HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

players have to clear waivers by wed to play in ahl

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-10-2004, 10:32 AM
  #1
NYR469
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,785
vCash: 500
players have to clear waivers by wed to play in ahl

Quote:
When the summer began, it appeared players who hadn't been eligible for 50 AHL games last season wouldn't be able to return to the league this season. But that idea has been scraped. Now, all NHL players will be eligible to play in the AHL, but they must clear waivers and be assigned by Wednesday. If NHL players or those with two-way contracts aren't put on waivers, they will be considered locked out. "We're evaluating everything and debating if we want to risk putting someone like Jed Ortmeyer on waivers," Maloney said, alluding to the right wing who began and ended last season with the Pack but spent most of the time with the Rangers. "They have two-way contracts but need to clear waivers to go to the minors. It's a fairly significant risk if we put him on waivers and don't know if we want to."
NHL's Labor Strife Impacting AHL

NYR469 is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 10:39 AM
  #2
Larry Melnyk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Gloomsville, USA
Posts: 4,366
vCash: 500
Somehow, I think the meglomaniac midget and the greedy scumsucking owners will practice a little collusion and let all these guys "slip" thru waivers

Larry Melnyk is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 11:03 AM
  #3
NYR469
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Melnyk
Somehow, I think the meglomaniac midget and the greedy scumsucking owners will practice a little collusion and let all these guys "slip" thru waivers
i think that will be the case for most of the guys...it'll be "if you want your guy to clear, then let my guy clear too"

i think guys like ortmeyer will have no problem clearing, because the benefit of another team claiming him wouldn't be worth turning around and losing your own guy...

but that won't apply if teams try to send their top prospects thru...if for example the sens try to pass spezza thru then i think the gloves will come off and teams will say 'screw everyone else' and claim him because the potential benefit would far exceed the risk...

it'll be interesting to see if any teams get guts and risk losing a top prospect

NYR469 is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 12:22 PM
  #4
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
Well I hope we claim someone. We do need more bodies up front. Especially a centre. Nylander and Holik are only ones with NHL expierence. And dont count on Betts. He gets hurt alot, and I have not heard anything since he was hurt during the trade that got him to NYR. A guy like Josef Vasicek Id like to go after. He might hold out. I wonder what it would take to get him.

How about this?

Canes- Rachunek, 3rd in 05
Rangers- Vasicek

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 01:40 PM
  #5
Unknownbutfamous
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 449
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Unknownbutfamous
How bout this one

To Jed Ortmeyer41: NOthing!
To Rest of Rangers Fans: NO Stupid Trade proposals for JOrtmeyer41

Unknownbutfamous is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 01:51 PM
  #6
Kubera55
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 323
vCash: 500
Serious question Ort... what have you got against Rachunek and Poti?

Every trade proposal I've seen of yours involves one of the two.

Given the Rangers hideous lack of NHL vetted defensemen, why are you in such a hurry to get rid of some of the better ones the team actually does have?

Sure, if you wanted to trade Poti/Rachunek for a better defenseman, I might take your argument. But you seem to throw them into every trade regardless of positional analysis....

Kubera55 is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 01:53 PM
  #7
barnaby63
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Long Island
Posts: 860
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kubera55
Serious question Ort... what have you got against Rachunek and Poti?

Every trade proposal I've seen of yours involves one of the two.

Given the Rangers hideous lack of NHL vetted defensemen, why are you in such a hurry to get rid of some of the better ones the team actually does have?

Sure, if you wanted to trade Poti/Rachunek for a better defenseman, I might take your argument. But you seem to throw them into every trade regardless of positional analysis....
Cause he likes 4th line scappers like Big Snake and Laraque for Rachunek since we need LW'ers. Thats all you need to know about this guy.

barnaby63 is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 06:07 PM
  #8
Bacchus
Registered User
 
Bacchus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dickes B
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOrtmeyer41
How about this?

Canes- Rachunek, 3rd in 05
Rangers- Vasicek
If I remember correctly you had a similar proposal some time ago. You received a big NO from Canes fans.

Bacchus is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 07:23 PM
  #9
majicpixie
Registered User
 
majicpixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Tardis
Country: United States
Posts: 1,571
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to majicpixie Send a message via AIM to majicpixie Send a message via MSN to majicpixie
I found these lists on another message board earlier today...


Players who have to clear waivers to be in Hartford or sign an AHL contract by Wednesday, September 15th or will considered Locked Out:
LaBarbera
Ortmeyer
Ulmer
Wiseman
Valiquette
Nycholat
MacMillan
Grenier
Giroux

Players that are available to play in Hartford:
Lampman
Blackburn
Balej
Murray
Moore
Marshall
Tyutin
Weller
Pock
Stals
Cullen
Cuthbert
Filipowicz
Gernander
Hollweg
Helminen
Gillies
Osaer
Taylor
Liffiton
Lawson

majicpixie is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 08:54 PM
  #10
Fish
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 2,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by majicpixie
I found these lists on another message board earlier today...


