HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Notices

Kolanos Demoted

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-29-2003, 09:36 AM
  #1
H-Bear
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: North Bay ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,503
vCash: 500
Kolanos Demoted

http://www.phoenixcoyotes.com/news/p...etails&ID=1453

Correct me if I am wrong, but does he not have to pass through waivers??

I would be VERY suprised if he made it through, and VERY VERY disapointed if the Oilers passed on him. He's got a lot of skill; he just needs to get over his injury problems (both physically, and mentally).

H-Bear is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 09:38 AM
  #2
Calnes
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Edge of my seat
Country: Canada
Posts: 206
vCash: 500
he was only sent to the minors, just like we sent salmo to toronto

Calnes is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 09:40 AM
  #3
Guy Flaming
HFB Partner
 
Guy Flaming's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Press Box & on Air
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,239
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Guy Flaming Send a message via Skype™ to Guy Flaming
Quote:
Originally Posted by comrie
Correct me if I am wrong, but does he not have to pass through waivers??
Not if he has a 2-way deal like Sarno and Salmo and Allen do for us.

Guy Flaming is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 09:40 AM
  #4
H-Bear
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: North Bay ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,503
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnbowski
he was only sent to the minors, just like we sent salmo to toronto
Yes, I know he was sent to the minors, but he has also played way more than the minimum number of games to be considered a permanent NHL player (ie: I think he has to pass through waivers).

H-Bear is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 09:42 AM
  #5
H-Bear
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: North Bay ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,503
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyF
Not if he has a 2-way deal like Sarno and Salmo and Allen do for us.
Ah, thank you GuyF.

H-Bear is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 10:36 AM
  #6
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyF
Not if he has a 2-way deal like Sarno and Salmo and Allen do for us.
But I'm pretty sure that 2-way contracts only have to do with money, and so players with them can still get put on waivers. Kolanos must just not be old enough or played enough games to be waiver eligible. It's all set out here, but it's not exactly easy reading (for me, anyway).

Seachd is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 12:28 PM
  #7
elphy101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: City of Champions
Posts: 1,568
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachd
But I'm pretty sure that 2-way contracts only have to do with money, and so players with them can still get put on waivers. Kolanos must just not be old enough or played enough games to be waiver eligible. It's all set out here, but it's not exactly easy reading (for me, anyway).
Weird. Going by your listing, Kolanos would have to be placed on waivers unless he was sent down for a conditioning stint.

He's 22 and has played 80 games in the NHL.

If you're 22 and you've played more than 70 NHL games then you must pass thru waivers to be sent down.

My guess is that Kolanos is down on a conditioning stint after his injury.

elphy101 is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 12:54 PM
  #8
oildrop
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,486
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by elphy101
Weird. Going by your listing, Kolanos would have to be placed on waivers unless he was sent down for a conditioning stint.

He's 22 and has played 80 games in the NHL.

If you're 22 and you've played more than 70 NHL games then you must pass thru waivers to be sent down.

My guess is that Kolanos is down on a conditioning stint after his injury.
My guess is that he has a 2-way contract and he can go up and down all season if they want him to. Just like Stoll, he has a two-way contract and if he were to be sent down then he could without having to be put on waivers. I don't think 2-way contracts is only about money. Maybe in the sense that if he's in the NHL he gets paid more money and if the guy is in the AHL he gets less money. I don't think it matters what age you are, if you have a 2-way contract then you can go up and down all season long.

oildrop is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 01:41 PM
  #9
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,385
vCash: 500
I don't know for sure, but I imagine Valiquette is on a 2-way, because I doubt the Oilers would want to pay him a full NHL salary for playing in the AHL. Yet the Oilers claimed him on waivers. But because Salo was injured, he could be called up and sent down without having to clear waivers.

Zac Bierk also had to clear waivers once, and he had a 2-way contract. I'm sure there are countless other examples.

Seachd is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 02:02 PM
  #10
riles
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 112
vCash: 500
A 2 way contract means that get paid one salary in the NHL and a diminished salary in the AHL. It has no effect on going through waivers. Valiquette didn't have to go through waivers now because he passed through waivers already this year.

riles is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 02:45 PM
  #11
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by riles
A 2 way contract means that get paid one salary in the NHL and a diminished salary in the AHL. It has no effect on going through waivers. Valiquette didn't have to go through waivers now because he passed through waivers already this year.
Are you sure about Valiquette? When did he clear waivers this year? The Oilers picked him up, so he didn't clear. The CBA says that when there are fewer than 2 goalies on the roster (Salo on IR), one can be brought up and sent down without having to clear waivers.

Seachd is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 02:55 PM
  #12
barto
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 2,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachd
Are you sure about Valiquette? When did he clear waivers this year? The Oilers picked him up, so he didn't clear. The CBA says that when there are fewer than 2 goalies on the roster (Salo on IR), one can be brought up and sent down without having to clear waivers.
I think you're right - Valiquette was claimed on waivers (twice, right?). But there was something about an 'emergency callup' deal for goalies, and you only get two per year...anyone heard about that? I think I heard that on the radio (not Bryan Hall, though, don't worry).

