HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

NHL/AHL Affiliates - How Does The Process Work?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-01-2013, 02:57 PM
  #1
WYFR
StanleyCupSabres
 
WYFR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: North Carolina
Country: United States
Posts: 151
vCash: 500
NHL/AHL Affiliates - How Does The Process Work?

In light if the Canucks buying Peoria from the Blues, I'm trying to figure out how the buying/selling of AHL teams works. The 'Nucks already have the Chicago Wolves and I'm sure they're not allowed to own multiple AHL teams so what do they do now? Sell the Wolves, give them to the Blues, or what? Also I assume the players/coaches of Peoria still belong to the Blues, correct?

WYFR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 03:00 PM
  #2
Hero
Raptors 13/14
 
Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 18,811
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by FolignofortheCalder View Post
In light if the Canucks buying Peoria from the Blues, I'm trying to figure out how the buying/selling of AHL teams works. The 'Nucks already have the Chicago Wolves and I'm sure they're not allowed to own multiple AHL teams so what do they do now? Sell the Wolves, give them to the Blues, or what? Also I assume the players/coaches of Peoria still belong to the Blues, correct?
http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2...se-from-blues/

The players/staff all still belong to the same NHL franchise. So all the Wolves players would move to Peoria and vise versa, if they do an official switch.

Might be some lag though as they sort out all the questions regarding Vancouver moving into the Heat's city and the following changes that would need to happen to sort everything out.

Hero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 03:09 PM
  #3
WYFR
StanleyCupSabres
 
WYFR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: North Carolina
Country: United States
Posts: 151
vCash: 500
so do the wolves go to peoria? or just no more AHL team there?

WYFR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 03:19 PM
  #4
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,905
vCash: 574
I'm pretty sure that the Canucks don't own the Wolves. Prior to the Jets moving to Winnipeg the Canucks minor league affliate was the Manitoba Moose which wasn't owned by the Canucks either. It was owned by True North which bough the Jets and relcoated the Moose to St Johns to become the Jets farm team.

This necessitated the Canucks finding a new farm affliation which they signed with the Wolves, which were previously Atlanta's minor league affliate.



Quote:
Originally Posted by FolignofortheCalder View Post
so do the wolves go to peoria? or just no more AHL team there?
The Canucks don't own the Wolves so it doesn't move them. The Wolves would now no longer be the farm team for the Canucks. They would need a new affliation, likely St. Louis.

As for Perioria, the Canucks could relocate that team. The Rumours are moving them to Abbotsford which would be closer to Vancouver, but there is currently a team there that would need to be relocated. The current Abbotsford team is owned by the Flames.


Last edited by cheswick: 04-01-2013 at 03:24 PM.
cheswick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 03:25 PM
  #5
WYFR
StanleyCupSabres
 
WYFR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: North Carolina
Country: United States
Posts: 151
vCash: 500
oh ok so the Canucks went from working with the Wolves as an AHL affiliate to owning the Rivermen as an AHL affliate/farm team. never really understood the NHL-AHL relationships. thanks guys

WYFR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 03:38 PM
  #6
Major4Boarding
Global Moderator
Private Equity
 
Major4Boarding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South of Heaven
Country: Scotland
Posts: 1,790
vCash: 500
Good spot for you to peruse through F4TC in the future

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=46

Major4Boarding is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 03:49 PM
  #7
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 55,496
vCash: 500
Check the stickied BOH Reference thread. The franchise information table includes known ownership by NHL teams of their AHL (and/or ECHL) affiliates.

Chicago (and Abbotsford) AHL franchise(s) are owned by local interests.

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 07:10 PM
  #8
HansH
Unwelcome Spectre
 
HansH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Diego
Country: United States
Posts: 3,321
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
Check the stickied BOH Reference thread. The franchise information table includes known ownership by NHL teams of their AHL (and/or ECHL) affiliates.

Chicago (and Abbotsford) AHL franchise(s) are owned by local interests.
To make it more confusing, I think the Flames own 50% of the Heat, and 50% is owned by local interests -- or some kind of confusing franchise lease situation.

