Like? You do realize there was probably over 100 guys on waiver a week and a half ago.
- Lahey

And all of them were the people you'd expect to clear waivers...

And all of them were the people you'd expect to clear waivers...
- p_zub

So what's your point? Seguin could've been apart of the guys sent down, but he would've had to clear waivers, hence why he wasn't assigned to the AHL.

So what's your point? Seguin could've been apart of the guys sent down, but he would've had to clear waivers, hence why he wasn't assigned to the AHL.
- Lahey

My point was in response to the people who wondered why the rules would be bent for Hall when he returns, and Seguin's name came up as a player who also wasn't able to be sent down for fear of losing him on waivers. Cloutier's convinced they'll bend the rules for Hall, but there would be a lot of pissed of teams if that happened, therefore it's not likely to go through.

My point was in response to the people who wondered why the rules would be bent for Hall when he returns, and Seguin's name came up as a player who also wasn't able to be sent down for fear of losing him on waivers. Cloutier's convinced they'll bend the rules for Hall, but there would be a lot of pissed of teams if that happened, therefore it's not likely to go through.
- p_zub

The rules wouldn't be bent for Hall, they can't be bent. What could've potentially happened was Hall would agree to a AHL deal with the Barons separate from the Oilers, but I'm not even sure that is an option anymore.

The rules wouldn't be bent for Hall, they can't be bent. What could've potentially happened was Hall would agree to a AHL deal with the Barons separate from the Oilers, but I'm not even sure that is an option anymore.
- Lahey

Yeah, that can't be done either...his ELC already has a two-way provision factoring in the AHL.

The rules wouldn't be bent for Hall, they can't be bent. What could've potentially happened was Hall would agree to a AHL deal with the Barons separate from the Oilers, but I'm not even sure that is an option anymore.
- Lahey

The rules were bent for Ben Scrivens since there is some agreement present, preventing him from going on waivers. I think Hall might be able to go down as well.

The rules were bent for Ben Scrivens since there is some agreement present, preventing him from going on waivers. I think Hall might be able to go down as well.
- JVR2112

I doubt any rules were bent. I don't know what his situation was, but rules just aren't being bent. He either wasn't waiver eligible or was waiver eligible and cleared them.

The rules were bent for Ben Scrivens since there is some agreement present, preventing him from going on waivers. I think Hall might be able to go down as well.
- JVR2112

I can't even find anywhere that says Scrivens went to the Marlies.

It's probably why they went to Switzerland and not the KHL. They could dominate with less effort.
- buffalofan19

lol......No..It's because Switzerland is ten times a better place to live and Canada and Switzerland are tight knit in terms of hockey development. Switzerland is Canada little brother in that regard.

The rules were bent for Ben Scrivens since there is some agreement present, preventing him from going on waivers. I think Hall might be able to go down as well.
- JVR2112

No rules were bent for Scrivens. In his new contract, the first year is a two-way deal, meaning he fit within the agreement the sides had that players on two-way deal could be sent down without waivers. This scenario wouldn't have been possible in the second year of the deal.

No rules were bent for Scrivens. In his new contract, the first year is a two-way deal, meaning he fit within the agreement the sides had that players on two-way deal could be sent down without waivers. This scenario wouldn't have been possible in the second year of the deal.
- p_zub

So there is an exception though. He would've normally went on waivers.

2 way has nothing to do with whether a player is eligible for waivers or not.
- JVR2112

It did in the case of the lockout. The NHL and PA negotiated an exception for players on two-way contracts to be assigned to the AHL without having to clear waivers. The stipulation is that they had to have been placed on waivers before the previous CBA expired, and they have to be recalled 3 days before NHL play resumes to avoid having to pass through re-entry waivers.

Edit: To relate it to your point, because Hall wasn't waived before the CBA expired (couldn't because he was injured), he doesn't qualify to play in the AHL without having to go through waivers. It wasn't a case-by-case exemption, but a one-time wider ranging exception.

I can't even find anywhere that says Scrivens went to the Marlies.
- Lahey

From Augello's blog:

Also on the goaltending page, as the Marlies open up training camp tomorrow at the Mastercard Centre in Etobicoke, recently signed goaltender Ben Scrivens will be on hand and due to an agreement between the players and owners before September 15th, will likely be between the pipes when Toronto begins the AHL regular season against Rochester on October 13th.

The 26 year old Scrivens signed a two year contract with the Leafs in August, after going 22-15-1 with a 2.04 GAA last season and leading Dallas Eakins' club to the Calder Cup Final.

According to the Globe and Mail’s James Mirtle, Toronto took advantage of the fact that the first year of the deal was two-way, which allowed the club to use an exception agreed to before the lockout for players under two-way deals to be signed to AHL-only contracts and thus not be subject to waivers once the lockout has ended.

Isn't Taylor Hall still on his ELC? Wouldn't that make him eligible?

From Augello's blog:



Isn't Taylor Hall still on his ELC? Wouldn't that make him eligible?
- JVR2112

Wasn't waived before the previous CBA expired because he was injured.

Wasn't waived before the previous CBA expired because he was injured.
- p_zub

Scrivens was waived?

From Augello's blog:



Isn't Taylor Hall still on his ELC? Wouldn't that make him eligible?
- JVR2112

The problem is he had to be assigned before the 15th. He was eligible, but because he was hurt he became in eligible. It was my understanding that teams had until the 15th or whatever to assign players, if you didn't you couldn't send him after.