Bart

barto is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 02:56 PM
  #13
oildrop
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,486
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachd
Are you sure about Valiquette? When did he clear waivers this year? The Oilers picked him up, so he didn't clear. The CBA says that when there are fewer than 2 goalies on the roster (Salo on IR), one can be brought up and sent down without having to clear waivers.
Valiquette doesn't have to clear waivers with the Oilers because we already put him on Waivers for the Waiver Draft and he was picked up but then put back on Waivers and the Oilers picked him up. Since the Oilers picked him back up off waivers we don't have to put him back on waivers because we already did at the beginning of the season. When a team does this, the player or team don't have to put him back on waivers to send him to the AHL. He's exempt for the normal waiver ways.

oildrop is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 02:58 PM
  #14
oildrop
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,486
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barto
I think you're right - Valiquette was claimed on waivers (twice, right?). But there was something about an 'emergency callup' deal for goalies, and you only get two per year...anyone heard about that? I think I heard that on the radio (not Bryan Hall, though, don't worry).

Bart
That had nothing to do with the waivers, that had to do with wether or not they were going to put Salo on the Injured Reserve. They didn't and in order to have a Roster of 24 they used the emergency callup clause. Then Salo went on IR and the team was back to a 23 man playing Roster.

oildrop is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 03:00 PM
  #15
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oildrop
Valiquette doesn't have to clear waivers with the Oilers because we already put him on Waivers for the Waiver Draft and he was picked up but then put back on Waivers and the Oilers picked him up. Since the Oilers picked him back up off waivers we don't have to put him back on waivers because we already did at the beginning of the season.
I'm not sure if it works this way. (Also remember the waiver draft does not always work the same as waivers.) Reasoner last year was exposed in the waiver draft, but didn't get claimed. So the Oilers could send him down later (within a certain time, I believe) without worrying about losing him on waivers. But Valiquette was claimed in the waiver draft. Then he was claimed again on waivers. He hasn't cleared them yet this season, which is what leads to a period of exemption.

Seachd is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 03:02 PM
  #16
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barto
I think you're right - Valiquette was claimed on waivers (twice, right?). But there was something about an 'emergency callup' deal for goalies, and you only get two per year...anyone heard about that? I think I heard that on the radio (not Bryan Hall, though, don't worry).
Yeah, I think that was the exception to the "maximum-of-two-goalies-on-the-roster" rule. I think I also heard that a team can only do that twice per season.

EDIT: Whoops, I see Oildrop already explained it.

Seachd is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 03:47 PM
  #17
oildrop
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,486
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachd
I'm not sure if it works this way. (Also remember the waiver draft does not always work the same as waivers.) Reasoner last year was exposed in the waiver draft, but didn't get claimed. So the Oilers could send him down later (within a certain time, I believe) without worrying about losing him on waivers. But Valiquette was claimed in the waiver draft. Then he was claimed again on waivers. He hasn't cleared them yet this season, which is what leads to a period of exemption.
I could be wrong, but I think once a team loses someone to waivers(Valiquette) if the team that lost that player then gets him back again can't lose him again, also meaning he doesn't have to be put back on waivers. It sounds better in my head but then when I try to explain it, it comes out too confusing. :p But I am pretty sure that since we lost him once and then re-claimed him we don't have to put him back on waivers because he didn't play a certain amount of games between when he was put on waivers and picked up again by the Oilers. To sum it up, it's in my opinion that Big Valley does not need to be put on waivers from the Oilers to go back and forth from the NHL and AHL.

oildrop is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 05:59 PM
  #18
Allan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: United Nations
Posts: 1,405
vCash: 500
I was under the impression that if a player is called up from the minors, he can be sent down without clearing waivers if he is sent back within 30 days or 10 games played.

Allan is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 06:10 PM
  #19
rabi_sultan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London, England
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 3,782
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to rabi_sultan Send a message via AIM to rabi_sultan Send a message via MSN to rabi_sultan Send a message via Yahoo to rabi_sultan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allan
I was under the impression that if a player is called up from the minors, he can be sent down without clearing waivers if he is sent back within 30 days or 10 games played.
thats true when the exemption rule is applied which i believe is whats happened with Valiquette.

rabi_sultan is offline  
Old
11-29-2003, 06:45 PM
  #20
elphy101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: City of Champions
Posts: 1,568
vCash: 500
My understanding is that after the Oilers claimed Valiquette from the Panthers. They still had to put him on waivers to send him down. He was placed on waivers, cleared them and then was sent down to the Roadrunners.

No team could would take Valiquette unless they were planning to have him on their NHL roster. Because as soon as another team sent him down, the Oilers would just reclaim him on waivers.

For his recent callup, Valiquette was exempt from waivers because it was a 30 day injury exemption.

elphy101 is offline  
Old
11-30-2003, 05:28 AM
  #21
rabi_sultan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London, England
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 3,782
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to rabi_sultan Send a message via AIM to rabi_sultan Send a message via MSN to rabi_sultan Send a message via Yahoo to rabi_sultan
Quote:
Originally Posted by elphy101
My understanding is that after the Oilers claimed Valiquette from the Panthers. They still had to put him on waivers to send him down. He was placed on waivers, cleared them and then was sent down to the Roadrunners.

No team could would take Valiquette unless they were planning to have him on their NHL roster. Because as soon as another team sent him down, the Oilers would just reclaim him on waivers.

For his recent callup, Valiquette was exempt from waivers because it was a 30 day injury exemption.
i dunno elphy the thing is that the panthers were sending him down, so when the oilers took him coz they already had two goalies the third went down to Toronto automatically negating the need from Valiquette to (try) clear waivers for the third time

rabi_sultan is offline  
Old
11-30-2003, 06:20 AM
  #22
Allan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: United Nations
Posts: 1,405
vCash: 500
I think that Edmonton was the only team to put in a claim for him, so since nobody else wanted him, it may not have been necessary to put him on waivers again.

Allan 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 09:36 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.