Yes he can be so as long as no other team put a claim in for him. If another team did put a claim in for him and the Oilers assign him to the Barons he would then be awarded to said team.
I'm pretty sure if another team had put a claim in, it just means the Oilers would have to waive him again to send him down. As far as I know he wouldn't just be sent to the team that put in the claim.
I'm pretty sure if another team had put a claim in, it just means the Oilers would have to waive him again to send him down. As far as I know he wouldn't just be sent to the team that put in the claim.
It depends. If the other team has higher waiver priority, which every team other than Dallas does right now, they would get him whether or not the Oilers claim him. If the team is of lower priority, then you are right, the Oilers could keep him on the main roster and later waive him again.
So the bottom line is that if the Oilers are successful in their claim and Dallas does not put in a claim, which they won't, the Oilers can send him down.
I'm pretty sure if another team had put a claim in, it just means the Oilers would have to waive him again to send him down. As far as I know he wouldn't just be sent to the team that put in the claim.
Of course he would, the whole point of waivers is to help said players stay in the NHL and earn a job there. If the Oilers intention is to send him to the minors he would go to the next team on the pecking list. However I'm sure they would be notified of any other teams making a claim and then the Oilers would have to decide to keep him on heir roster to send him to OKC.
Meh - I probably would've just let him go unclaimed. The Barons are doing fine, and I'd rather have the extra contract space.
This was my first concern as well. Someone pointed out we are very unlikely to make a trade where we take on an extra contract which makes a lot of sense.
According to Spectors tweet Chorney is on the Oilers roster and thus the reason that Teubert was sent down. He then also said that Chorney would ahve to be placed back on waivers to go to OKC and they would likely do this tomorrow with Sutton becoming available to play tomorrow.
Also for those asking about contracts that puts us back to 49.
Of course he would, the whole point of waivers is to help said players stay in the NHL and earn a job there. If the Oilers intention is to send him to the minors he would go to the next team on the pecking list. However I'm sure they would be notified of any other teams making a claim and then the Oilers would have to decide to keep him on heir roster to send him to OKC.
If you can find that section in the CBA I'd love to see it, but I've never heard of a player going to the next highest team that put in a claim when a team tries to send a guy down.
For example, you say Spector says he would have to clear again to get sent down. If true, that would mean either DAL or PIT out in a claim as well. If the Oilers decide to send Chorney down, he would need to clear waivers again, not get sent immediately to DAL or PIT.
i think Spector's wrong. from up-thread (emphasis mine):
Quote:
Originally Posted by phaedrusDH
From the CBA:
13.22 When a Club claims a Player on Regular, Re-Entry or Unconditional Waivers, and, subsequently, in the same season it requestsWaivers on the same Player and the original owning Club is the successful and only Club making a Waiver claim, then the original owning Club shall be entitled to Loan such Player to a club in another league within thirty days without further Waivers being asked; provided that such Player has not participated in ten or more NHL Games (cumulative) and remained on an NHL roster more than thirty days (cumulative) following such successful claim.
my interpretation is that Chorney can be assigned to the AHL as he has not played 10 NHL games since he was claimed by St. Louis.
If you can find that section in the CBA I'd love to see it, but I've never heard of a player going to the next highest team that put in a claim when a team tries to send a guy down.
You're right it might not actually work like that but it makes sense to me that it saves time because if the Oilers have to put him back on waivers said team is likely to put in a claim again and you're back to the initial situation.
If you can find that section in the CBA I'd love to see it, but I've never heard of a player going to the next highest team that put in a claim when a team tries to send a guy down.
There is a rule about offering the player to other teams that put in a claim but that's only if you want to trade the player you acquired off waivers.
By the by, TSN has him listed as both claimed and assigned to OKC.
Of course he would, the whole point of waivers is to help said players stay in the NHL and earn a job there. If the Oilers intention is to send him to the minors he would go to the next team on the pecking list. However I'm sure they would be notified of any other teams making a claim and then the Oilers would have to decide to keep him on heir roster to send him to OKC.
In this situation the only team the Oilers have priority over is Dallas though, so if any other team except Dallas put in a cliam they would get him over the Oilers.
i think Spector's wrong. from up-thread (emphasis mine):
If it is worth anything I agree with your assessment. Unless and means something completely different in Hockey Law than it does in my world you are right.
That said there have been other examples in the past where what seemed like clear language in the CBA ha ended-up being interpreted differently.
In this situation the only team the Oilers have priority over is Dallas though, so if any other team except Dallas put in a cliam they would get him over the Oilers.
Yes and Pitts has priority too.
However am I correct in assuming that they have this rule this way to protect the player and keep them in the NHL should another team want them?
He's a servicable AHL defenceman; He'll be nothing else, nothing more.
He's still fairly young. Look at the huge corner Smid just turned. He's a good AHL dman who could likely be a 6/7 on a weaker NHL team with a chance to be more
However am I correct in assuming that they have this rule this way to protect the player and keep them in the NHL should another team want them?
That would be the most likely intent of the rule.
As to Pittsburgh, they have more points than the Oilers but a lower percentage of possible points earned due to the one extra game, so as far as waivers are concerned they would retain priority over the Oilers.
He's still fairly young. Look at the huge corner Smid just turned. He's a good AHL dman who could likely be a 6/7 on a weaker NHL team with a chance to be more
The difference is type of play and developmental styles.
The closer example would be Potter as they both developed in the A, and are offensive minded. But he hasn't shown anything at the NHL level thus far to prove he's anything more than a mid ranged AHL defencemen.