Players who have to clear waivers to be in Hartford or sign an AHL contract by Wednesday, September 15th or will considered Locked Out:
LaBarbera
Ortmeyer
Ulmer
Wiseman
Valiquette
Nycholat
MacMillan
Grenier
Giroux

Players that are available to play in Hartford:
Lampman
Blackburn
Balej
Murray
Moore
Marshall
Tyutin
Weller
Pock
Stals
Cullen
Cuthbert
Filipowicz
Gernander
Hollweg
Helminen
Gillies
Osaer
Taylor
Liffiton
Lawson
Well I don't believe Osaer is signed...Gernander would have to clear waivers, Filipowicz too, also Marshall and Blackburn too I believe. Meanwhile Labarbera doesn't have to, nor does Ulmer, nor Nycholat, nor Wiseman, nor Giroux, nor Grenier.

Fish is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 09:04 PM
  #11
NYRangers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,853
vCash: 500
Blackburn doesnt.

NYRangers is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 09:11 PM
  #12
Fish
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 2,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRangers
Blackburn doesnt.
Are you sure?

13.4. Waiver Draft/Regular Season Waivers. With the exception
of those exempt Players set forth below, Players party to Player
Contract must be cleared through the waiver draft and/or regular
season waivers prior to being assigned to a minor league Club:

GOALIES
Age - Years - NHL Games

18 6 80
19 5 80
20 4 80
21 4 60
22 4 60
23 3 60
24 2 60
25+ 1

Blackburn is 21 and has played 63 NHL games

Fish is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 09:23 PM
  #13
NYRangers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish
Are you sure?

13.4. Waiver Draft/Regular Season Waivers. With the exception
of those exempt Players set forth below, Players party to Player
Contract must be cleared through the waiver draft and/or regular
season waivers prior to being assigned to a minor league Club:

GOALIES
Age - Years - NHL Games

18 6 80
19 5 80
20 4 80
21 4 60
22 4 60
23 3 60
24 2 60
25+ 1

Blackburn is 21 and has played 63 NHL games
I dont know the specifics but if the season is played he wont need to this season. Next season he would. We had a big discussion about this since its a question of 'whats his role in 2005-06 - do we hand him the job?'. Someone posted the reason why he doesnt need to clear on here somewhere. If he did there wouldnt be all this talk of him going to hartford in december.

maybe your right, but someone made a post why he was eligible. If hes not hes screwed, hes not ready for the NHL after being hurt and out so long.

NYRangers is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 09:29 PM
  #14
Fish
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 2,175
vCash: 500
I initially thought he wasn't eligible for waivers, until I re-read the rules several times and it seems like the only way he couldn't be is if the number of NHL games remains constant to the year he started playing (i.e. 80 vs 60).

At any rate, who would be willing to pick up Blackburn off of waivers to put on their roster after such a major injury?

Fish is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 09:32 PM
  #15
riz
Registered User
 
riz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 1,477
vCash: 500
Saw Osaer last night (Friday) playing in London (UK) with a SportAid charity team against local Racers team. He looked average at best so I wouldn't be suprised if he got signed to some second tier european league for this season. Or ECHL or downwards. But enough of that, how 'bout that Team Finland ?

riz is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 09:32 PM
  #16
NYRangers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish
At any rate, who would be willing to pick up Blackburn off of waivers to put on their roster after such a major injury?
I'd bet my entire savings he would be claimed.

NYRangers is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 09:45 PM
  #17
Fish
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 2,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRangers
I'd bet my entire savings he would be claimed.
I wouldn't be so quick to put your life savings (unless it amounts to little) on that. The team that claims him would have to keep him on the roster, otherwise the Rangers could claim him back...

Fish is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 09:51 PM
  #18
NYRangers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish
I wouldn't be so quick to put your life savings (unless it amounts to little) on that. The team that claims him would have to keep him on the roster, otherwise the Rangers could claim him back...
Doesnt matter to me. I still think theres no shot he gets through. Even if there was a 5% chance he could get through I doubt the Rangers take that chance.

NYRangers is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 07:02 AM
  #19
L.I.RangerFan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Enemy Land - Long Is
Country: United States
Posts: 600
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish
Are you sure?

13.4. Waiver Draft/Regular Season Waivers. With the exception
of those exempt Players set forth below, Players party to Player
Contract must be cleared through the waiver draft and/or regular
season waivers prior to being assigned to a minor league Club:

GOALIES
Age - Years - NHL Games

18 6 80
19 5 80
20 4 80
21 4 60
22 4 60
23 3 60
24 2 60
25+ 1

Blackburn is 21 and has played 63 NHL games

If I remember correctly, the waiver rules apply to the age of the player signing his first NHL contract and playing in the NHL.

Blackburn was 18 years old when he signed/played, so he would have 6 years or 80 games, whichever comes first.

IMO he is exempt.

Did some more research:

http://www.nhlcbanews.com/cba/article13.html


Quote:
For purposes of Regular Season Waivers and the Wavier Draft, the six year exemption for an 18 year old goalie and the five year exemption for a 19 year old goalie shall both be reduced to four years commencing the first season that the 18 or 19 year old goalie plays in 11 NHL Games or more. The next three seasons, regardless of whether the goalie plays any games in either season, shall count as the next three years toward satisfying the exemption.
So Blackburn played more than 11 games in his "18" year. That means that his waiver exemption is reduced to 4 years or 80 games. IMO still exempt.


