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

Oilers Reclaim Taylor Chorney; Assigned to OKC

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-09-2011, 12:27 PM
  #1
oilers4life5
Registered User
 
oilers4life5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: City of Champions
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,341
vCash: 500
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!


Last edited by Soli: 11-10-2011 at 11:48 AM.
oilers4life5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 12:28 PM
  #2
Section337
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 4,236
vCash: 500
As he has been passed by many prospects, it is not worth adding his contract.

Section337 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 12:32 PM
  #3
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,308
vCash: 98
If they think they can use help in OKC I don't see why not.

joestevens29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 12:36 PM
  #4
Krut
Registered User
 
Krut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
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.

Krut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 12:41 PM
  #5
aspin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Regina
Posts: 1,863
vCash: 500
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.

aspin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 12:43 PM
  #6
Perfect_Drug
Registered User
 
Perfect_Drug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,067
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aspin View Post
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.

:/

Perfect_Drug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 12:44 PM
  #7
OneMoreAstronaut
Reduce chainsaw size
 
OneMoreAstronaut's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 4,509
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by aspin View Post
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.

OneMoreAstronaut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 12:46 PM
  #8
Reimer
Tambo Troll Face
 
Reimer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneMoreAstronaut View Post
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.

Reimer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 12:49 PM
  #9
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,308
vCash: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by aspin View Post
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?

joestevens29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 12:49 PM
  #10
aspin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Regina
Posts: 1,863
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneMoreAstronaut View Post
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

aspin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 12:53 PM
  #11
Reimer
Tambo Troll Face
 
Reimer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
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.

Reimer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 12:54 PM
  #12
spot
Registered User
 
spot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,554
vCash: 500
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.

spot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 12:59 PM
  #13
aspin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Regina
Posts: 1,863
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by spot View Post
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.

aspin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 01:04 PM
  #14
nvan97
Registered User
 
nvan97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,515
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilers4life5 View Post
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.

nvan97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 01:09 PM
  #15
Vik
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aspin View Post
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.

Vik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 01:13 PM
  #16
oilers4life5
Registered User
 
oilers4life5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: City of Champions
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,341
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvan97 View Post
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

oilers4life5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 01:16 PM
  #17
aspin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Regina
Posts: 1,863
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vik View Post
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.

aspin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 01:19 PM
  #18
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,308
vCash: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by aspin View Post
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.

joestevens29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 01:21 PM
  #19
Neilio
Navi-X, Google it
 
Neilio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,173
vCash: 500
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.

Neilio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 01:26 PM
  #20
Vik
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aspin View Post
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.

Vik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 01:27 PM
  #21
OneMoreAstronaut
Reduce chainsaw size
 
OneMoreAstronaut's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 4,509
vCash: 50
[deleted]

OneMoreAstronaut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 01:41 PM
  #22
oilers4life5
Registered User
 
oilers4life5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: City of Champions
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,341
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vik View Post
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

oilers4life5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 01:53 PM
  #23
Tarpit*
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Cold North
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,357
vCash: 500
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.

Tarpit* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 01:57 PM
  #24
Reimer
Tambo Troll Face
 
Reimer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vik View Post
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.

Reimer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2011, 02:02 PM
  #25
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,391
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reimer View Post
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.

Seachd 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 01:52 PM.

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.