HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Winnipeg Jets
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Jaffray and Kulda clear waivers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-14-2011, 03:28 PM
  #26
Lynk
Registered Bro
 
Lynk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 15,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
I'm not going to rehash my posts from the PGT here, but it's not the fact that Kulda cleared. It's the fact that he shouldn't have been exposed to waivers in the first place. Brutal asset management.

As to the bolded, there is NO way Chevy could know that.
I agree.

The Kulda we saw at the start of the pre-season to now is very different.

He's become a hard nosed, reliable stay at home d-man and I am still surprised everyone passed. With as much depth that we have it still would've hurt had someone claimed him.

Lynk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:38 PM
  #27
BigTuna49
#WPGWHITEOUT
 
BigTuna49's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ATL
Country: Scotland
Posts: 24,501
vCash: 84
Me happy.

"Caley" over in the Waivers thread made a point about Kulda clearing once already this year so he figured he would clear again. Gotta admit, that guy is smart and understands how these things work. He guessed Comeau would get claimed by Calgary and what do you know. As far as asset management goes, he knows his stuff.

BigTuna49 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:41 PM
  #28
Holden Caulfield
Global Moderator
The Eternal Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mungman View Post
The bolded would be a pretty douchy way to treat your farm team and players. I can't see TNSE doing that, they of anyone know how to treat a farm organization (especially since they still own the team).
Not at all. Farm teams are there to develop players and have extra players for your NHL team. That is there function, it is simply part of being a farm team. Not to mention the farm team would getting Kulda, and losing Festerling for one game, so it's an even split. And they would be getting Festerling back in a matter of days anyways.

Oh and it is certainly NOT douchy to the players, their salary is calculated daily. These guys make 10x more at the NHL level than AHL. Festerling will make more if he is up for 3 days with the team than he would in an entire month in the AHL, regardless if he plays in the NHL or not. I can guarantee he would not mind.

Anyways, as Huffer has said, we talked about this yesterday quite a bit, this was very poor asset management by Chevy, we got lucky he didn't get claimed. I have np real desire to type all the reasons this was a really stupid thing to do, but I think most people here understand by now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jet View Post
I guess the reason I am such a staunch supporter of #12 is:

A> Everyone gangs up on him, and we should be supporting him, he is a Jet (I know I am a giant hypocrite because of Byfuglien)

I also believe that there will be a time this year when we are really happy we have him. I also think that if we make the playoffs depth guys like Jones are EXACTLY the types of guys you need to go deep. Injuries often kill the front runners for the cup, and if you have guys you can plug in with poise, experience and versatility you are ahead of the game.
I am going to disagree here obviously . Jones is sorely missing in 2/3 of those things you listed. He has no poise, no versatility. Poise and versatility would fun he would be able to handle to puck to do something (ANYTHING) other than dump it straight down the ice or be able to play in more different roles. He can't. He can play 12-14 SHELTERED minutes and PK, but he cannot skate, cannot make a first pass, is out of position, cannot control the corners. If Jones is out there against the other team's top line, they will victimize him, especially in playoffs. If he is moved up the lineup, we will be in trouble. I would have Kulda/Oduya even Flood step up if injuries arise, at least those have the natural ability to keep up.

Holden Caulfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:43 PM
  #29
Snowman
Registered User
 
Snowman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Country: Canada
Posts: 260
vCash: 500
I don't see it as bad asset management because we risked losing Kulda and getting nothing in return.

Obviously, if he wasn't claimed for "free" we couldn't have got anything for him anyways.

I think Chevy was pretty confident, that no one was going to burn a roster spot to claim him.

Snowman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:51 PM
  #30
dobiezeke*
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,421
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowman View Post
I don't see it as bad asset management because we risked losing Kulda and getting nothing in return.

Obviously, if he wasn't claimed for "free" we couldn't have got anything for him anyways.

I think Chevy was pretty confident, that no one was going to burn a roster spot to claim him.
But we could have lost Kulda...we didn't...but, but we could have.

dobiezeke* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 04:08 PM
  #31
Snowman
Registered User
 
Snowman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Country: Canada
Posts: 260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dobiezeke View Post
But we could have lost Kulda...we didn't...but, but we could have.
I would think one of three things happened:

1) Chevy decided that Kulda was expendable and we could live without him if we lost him, so waivers wasn't a concern.