HansH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 07:23 PM
  #9
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,202
vCash: 500
I'm curious to know if Seattle gets a team who's AHL farm system it be for them.

gstommylee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 11:12 PM
  #10
IU Hawks fan
They call me 'IU'
 
IU Hawks fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: No longer IU
Country: United States
Posts: 18,246
vCash: 772
The Wolves aren't owned by the Canucks, they're owned by 2 Chicago businessmen. Don Levin and Buddy Meyers.

IU Hawks fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 11:16 PM
  #11
Holden Caulfield
Moderator
Perennial Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,640
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
I'm curious to know if Seattle gets a team who's AHL farm system it be for them.
Well that would depend. If Seattle got Phoenix, they would inherit the agreement Phoenix has with Portland Pirates.

If Seattle were to get an expansion team, it's uncertain. It is likely the AHL would expand to stay even with NHL teams, but ownership and location would have to be found at that point.

__________________


Holden Caulfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 11:25 PM
  #12
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holden Caulfield View Post
Well that would depend. If Seattle got Phoenix, they would inherit the agreement Phoenix has with Portland Pirates.

If Seattle were to get an expansion team, it's uncertain. It is likely the AHL would expand to stay even with NHL teams, but ownership and location would have to be found at that point.
Thanks. Portland pirates i can see there being some confusion with that in the northwest for a while.

gstommylee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 11:26 PM
  #13
danishh
Dat Stache
 
danishh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: mtl/ott/somewhere
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,654
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by IU Hawks fan View Post
The Wolves aren't owned by the Canucks, they're owned by 2 Chicago businessmen. Don Levin and Buddy Meyers.
which, btw, makes this new st. louis-chicago arrangement more interesting, because if levin ends up owning Seattle NHL (and it appears he's the frontrunner), he'd likely want them to affiliate with the wolves.

__________________
RIP Kev.
danishh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 11:27 PM
  #14
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danishh View Post
which, btw, makes this new st. louis-chicago arrangement more interesting, because if levin ends up owning Seattle NHL (and it appears he's the frontrunner), he'd likely want them to affiliate with the wolves.
Makes sense to me.

gstommylee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 07:21 AM
  #15
CHRDANHUTCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auburn, Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 14,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via MSN to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via Yahoo to CHRDANHUTCH
Quote:
Originally Posted by danishh View Post
which, btw, makes this new st. louis-chicago arrangement more interesting, because if levin ends up owning Seattle NHL (and it appears he's the frontrunner), he'd likely want them to affiliate with the wolves.
not under the current scenario, danishh:

If Levin moves up he inherits the existing PDC w/ Portland, just as TNSE DOES WHEN THEY acquired Atlanta AND SHIFTED the Moose to NFLD/Labrador (existing 2 yr PDC) IRREGARDLESS of the lease w/ the arena. Levin loses his rights to the WOLVES if he shifts leagues.

CHRDANHUTCH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 07:56 AM
  #16
wildcat48
HFB Partner
 
wildcat48's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: South Portland, ME
Country: United States
Posts: 3,226
vCash: 500
Oh boy...

wildcat48 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 09:39 AM
  #17
HamiltonOHL
BulldogsFan00
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,813
vCash: 500
the person who asked about spliting ahl teams, remember back when oilers didint have a ahl squad they had i believe 2-3 farm teams to split their players between, wilkes, iowa stars and milwaukee i believe it was

HamiltonOHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 12:03 PM
  #18
danishh
Dat Stache
 
danishh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: mtl/ott/somewhere
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,654
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH View Post
not under the current scenario, danishh:

If Levin moves up he inherits the existing PDC w/ Portland, just as TNSE DOES WHEN THEY acquired Atlanta AND SHIFTED the Moose to NFLD/Labrador (existing 2 yr PDC) IRREGARDLESS of the lease w/ the arena. Levin loses his rights to the WOLVES if he shifts leagues.
obviously, like TNSE did, he'd try to work out a 'trade' with st. louis, where they shift to portland and seattle signs a new deal with chicago.

danishh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2013, 01:02 AM
  #19
CHRDANHUTCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auburn, Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 14,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via MSN to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via Yahoo to CHRDANHUTCH
Quote:
Originally Posted by danishh View Post
obviously, like TNSE did, he'd try to work out a 'trade' with st. louis, where they shift to portland and seattle signs a new deal with chicago.
Why would St. Louis want to be further away, than IL, WHETHER it lands in Rosemont or not, danishh, Phoenix has no interest in being bought out of its contract, and there's the caveat of the existing team has to find the next one before paying Portland wht's outstanding, just as Washington did in 2005, Anaheim paid when they pulled out after 3, and Buffalo did when they returned to Rochester when they bought them.

you forget PORTLAND HAS BEEN PRIVATELY OWNED SINCE ITS INCEPTION in 1977.