Last edited by L.I.RangerFan: 09-11-2004 at 07:10 AM.
L.I.RangerFan is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 07:18 AM
  #20
L.I.RangerFan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Enemy Land - Long Is
Country: United States
Posts: 600
vCash: 500
Unless I am missing something Ortmeyer is also exempt. He signed his contract at age 24, so he would have two years or 60 games. Last year was his first year and he played 58 games.

Quote:
Note:


For purposes of this Article, a "year" of exemption shall mean a playing season and the waiver draft following such season.

For purposes of this Article, a Player who is exempt from a waiver draft, but eligible for regular season waivers, must clear regular season waivers before being sent to a minor league Club.

For purposes of this Article, "age 18" means a Player reaching his eighteenth birthday between January 1 next preceding the Entry Draft and September 15 next following the Entry Draft, both dates included; "age 19" means a Player reaching his nineteenth birthday in the calendar year of the Entry Draft; "age 20" means a Player reaching his twentieth birthday in the calendar year of the Entry Draft; and "age 21" means a Player reaching his twenty-first birthday in the calendar year of the Entry Draft.

L.I.RangerFan is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 08:24 AM
  #21
Fish
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 2,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by L.I.RangerFan
If I remember correctly, the waiver rules apply to the age of the player signing his first NHL contract and playing in the NHL.

Blackburn was 18 years old when he signed/played, so he would have 6 years or 80 games, whichever comes first.

IMO he is exempt.

Did some more research:

http://www.nhlcbanews.com/cba/article13.html




So Blackburn played more than 11 games in his "18" year. That means that his waiver exemption is reduced to 4 years or 80 games. IMO still exempt.
Yeah, that's where the confusion lies...if he is 21 now, is it the original 80 games that still apply, or is it now the 60 games that now apply. The CBA is not clear...

Fish is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 08:55 AM
  #22
L.I.RangerFan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Enemy Land - Long Is
Country: United States
Posts: 600
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish
Yeah, that's where the confusion lies...if he is 21 now, is it the original 80 games that still apply, or is it now the 60 games that now apply. The CBA is not clear...

Fish, I still believe it goes back to his original date of signing and playing. Take a look at the example used in the CBA

The following examples illustrate how the provisions in the Waiver chart shall be applied:


Quote:
An 18 year old or 19 year old drafted in the '95 Entry Draft who signed and played in 11 NHL Games or more in the 1995-96 season will be exempt as follows:

Season Waiver Draft Regular Season Waivers
95-96 n/a Exempt
96-97 Exempt Exempt
97-98 Exempt Exempt
98-99 Exempt Eligible
99-00 Eligible Eligible
So Blackburn was drafted in 2001 signed and played more than 11 games

01-02, waiver draft n/a regular season waivers, exempt
02-03 waiver draft exempt, regualr season waivers, exempt
03-04 waiver draft exempt, regular season waivers, exempt
04-05 waiver draft exempt, regular season waivers, eligible
05-06 eligible for all

Now you have to look at what a year constitutes.

Quote:
For purposes of this Article, a "year" of exemption shall mean a playing season and the waiver draft following such season.
So technically the year doesn't start anew until after the waiver draft. So if Blackburn is sent down prior to the expiration of the CBA, he is under the year 03-04 rules.

At least this is my take on it.

L.I.RangerFan is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 09:21 AM
  #23
Melrose_Jr.
Registered User
 
Melrose_Jr.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Providence, RI
Country: United States
Posts: 10,692
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRangers
I'd bet my entire savings he would be claimed.
Like Lundmark, Blackburn is such a high risk player, I just don't see any GM waiving one of his roster players to make room for him. We're not talking about sure fire, blue chip prospects here. Blackburn hasn't touched the ice in 18 months and as far as I know, has no projected date to make his return. Not exactly someone I'd expose a valueable commodity of mine for.

Melrose_Jr. is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 11:39 AM
  #24
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,192
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose_Jr.
Like Lundmark, Blackburn is such a high risk player, I just don't see any GM waiving one of his roster players to make room for him. We're not talking about sure fire, blue chip prospects here. Blackburn hasn't touched the ice in 18 months and as far as I know, has no projected date to make his return. Not exactly someone I'd expose a valueable commodity of mine for.
Assuming the commodity they expose is actually of value. If you've got a team with a questionable number 1, Blackburn might be worth a look if it means exposing a backup and if you've got some depth in the system.

Worse case scenario is you waive him and someone else claims him.

Edge is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 11:54 AM
  #25
NYRangers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose_Jr.
Like Lundmark, Blackburn is such a high risk player, I just don't see any GM waiving one of his roster players to make room for him. We're not talking about sure fire, blue chip prospects here. Blackburn hasn't touched the ice in 18 months and as far as I know, has no projected date to make his return. Not exactly someone I'd expose a valueable commodity of mine for.
Say Blackburn was in this situation with NJ. They waive him, you wouldnt take a chance on him if it meant loosing Strudwick?

NYRangers 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 09:14 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.