2) Chevy called around and knew he couldn't trade him for anything and that no one was likely to claim him, so we were relatively safe

3) Chevy was being nice and giving Kulda a chance to play somewhere else since he wasn't going to be playing much here.

All good asset management, IMO.

Snowman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 04:19 PM
  #32
atl thrasher344
Believe in Blueland
 
atl thrasher344's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 2,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowman View Post
I would think one of three things happened:

1) Chevy decided that Kulda was expendable and we could live without him if we lost him, so waivers wasn't a concern.

2) Chevy called around and knew he couldn't trade him for anything and that no one was likely to claim him, so we were relatively safe

3) Chevy was being nice and giving Kulda a chance to play somewhere else since he wasn't going to be playing much here.

All good asset management, IMO.
I doubt he did that. That would tip off the other GMs that Kulda was going to be sent down and they of course wouldn't say that they wouldn't want to give up anything for him because in a couple days they would get the opportunity to do get him for nothing.

atl thrasher344 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 04:21 PM
  #33
Holden Caulfield
Global Moderator
The Eternal Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowman View Post
I don't see it as bad asset management because we risked losing Kulda and getting nothing in return.

Obviously, if he wasn't claimed for "free" we couldn't have got anything for him anyways.

I think Chevy was pretty confident, that no one was going to burn a roster spot to claim him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowman View Post
I would think one of three things happened:

1) Chevy decided that Kulda was expendable and we could live without him if we lost him, so waivers wasn't a concern.

2) Chevy called around and knew he couldn't trade him for anything and that no one was likely to claim him, so we were relatively safe

3) Chevy was being nice and giving Kulda a chance to play somewhere else since he wasn't going to be playing much here.

All good asset management, IMO.
Your missing the point. Nobody ever claimed he had any trade value, that was not the issue. The issue was that if they sent him down on Sunday he did not have to clear waivers, so we risked an asset for nothing. That completely eliminates 1/2.

The 3rd has been brought up in the other thread as well. This may be the case, but at this point in his career with 15 career gp I do not think you are ready to give in to players like that, you control these players for a certain time. I think next year if he fails to crack the roster you look into getting him some time, but when he has come in and played that well at 23 you gotta take a serious look at protecting him for the future.

Holden Caulfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 04:31 PM
  #34
Snowman
Registered User
 
Snowman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Country: Canada
Posts: 260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holden Caulfield View Post
Your missing the point. Nobody ever claimed he had any trade value, that was not the issue. The issue was that if they sent him down on Sunday he did not have to clear waivers, so we risked an asset for nothing. That completely eliminates 1/2.

The 3rd has been brought up in the other thread as well. This may be the case, but at this point in his career with 15 career gp I do not think you are ready to give in to players like that, you control these players for a certain time. I think next year if he fails to crack the roster you look into getting him some time, but when he has come in and played that well at 23 you gotta take a serious look at protecting him for the future.
Actually, I think you're missing the point, which is: We obviously didn't think Kulda had much value to us or anyone else and could thus risk it.

Chevy didn't just fall off the GM cabbage truck. If he thought 48 hours earlier was the better move... he would have done it.

I understand people may have a soft spot for Kulda, but it wasn't asset mis-management in the slightest.

Snowman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 04:34 PM
  #35
PostmanPat1919
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 616
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by atl thrasher344 View Post
I doubt he did that. That would tip off the other GMs that Kulda was going to be sent down and they of course wouldn't say that they wouldn't want to give up anything for him because in a couple days they would get the opportunity to do get him for nothing.
Worth noting that the Islanders attempted to move Comeau and couldn't even get a 7th for him before deciding to place him on waivers.

PostmanPat1919 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 04:34 PM
  #36
luki here
Registered User
 
luki here's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Vienna
Country: Austria
Posts: 2,514
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
I'm not going to rehash my posts from the PGT here, but it's not the fact that Kulda cleared. It's the fact that he shouldn't have been exposed to waivers in the first place. Brutal asset management.

As to the bolded, there is NO way Chevy could know that.
i think the islanders were a pretty good candidate to claim him. Our D sucks anyways...our 4th dman was staios and he has a concussion as of today. Nearly any d man is an upgrade for us (thanks garth snow!)

luki here is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 04:35 PM
  #37
Holden Caulfield
Global Moderator
The Eternal Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowman View Post
Actually, I think you're missing the point, which is: We obviously didn't think Kulda had much value to us or anyone else and could thus risk it.

Chevy didn't just fall off the GM cabbage truck. If he thought 48 hours earlier was the better move... he would have done it.