CHRDANHUTCH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2013, 05:37 PM
  #20
saskganesh
Registered User
 
saskganesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the Annex
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,044
vCash: 500
yeah, I don't know either.

saskganesh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2013, 05:48 PM
  #21
IU Hawks fan
They call me 'IU'
 
IU Hawks fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: No longer IU
Country: United States
Posts: 18,246
vCash: 772
The Blues won't have much a choice. Twice now, the Wolves have just taken 'the leftovers' after some switching due to AHL owners buying NHL teams and then vice versa. Once they're the ones in position to do the same, they will.

If the Blues wanted to guarantee that their affiliate would be close they should have not sold theirs. There is no reason for the Wolves to be stuck with the Blues still were Levin to buy an NHL franchise.

IU Hawks fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2013, 08:55 PM
  #22
HansH
Unwelcome Spectre
 
HansH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Diego
Country: United States
Posts: 3,321
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FolignofortheCalder View Post
In light if the Canucks buying Peoria from the Blues, I'm trying to figure out how the buying/selling of AHL teams works. The 'Nucks already have the Chicago Wolves and I'm sure they're not allowed to own multiple AHL teams so what do they do now? Sell the Wolves, give them to the Blues, or what? Also I assume the players/coaches of Peoria still belong to the Blues, correct?
Addressing the OP's question in the thread title:

The key to understanding the relationship between NHL teams and AHL teams is understanding that there are two key aspects to any minor-league team -- the _franchise_, which is the right to play as a team in a specific league, and the _affiliation_, which in the AHL's case is "the supplier of players to the team".

So what's happened here is that the Rivermen had an affiliation with the Blues, AND the Rivermen _franchise_ was also owned by the Blues. In this transaction, the FRANCHISE is what was sold from the Blues to the Canucks. The Blues are now free to negotiate an AFFILIATION agreement with any AHL FRANCHISE holder. Where that gets complicated is that there are exactly 30 AHL franchises, which means a game of musical chairs where the last person, instead of being totally left out, ends up likely "stuck" with the last available chair, even if it's not the one that's most comfortable for that person.

OK, it's not a perfect analogy, because in theory any NHL team could decide (as Anaheim did a few seasons ago, before the AHL finally made its way up to 30 teams, IIRC) that they're not going to sign an AHL affiliation agreement with anyone, and just sprinkle their prospects among various AHL teams that would accept the "loan" of the player, or sometimes just working with their ECHL affiliation(s). But the key is that the affiliation provides the players. What else any given affiliation provides is detail left up to the specifics of the negotiating parties -- so Vancouver's agreement with the Wolves, for example, is likely VERY different from Ottawa's agreement with Binghamton, in terms of who hires the coach, who GM's the team outside NHL-assigned players, and who decides the details of playing time and on-ice approach.

As others have already pointed out, the Wolves are not owned by the Canucks -- the Canucks were, up to this point, simply getting paid by the Wolves' ownership to supply the Wolves with an AHL roster. With the purchase of the former Rivermen _franchise_, the Canucks now only have to negotiate with themselves when it comes to the affiliation. However, they do still have to, as owners of the _franchise_, negotiate an arena lease somewhere. Maybe Peoria, maybe Abbotsford (if Calgary can be convinced to vacate, or to do some complicated franchise ownership transfer that means the Canucks trade the Rivermen franchise to Calgary in return for the Heat, potentially leaving the Heat's AMAZINGLY sweet lease in place for the Canucks/Rivermen to take advantage of), maybe elsewhere that doesn't currently have a hockey tenant or may be about to lose one (Houston? Kansas City? Seattle (Key Arena)? Tacoma? San Diego? Long Beach? Des Moines?)

