HFBoards

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

Waiver Draft Underway

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-03-2003, 01:39 PM
  #26
momentai
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,352
vCash: 500
Yeah... I believe that if a player is claimed, the team has a right to either select the player the other team dropped or take 50k in compensation. I could be wrong but that's how I thought it worked regardless of what draft position the other team might be.

momentai is offline  
Old
10-03-2003, 01:43 PM
  #27
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,860
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
I don't know if we did, but if we could have taken Hurme and didn't I'm VERY disapointed! Hurme could still be a number one in this league IMO. He's played great every where he's went, and he was great for Finland in the Olympics....... oh well....

thome_26 is offline  
Old
10-03-2003, 02:15 PM
  #28
MrMackey
Registered User
 
MrMackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: cgy
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowetide
I don't know, Mr. Mackey. I mean, Toronto lost Green and got to pick the player that was dropped, right?

I just think that Lowe thought there was no way he could take the goalie. MAYBE Dudley even said no, then said yes when Atlanta put in a claim because they had a pre-arranged deal.

Maybe Lowe went to the can, I dont know. Whatever the reason, I would hope if someone had said 'Edmonton do you want Hurme', they would have said yes.
Its weird, because it looks like the Oilers should've had that option, but the same rule that states this goes on to say each team cannot lose more than one goaltender.

Quote:
When one team selects a player from another team, the selecting team must take a player off their protected list. The team that lost the player has the choice of claiming either the newly-unprotected player (who they must place on their protected list or he can be claimed again) or the selected player's waiver price. If the team that lost a player chooses to accept the waiver price, that team can then protect another player. A team cannot lose more than three players or one goaltender.
Maybe everyone just assumed Hurme wasn't available. Or maybe Lowe was worried about losing Conklin as well, if it was clear at that point that the rule didn't seem to apply this year.

The whole thing seems kind of bizarre... but I agree with you LT, that if the league said "K.Lo, do you want Hurme?" Lowe should've said yes, because Hurme is an improvement over Conklin IMO.

MrMackey is offline  
Old
10-03-2003, 02:20 PM
  #29
oilersrule14
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 1,432
vCash: 500
Here's another question. If for some reason Hurme wasn't available to the Oilers, Wasn't there another goalie out there that Lowe could have selected to replace Valiquette? I've heard some good things about JF Damphousse. If they had selected another goalie, they wouldn't have to lose another because of the 2 goalie rule right, so what would have been the harm?

oilersrule14 is offline  
Old
10-03-2003, 02:28 PM
  #30
MrMackey
Registered User
 
MrMackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: cgy
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilersrule14
Here's another question. If for some reason Hurme wasn't available to the Oilers, Wasn't there another goalie out there that Lowe could have selected to replace Valiquette? I've heard some good things about JF Damphousse. If they had selected another goalie, they wouldn't have to lose another because of the 2 goalie rule right, so what would have been the harm?
Ugh, I wouldn't have take JFD. In another thread I mentioned I was glad the Oil didn't pick up any of the overpriced filth available. The harm, to me, would've been that it would tie their hands in making a better deal down the road.

In recent years, there has not been more goaltending talent available than there is now. If we want a guy like JFD, Fichaud, Shields, Moss, Irbe, Storr, Hnlinka... then we could probably grab them a month from now for a sixth round pick.

I'd rather see how some of the young Oiler forwards do early in the season, see who's going to stick and then trade to address the needs (if any) in goal. If Conklin/Salo are looking good, then they can pick up some of the junk that's available to put in TO for one year until JDD goes there in '05 (or '04 if no lockout).

MrMackey is offline  
Old
10-03-2003, 02:28 PM
  #31
Cloned
Sexy Genesis
 
Cloned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,868
vCash: 500
Hmm, maybe this is a question for GuyF to ask the Oilers brass sometime. I know, it's not technically about prospects, but maybe an exception can be made this time?


Cloned is offline  
Old
10-03-2003, 04:01 PM
  #32
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMackey
Ugh, I wouldn't have take JFD. In another thread I mentioned I was glad the Oil didn't pick up any of the overpriced filth available. The harm, to me, would've been that it would tie their hands in making a better deal down the road.
I don't know... you can't get much of a better deal than a goalie for nothing. Out of all the goalies available, I would have taken Damphousse. Obviously, the Oilers didn't see it that way, but Toronto's going to be in trouble if they leave the goaltending the way it is. And if they were going to get a good goalie for the farm, today would have been a fine time.

Seachd is offline  
Old
10-03-2003, 06:42 PM
  #33
Allan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: United Nations
Posts: 1,405
vCash: 500
The Roadrunners signed a goalie named Chris Madden last month. Don't know where he fits in, but thats one more on the pile. He was the backup in Milwaukee last year.

http://www.scsmhockey.com/ChrisMadden.htm

Allan is offline  
Old
10-03-2003, 09:53 PM
  #34
aki
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 305
vCash: 500
Valiquette=Smelt

I can't believe all the fuss about the loss of a #3 goalie who would be a #4 or #5 goalie in a deeper organization. Filler goalies at that level are a dime a dozen. Valiquette, Antila, Morrison, Madden, Mason, McLennan, blah blah blah. Whatever.

aki is offline  
Old
10-04-2003, 02:34 AM
  #35
hockeyaddict101
Registered User
 
hockeyaddict101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 19,903
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aki
I can't believe all the fuss about the loss of a #3 goalie who would be a #4 or #5 goalie in a deeper organization. Filler goalies at that level are a dime a dozen. Valiquette, Antila, Morrison, Madden, Mason, McLennan, blah blah blah. Whatever.
Because it helps lead to the ever popular but completely devoid of any hard evidence that Kevin Lowe has doomed the organization.

People seemed to be quick to react without a)knowing the waiver rules b)thinking the matter through.

If we had 1.5 million for a backup goaltender then why would have we traded Jussi?

The thread at Oilfans on the matter is hilarious. I think it didn't even stop after someone explained the waiver draft rules

hockeyaddict101 is offline  
Old
10-04-2003, 08:19 AM
  #36
momentai
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aki
I can't believe all the fuss about the loss of a #3 goalie who would be a #4 or #5 goalie in a deeper organization. Filler goalies at that level are a dime a dozen. Valiquette, Antila, Morrison, Madden, Mason, McLennan, blah blah blah. Whatever.
They may be a dime a dozen... but if Salo goes down to injury, I don't think anyone is going to like a tandem of Anitlla/Conklin. And if Lowe decides at that point, that the club needs a goaltender... other teams are going to smell blood in the water and try to milk Lowe because of the position he's in. Of course, we still had that concern when Valiquette was here... but I'd like I'd still feel a lot more comfortable with Steve and Ty, than Kristian and Ty.

momentai is offline  
Old
10-04-2003, 09:50 AM
  #37
Lowetide
Registered User
 
Lowetide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaz44
Because it helps lead to the ever popular but completely devoid of any hard evidence that Kevin Lowe has doomed the organization.

People seemed to be quick to react without a)knowing the waiver rules b)thinking the matter through.

If we had 1.5 million for a backup goaltender then why would have we traded Jussi?

The thread at Oilfans on the matter is hilarious. I think it didn't even stop after someone explained the waiver draft rules
I'm glad you told me. I had avoided reading it, although tempted.

Lowetide is offline  
Closed Thread

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 08:02 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.