov maybe getting a leg up on a roster spot over Raymond and Hansen because of this configuration", that would have been just fine.

But the fact is that he went out of his way to attack me, and didn't even bother to post the details he thought were SO necessary in his post that raised my ire. It's just a complete waste of time.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 02:00 PM
  #309
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,868
vCash: 500
here is the CBA for those interested: http://www.nhl.com/cba/2005-CBA.pdf

As far as the definition of "two-way" ... it's throughout the CBA in different areas, such as:

Quote:
"Two-Way Qualifying Offer" means a Qualifying Offer that provides for
a Paragraph 1 NHL Salary to be effective when the Player is in the NHL, and a Paragraph
1 Minor League Salary to be effective when the Player is Loaned to a club outside the
NHL.
two-way specifically refers to a different salary in the pro as opposed to minors. That's the extend and limitation of the term "two-way" in the CBA.

Whether a player is eligible for waivers has nothing to do with a 2-way contract. It's entirely dependent on the age and experience of said player, as defined on page 84 of the CBA.

according to those guidelines, Raymond, for example, is no longer waiver eligible, as is Hansen - who just failed to be exempt, as he's 23 years old, and has now played in 60 NHL games, which is the actual cut-off for waiver eligibility for 23 YO players.

Interestingly, if he had played 1 less NHL game, he would still remain exempt from waivers, as he signed his first contract 3 years ago and is 23 YO.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 02:15 PM
  #310
dhabums*
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
But the fact is that he went out of his way to attack me, and didn't even bother to post the details he thought were SO necessary in his post that raised my ire. It's just a complete waste of time.
You were not attacked.

dhabums* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 02:22 PM
  #311
windflare
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,266
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dhabums View Post
You were not attacked.
For some people, being rebuked = being attacked, especially on the internet.

windflare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 05:11 PM
  #312
timorousme
luongod
 
timorousme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,537
vCash: 500
ahahahahahaha

timorousme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 10:51 PM
  #313
Hooker
Registered User
 
Hooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,369
vCash: 500
This is hilarious.

Hooker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 10:58 PM
  #314
Peter Griffin
Registered User
 
Peter Griffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,938
vCash: 500
So, how long until the nickname Raycrap becomes a staple on this board?

Peter Griffin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 11:10 PM
  #315
Saren
Multi Pass!
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Fhloston Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,088
vCash: 500
I'm waiting for a Andrew Raycroft: Goalie Tomb Raider photoshop.

Also, lol @ tt.

I like Raycrap though.

Saren is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:50 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.