I understand people may have a soft spot for Kulda, but it wasn't asset mis-management in the slightest.
I can understand this line of thinking, but it is very very dangerous. It may not matter in this case or the next, but continue to operate like this and one day we will get burned, guaranteed (think Michael Grabner or Martin St. Louis)

Holden Caulfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 04:45 PM
  #38
Snowman
Registered User
 
Snowman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Country: Canada
Posts: 260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holden Caulfield View Post
I can understand this line of thinking, but it is very very dangerous. It may not matter in this case or the next, but continue to operate like this and one day we will get burned, guaranteed (think Michael Grabner or Martin St. Louis)
I agree, one day a bad move could hurt us. But, people are talking like Chevy doesn't understand the waiver rules and completely missed that he could have sent Kulda down 48 hours earlier and not risked losing him.

We all know that isn't true, Chevy knew the situation and for whatever reason did what he did. I think people are underestimating the due diligence our management team does on moves like this.

Snowman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 04:51 PM
  #39
atl thrasher344
Believe in Blueland
 
atl thrasher344's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 2,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowman View Post
I agree, one day a bad move could hurt us. But, people are talking like Chevy doesn't understand the waiver rules and completely missed that he could have sent Kulda down 48 hours earlier and not risked losing him.

We all know that isn't true, Chevy knew the situation and for whatever reason did what he did. I think people are underestimating the due diligence our management team does on moves like this.
I don't think anyone is saying that he doesn't know the rules or even implying that. My point is that he took an unnecessary risk.

If you could do something today, although it inconveniences you, and face no consequences or you could wait until tomorrow, when it is convenient, and face the possibility of consequences, which is the smart thing to do?

atl thrasher344 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 04:51 PM
  #40
Holden Caulfield
Global Moderator
The Eternal Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowman View Post
I agree, one day a bad move could hurt us. But, people are talking like Chevy doesn't understand the waiver rules and completely missed that he could have sent Kulda down 48 hours earlier and not risked losing him.

We all know that isn't true, Chevy knew the situation and for whatever reason did what he did. I think people are underestimating the due diligence our management team does on moves like this.
We don't actually know that. There is the possibility he simply screwed up. I would hope not, but really I have a hard time interpreting this any other way, TBH. I really do WANT to believe that management is putting in their due diligence but I still think we got away with making a really stupid decision. Agree to disagree, I guess.

To be honest, I would rather this to have been a mistake, since then they can learn from it. If they did put in their due diligence, and still decided to make a completely unnecessary risk, I am slightly concerned, despite the decent enough job Chevy has been doing to this point.

Holden Caulfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 05:04 PM
  #41
Tdoe42
Registered User
 
Tdoe42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 1,159
vCash: 500
Jaffray was a Good call up too bad he had no points or he would still be in the line up. He will be back we played our best hockey with him in the line up

Tdoe42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 05:18 PM
  #42
Holden Caulfield
Global Moderator
The Eternal Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tdoe42 View Post
Jaffray was a Good call up too bad he had no points or he would still be in the line up. He will be back we played our best hockey with him in the line up
You won't get many agreeing with you here. He is not fast, does not hit, suspect turnovers in his own end, not particularly talented with the puck, does not fight, does not agitate. Adds nothing to a bottom line and nowhere near skilled enough to play top 6. AHL player.

I got nothing against the guy personally, but I feel that he has now been sufficiently rewarded for his Moose loyalty (made more in the past month than he would have in the entire season in AHL) and that he should now be in St.J to help them, where is actually a good player for them.

Holden Caulfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 05:19 PM
  #43
Lynk
Registered Bro
 
Lynk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 15,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holden Caulfield View Post
You won't get many agreeing with you here. He is not fast, does not hit, suspect turnovers in his own end, not particularly talented with the puck, does not fight, does not agitate. Adds nothing to a bottom line and nowhere near skilled enough to play top 6. AHL player.

I got nothing against the guy personally, but I feel that he has now been sufficiently rewarded for his Moose loyalty (made more in the past month than he would have in the entire season in AHL) and that he should now be in St.J to help them, where is actually a good player for them.
Pretty much this.

Lynk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 05:23 PM
  #44
Snowman
Registered User
 
Snowman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Country: Canada
Posts: 260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by atl thrasher344 View Post
I don't think anyone is saying that he doesn't know the rules or even implying that. My point is that he took an unnecessary risk.