Scrivens was waived?
- JVR2112

Technically, but it was more of a formality for paperwork. Players who were waived under this provision weren't allowed to be claimed by other teams.

I should add, though, upon further reading, this provision was extended to AHL veterans (which Scrivens has now played two seasons) who were currently on two-way NHL contracts. That also likely plays in the scenario more than I discussed as neither Hall or Seguin played any time in the AHL up until this point.

It did in the case of the lockout. The NHL and PA negotiated an exception for players on two-way contracts to be assigned to the AHL without having to clear waivers. The stipulation is that they had to have been placed on waivers before the previous CBA expired, and they have to be recalled 3 days before NHL play resumes to avoid having to pass through re-entry waivers.

Edit: To relate it to your point, because Hall wasn't waived before the CBA expired (couldn't because he was injured), he doesn't qualify to play in the AHL without having to go through waivers. It wasn't a case-by-case exemption, but a one-time wider ranging exception.
- p_zub

That isn't true. Alex Plante was on waivers and has a two-way deal.

The problem is he had to be assigned before the 15th. He was eligible, but because he was hurt he became in eligible. It was my understanding that teams had until the 15th or whatever to assign players, if you didn't you couldn't send him after.
- Lahey

Got it. This stuff is confusing and stupid tbh. Barons would be even more scary with Hall, Nuge, and Ebs lol.

Got it. This stuff is confusing and stupid tbh. Barons would be even more scary with Hall, Nuge, and Ebs lol.
- JVR2112

The problem I have is now guys that need the time in the AHL aren't going to get it. Sure it will be nice for whoever gets playing time with the Nuge and Ebs, but what about the other guys that get pushed down the lineup? Now all of a sudden a guy like Curtis Hamilton will be in the ECHL or in the pressbox.

The one real bright spot for me is Schultz. I'm not sure how good he is and was a bit scared that he'd struggle in the NHL. At least now if he doesn't have the AHL game down, maybe he realizes that he should stay in the AHL until he is ready.

Technically, but it was more of a formality for paperwork. Players who were waived under this provision weren't allowed to be claimed by other teams.

I should add, though, upon further reading, this provision was extended to AHL veterans (which Scrivens has now played two seasons) who were currently on two-way NHL contracts. That also likely plays in the scenario more than I discussed as neither Hall or Seguin played any time in the AHL up until this point.
- p_zub

I think you are making this up. You can't waive players and not have them be available to other teams.

The reason players weren't picked up was because if you did pick them up you'd be forced to keep them on your NHL roster, which for the most part is a horrible option. The majority of the guys that were on waivers need to be playing and developing their game. What good is picking up a Zach Boychuk or Brett Sutter who may one day be good players, but they end up sitting at home wasting a year of development?

The problem I have is now guys that need the time in the AHL aren't going to get it. Sure it will be nice for whoever gets playing time with the Nuge and Ebs, but what about the other guys that get pushed down the lineup? Now all of a sudden a guy like Curtis Hamilton will be in the ECHL or in the pressbox.

The one real bright spot for me is Schultz. I'm not sure how good he is and was a bit scared that he'd struggle in the NHL. At least now if he doesn't have the AHL game down, maybe he realizes that he should stay in the AHL until he is ready.
- Lahey

Agree with you about Schultz. Blessing in disguise really. You want him to dominate the AHL and then transition into the NHL with confidence and more experience, instead of being thrown into a top4 position in the NHL.

As a followup this is what the NHL/PA pact is;

They can still be claimed. The "special" aspect of this waiver period is that, at the end of the lock-out (should there be one), these players can be recalled and any of them who are eligible for 're-entry' waivers will not have to do so.
The only difference from the current rule to this revision is the re-entry.


While maybe their is a handshake agreement about picking guys this is what Portzline posted on twitter. There was talk about a handshake agreement last lockout and ask MTL how well that worked.

Aaron Portzline
Quote:
Even with 'waiver window' created by NHL/NHLPA pact, some teams very reluctant to expose players ... even w lockout looming.

I think you are making this up. You can't waive players and not have them be available to other teams.

The reason players weren't picked up was because if you did pick them up you'd be forced to keep them on your NHL roster, which for the most part is a horrible option. The majority of the guys that were on waivers need to be playing and developing their game. What good is picking up a Zach Boychuk or Brett Sutter who may one day be good players, but they end up sitting at home wasting a year of development?
- Lahey

http://www.tsn.ca/ahl/story/?id=405264

...and I quote:

"One of the few things the NHL and the NHL Players Association agreed on this week was a mechanism for shipping players to the AHL in case of a lockout."

"Players who are subject to clearing waivers and who are waived before the Collective Bargaining Agreement expires at midnight Saturday can be assigned to the AHL and then can return without re-entry waivers if they are recalled three days before play resumes."

"That includes those on two-way contracts, and already there has been a flood of players assigned to the AHL."

http://www.tsn.ca/ahl/story/?id=405264

...and I quote:

"One of the few things the NHL and the NHL Players Association agreed on this week was a mechanism for shipping players to the AHL in case of a lockout."

"Players who are subject to clearing waivers and who are waived before the Collective Bargaining Agreement expires at midnight Saturday can be assigned to the AHL and then can return without re-entry waivers if they are recalled three days before play resumes."
- p_zub

And that's always been the rule. The only thing changed is the re-entry.

You still like before are waiving players. Kinda like how every year during and after training camp players go on waivers and then are assigned to the AHL if they clear.

It doesn't say anything about players not having to go on waivers.