Waivers Rule - Should be Enforced

CBJackets · Guru

Waivers Rule - Should be Enforced

Philippe27 · Guru

I'm not sure I get this rule, how do we know if a guy clears waivers or not, I always thought players stayed on the farm and we could claim them whenever we wanted.
Anyways if this rule is to be enforced I'd like Richardson to go back to his original team because I claimed him after I made a trade with the Rangers which he backed out of and I don't want to be stuck paying for a guy I don't need.

-- Edited by Philippe27 at 22:40, 2006-11-10

CBJackets · Guru

Well the rule was put in place so that teams couldn't keep lousy contracts in the minors. I don't see the difference between a guy starting there and a guy being sent there. I guess Eric or Bryce will have to clarify, but I think it's unfair to just keep your big contracts in the minors and not be subject to the cap or the salary.

Florida Panthers · Senior Member

Philippe27 wrote:

I'm not sure I get this rule, how do we know if a guy clears waivers or not, I always thought players stayed on the farm and we could claim them whenever we wanted.
Anyways if this rule is to be enforced I'd like Richardson to go back to his original team because I claimed him after I made a trade with the Rangers which he backed out of and I don't want to be stuck paying for a guy I don't need.

You'd know that a guy clears waivers if he isn't taken off your team... otherwise he should be staying on your pro roster the whole time. The rule is pretty clear about timelines to claim someone off waivers as well as who has to remain on the pro roster.

I don't see why you should be allowed to have Richardson go back to his original team... whatever happened between you and the Rangers is between you and the Rangers, not an issue for the rest of the league to keep track of or have to be affected by.

-- Edited by Florida Panthers at 23:08, 2006-11-10

Philippe27 · Guru

Florida Panthers wrote:

Philippe27 wrote:

I'm not sure I get this rule, how do we know if a guy clears waivers or not, I always thought players stayed on the farm and we could claim them whenever we wanted.
Anyways if this rule is to be enforced I'd like Richardson to go back to his original team because I claimed him after I made a trade with the Rangers which he backed out of and I don't want to be stuck paying for a guy I don't need.

You'd know that a guy clears waivers if he isn't taken off your team... otherwise he should be staying on your pro roster the whole time. The rule is pretty clear about timelines to claim someone off waivers as well as who has to remain on the pro roster.

I don't see why you should be allowed to have Richardson go back to his original team... whatever happened between you and the Rangers is between you and the Rangers, not an issue for the rest of the league to keep track of or have to be affected by.

-- Edited by Florida Panthers at 22:54, 2006-11-10

I'll let Bryce and Eric decide on that but if I'm stuck paying his 2M salary because of another GM I'll be pissed.

-- Edited by Philippe27 at 23:05, 2006-11-10

Florida Panthers · Senior Member

Philippe27 wrote:

I'll let Bryce and Eric decide on that but if I'm stuck paying his 2M salary because of another GM I'll be pissed.

-- Edited by Philippe27 at 23:05, 2006-11-10

I don't understand... why is it another GM's fault that you have Richardson? Unless I remember incorrectly, no trade was processed with and the Rangers, and then reversed because someone backed out (by all means correct me if I'm wrong)... so why is it someone else's fault that you picked up someone on waivers??

I'm sure the other GM would be just as pissed if he got stuck paying Richardson's $2 mil contract because you made a mistake in taking him off waivers, and it got reversed...

Philippe27 · Guru

Florida Panthers wrote:

Philippe27 wrote:

I'll let Bryce and Eric decide on that but if I'm stuck paying his 2M salary because of another GM I'll be pissed.

-- Edited by Philippe27 at 23:05, 2006-11-10

I don't understand... why is it another GM's fault that you have Richardson? Unless I remember incorrectly, no trade was processed with and the Rangers, and then reversed because someone backed out (by all means correct me if I'm wrong)... so why is it someone else's fault that you picked up someone on waivers??

I'm sure the other GM would be just as pissed if he got stuck paying Richardson's $2 mil contract because you made a mistake in taking him off waivers, and it got reversed...

He's not stuck paying him cuz I made a mistake taking him off, he'd be stuck with him because a GM traded me a 1st round pick he didn't have and then backed out when I tried to renegotiate.
Whatever my team's still the best in the league so whatever Bryce and Eric decide I'll deal with.

Florida Panthers · Senior Member

Philippe27 wrote:

He's not stuck paying him cuz I made a mistake taking him off, he'd be stuck with him because a GM traded me a 1st round pick he didn't have and then backed out when I tried to renegotiate.
Whatever my team's still the best in the league so whatever Bryce and Eric decide I'll deal with.

Glad to hear it, because on your pro roster is right where he should go... it shouldn't even be a second thought.

Philippe27 · Guru

Florida Panthers wrote:

Philippe27 wrote:

He's not stuck paying him cuz I made a mistake taking him off, he'd be stuck with him because a GM traded me a 1st round pick he didn't have and then backed out when I tried to renegotiate.
Whatever my team's still the best in the league so whatever Bryce and Eric decide I'll deal with.

Glad to hear it, because on your pro roster is right where he should go... it shouldn't even be a second thought.

Once the commish decides (not you) and I see Niinimaa and Zhamnov on the pro that's what I'll do.

Florida Panthers · Senior Member

Or rather than try to fight something that's black and white in the rules, we could all just follow them...

Philippe27 · Guru

Florida Panthers wrote:

Or rather than try to fight something that's black and white in the rules, we could all just follow them...

Well it hasn't been enforced for the past 42 days so maybe something changed?

Eric_Isles · BRHL2 Co-Commish

While trying to read a majority of this, hear's how it goes.

(Keep in mind that this is a BRHL2 rule and not a FHL rule, so the enforcement of it is done manually)

When a team sends a player 70ov or above to the farm, it's pretty much like the player going through waivers. Except, that if he clears, the player will be placed back onto the pro roster within 24 hours (or as close as I can get it). Chicago's placement of Niinimaa is primarily my fault since CHI claimed him from NYR, and he should've been moved up to the pro roster.

While the other players involved will be moved to the pro's before next sim.

Hope that answers the confusion.

Hawks_G · Guru

I even sent an email to the league to bring Niinimaa up and send Suter down.... :)

Florida Panthers · Senior Member

Eric_Calgary wrote:

When a team sends a player 70ov or above to the farm, it's pretty much like the player going through waivers. Except, that if he clears, the player will be placed back onto the pro roster within 24 hours (or as close as I can get it). Chicago's placement of Niinimaa is primarily my fault since CHI claimed him from NYR, and he should've been moved up to the pro roster.

While the other players involved will be moved to the pro's before next sim.

Hope that answers the confusion.

Given that the intent of the rule is that decent players with big contracts can't be buried on the farm, why not just simplify everything and say that no skater 70 or over, and no goalie 73 or over can be on the farm... period. If you want to put a guy on waivers, go ahead, but he is never allowed to be on the farm. Not even for the game or two games that he's available on waivers.

BruinsAssistantGM · Veteran Member

In another league i am in they have a rule that a player making over $2 Million can't be sent to the farm, which will keep teams from trying to hide a salary with the cap in place.

Chinnick

AGM Boston