If you could do something today, although it inconveniences you, and face no consequences or you could wait until tomorrow, when it is convenient, and face the possibility of consequences, which is the smart thing to do?
I understand where you're coming from. But my point is that Chevy didn't consider it a risk. For whatever reason, Chevy didn't think it was important to protect Kulda.

Or, we figured we had no choice but to keep Kulda up as long as necessary and that losing him on waivers was something we were going to have to deal with in order to keep our team competitive with all our injuries.

Snowman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 05:42 PM
  #45
Snowman
Registered User
 
Snowman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Country: Canada
Posts: 260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holden Caulfield View Post
We don't actually know that. There is the possibility he simply screwed up. I would hope not, but really I have a hard time interpreting this any other way, TBH. I really do WANT to believe that management is putting in their due diligence but I still think we got away with making a really stupid decision. Agree to disagree, I guess.

To be honest, I would rather this to have been a mistake, since then they can learn from it. If they did put in their due diligence, and still decided to make a completely unnecessary risk, I am slightly concerned, despite the decent enough job Chevy has been doing to this point.
I wouldn't be. If we'd waived a top notch prospect, I'd be worried, but a 7,8,9 D-man. Not so much. Although, you may view Kulda higher than that and could very well be right about him in the future.

But at this point with Kulda, if someone claimed him, they have to keep him on the roster and he's still not there yet as a regular player. And if someone claimed him and didn't keep him on the roster... we get him back.

Very low risk move. I didn't want to lose Kulda either, I'm just trying to provide some rationale for our move.

Maybe, that's why Chevy did it this way.

Snowman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 06:04 PM
  #46
Tdoe42
Registered User
 
Tdoe42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 1,159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holden Caulfield View Post
You won't get many agreeing with you here. He is not fast, does not hit, suspect turnovers in his own end, not particularly talented with the puck, does not fight, does not agitate. Adds nothing to a bottom line and nowhere near skilled enough to play top 6. AHL player.

I got nothing against the guy personally, but I feel that he has now been sufficiently rewarded for his Moose loyalty (made more in the past month than he would have in the entire season in AHL) and that he should now be in St.J to help them, where is actually a good player for them.
I disagree I admit that he isnt anything more then a good callup but too say he adds nothing is pretty steep. He was solid on the forcheck and made some nice hits even though thats not his game he is an ahl goal scorer and its just too bad he hasnt put up points but I think he will eventually he is gonna get a cpl more games it appears.

Tdoe42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 06:17 PM
  #47
Hammer Slammer
Moderator
 
Hammer Slammer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,771
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to Hammer Slammer
Thank goodness Kulda cleared and happy Jaffray is on his way back to STJ. I'm sure he'll clear. Nothing against him, he was my favourite player on the Moose.

__________________
Hammer Slammer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 06:34 PM
  #48
Jerry Westerbee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2
vCash: 500
I keep seeing comments about 48 hours. I thought that You could only waive Monday through Thursday? Not sure.

Jerry Westerbee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 06:46 PM
  #49
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 11,005
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowman View Post
Actually, I think you're missing the point, which is: We obviously didn't think Kulda had much value to us or anyone else and could thus risk it.

Chevy didn't just fall off the GM cabbage truck. If he thought 48 hours earlier was the better move... he would have done it.

I understand people may have a soft spot for Kulda, but it wasn't asset mis-management in the slightest.
I don't agree with you Snowman.

To me it doesn't matter if we consider that Kulda had "low value."

The fact of the matter is that he is part of our organization, a 23 year old D man who has shown that he can play in the NHL, and a guy that could really be used in St. John's.

To me, it doesn't matter if we are talking about Kulda or the Jets washing machines. If our management team passes up an opportunity to not lose an asset, ANY asset, and instead takes the path that COULD lead to losing them for nothing, I question that line of thinking.

So I am firmly in the Bad Asset Management camp.

Huffer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 06:49 PM
  #50
Holden Caulfield
Global Moderator
The Eternal Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry Westerbee View Post
I keep seeing comments about 48 hours. I thought that You could only waive Monday through Thursday? Not sure.
You can waiver players at any time. Players waived during the week clear waivers 24 hours after being placed on waivers. Players waived on the weekend clear waivers 48 hours after being waived.

The 48 hours thing that has come up in this thread is simply due to the fact that had Kulda been sent down on Sunday he would not have had to clear waivers, but he was put on waivers on Tuesday morning.

Holden Caulfield 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 10:46 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.