So, here's the parties as they stand, and what they have to do before next season:

VANCOUVER CANUCKS:
*Know which AHL franchise they're affiliating with (the former Rivermen, over which they now have full control)
*Haven't announced where that franchise will play in 2013-14 (may know it, but it hasn't been made public)
*Must either sign a lease somewhere for next season, announce a signing that has already taken place, or announce they will take the Rivermen franchise dormant for a season.

ST. LOUIS BLUES:
*Have not indicated for certain which AHL franchise they're affiliating with - rumors point towards the one apparently newly-available opening in Chicago, which was made available by the Canucks not renewing their affiliation for next season.
*Must conclude an affiliation agreement for next season with SOME AHL team, or try to find alternate "homes" for their AHL players for 2013-14.

CALGARY FLAMES:
*As of this moment, know which franchise they're affiliating with, as they own the Heat (or have at least 50% ownership).
*Don't _have_ to do anything for next season, unless they are deciding to move the Abbotsford franchise. If they do move the franchise, they will need to agree to a lease and announce it.

CHICAGO WOLVES:
*As of this moment, do NOT know for sure which NHL team they will affiliate with in 2013-14 -- the most likely partner may be St. Louis and the Blues, but they have the option of negotiating an affiliation agreement with any willing partner, and if I'm not mistaken, there is more than one affiliation agreement that is up for renewal or transfer after this 2012-13 season.
*COULD in theory play the 2013-14 season without any NHL affiliation, but the league's replies to whether a team would be allowed to do so seem to always say "technically yes, but we don't think any owner would put themselves under that much of a financial burden to have to pay ALL of their players themselves instead of getting them supplied relatively cheaply through the NHL parent". So, it's a technical possibility, but a longshot.

PEORIA RIVERMEN:
*Non-player character - controlled by the Canucks now.

ABBOTSFORD HEAT:
*Non-player character - controlled by the Flames.

Hope this helps!

HansH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2013, 11:16 PM
  #23
IU Hawks fan
They call me 'IU'
 
IU Hawks fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: No longer IU
Country: United States
Posts: 18,246
vCash: 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by HansH View Post
CHICAGO WOLVES:
*As of this moment, do NOT know for sure which NHL team they will affiliate with in 2013-14 -- the most likely partner may be St. Louis and the Blues, but they have the option of negotiating an affiliation agreement with any willing partner, and if I'm not mistaken, there is more than one affiliation agreement that is up for renewal or transfer after this 2012-13 season.
*COULD in theory play the 2013-14 season without any NHL affiliation, but the league's replies to whether a team would be allowed to do so seem to always say "technically yes, but we don't think any owner would put themselves under that much of a financial burden to have to pay ALL of their players themselves instead of getting them supplied relatively cheaply through the NHL parent". So, it's a technical possibility, but a longshot.
Someone smarter than me will know more, but I'm pretty sure an affiliation is a requirement ever since the expansion to 30 teams.

IU Hawks fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2013, 12:31 AM
  #24
CHRDANHUTCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auburn, Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 14,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via MSN to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via Yahoo to CHRDANHUTCH
Quote:
Originally Posted by IU Hawks fan View Post
Someone smarter than me will know more, but I'm pretty sure an affiliation is a requirement ever since the expansion to 30 teams.
YEAH, IT IS IU, it's why St. Louis was coerced into buying the then Ice Cats after Boe went to Bridgeport. There are three bylaws: there are no Independents, no duals after all 30 franchises are spoken for now that OKC was activated 3 years ago, and a requirement that a PDC be in place w/ an NHL Partner...

the question is who else other than Vancouver has an expiring PDC If Young is to be believed that the Wolves are down to 4 potential partners, who are the other 3 besides St. Louis?

CHRDANHUTCH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2013, 12:36 AM
  #25
CHRDANHUTCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auburn, Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 14,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via MSN to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via Yahoo to CHRDANHUTCH
Quote:
Originally Posted by HamiltonOHL View Post
the person who asked about spliting ahl teams, remember back when oilers didint have a ahl squad they had i believe 2-3 farm teams to split their players between, wilkes, iowa stars and milwaukee i believe it was
the 5 way affiliation was an anomaly, Hamilton, Anaheim went through the same thing when Iowa was terminated and transferred to replace the conditional franchise in Cedar Park per league agreement otherwise, Texas wouldn't be in the league, because the other option would've been wht's now OKC.

CHRDANHUTCH 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 04:35 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.