Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 13:24:03 GMT
this is an important topic and one that has brought some very good points in the chat. i dont believe the chat can record past messages so its best we discuss here.
i think its unfair that i will be losing a player like kovalchuk to waivers essentially for the second time. after all, he retired and when you retire and decide to come back, the team he left has first dibbs at him just like in the NHL.
why is it different here? this rule should be implemented before he comes back and for future occurrences.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 13:29:12 GMT
Since you're such a great guy on these message boards I'm sure everyone will understand and side with you getting Kovalchuk.
We shouldn't copy anything the NHL does regarding this situation. They've handled it horribly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 13:37:38 GMT
of course know one will agree with me just because of that but it doesnt mean my team should be penalized because everyone in this league has a low self-esteem after trash talking them each and every year.
the nhl has ruling on this subject, our league is based on nhl rules and stats, so i dont see the difference.
th player retired from the nhl how was the nhl ruling horrible? any player has the right to retire and come back in any sport
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 15:17:15 GMT
Perhaps this is a situation where we make new policies? I'm not sure there is a way to deal with this situation other than keeping it the way it is, having said that, if I had Kovi and he walked and I lost him without trading him away or dropping him in one way or another and he came back, I'd be a little rattled. Unfortunately Armando, I'm not exactly seeing a great way of dealing with it but i'll bring up these possibilities:
If a player on an active roster that has passed the threshold of being a rookie leaves to a foreign league or retires, said team has 3 year "rights" on a player. The years of these rights is gonna be hard to come up with a fair number.
If the player still has prospect status and leaves and then graduates to non-prospect status while not in the NHL, he becomes essentially a free agent and must pass through waivers. (This prevents the situation Peter brought up using the example of a player such as Gusev getting drafted and the team drafting him basically still having him past his prospect eligibility because of owning his "rights")
Player rights seems like a sticky situation that could have some odd issues.
Count me in with the group that thinks waivers should reset yearly based on results
If you want to include such rules as trade freezes on players picked up then perhaps we can hold discussions on new waiver rules as well.
As I've previously said in other polarizing posts I've made, I'm still learning the league and have 0 experience on how it operates and works throughout the season, I'm just posting to create discussion and thoughts!
|
|
|
Post by Dave - Calgary on May 11, 2017 16:02:16 GMT
I've always figured once you release a player, you give up those rights. Armando let me ask you this, did you release Kovalchuk? If so, your answer is right there. Right now there is a team holding onto Nichushkin in the hopes he comes back. You could've done the same thing with Kovy, but you wisely released him, freeing up a spot to put a contributing body in.
If there is to be a rule change regarding this, it should be implemented next season. Not after a big name like Kovalchuk suddenly reappears causing everyone to scramble.
Considering your stance Armando, I'm surprised your were so quiet last season when Radulov came back and Josh got the short end of the stick there. But then again, that didn't affect you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 16:42:53 GMT
Considering your stance Armando, I'm surprised your were so quiet last season when Radulov came back and Josh got the short end of the stick there. But then again, that didn't affect you. THIS^^^ ps sorry for stirring up the chat box then leaving. I can't see it from my proboards app and haven't been on my laptop since yesterday morning
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 17:43:23 GMT
From my perspective, resetting the waiver wire at end of season and somehow setting it up so that teams that finish near the bottom have a better chance at the top spot is the way to go.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 18:44:48 GMT
I've always figured once you release a player, you give up those rights. Armando let me ask you this, did you release Kovalchuk? If so, your answer is right there. Right now there is a team holding onto Nichushkin in the hopes he comes back. You could've done the same thing with Kovy, but you wisely released him, freeing up a spot to put a contributing body in. If there is to be a rule change regarding this, it should be implemented next season. Not after a big name like Kovalchuk suddenly reappears causing everyone to scramble. Considering your stance Armando, I'm surprised your were so quiet last season when Radulov came back and Josh got the short end of the stick there. But then again, that didn't affect you. kovalchuk OFFICIALLY RETIRED from the nhl, was i supposed to keep him on my roster? radulov DID NOT retire, HUGE! difference here. what ever ruling we do is fine but as it stands now by default we should follow nhl rules to be fair, shouldnt we?
|
|
|
Post by Dave - Calgary on May 11, 2017 19:00:24 GMT
This is where the confusion lies. Kovalchuk VOLUNTARILY RETIRED from the NHL.....he never OFFICALLY RETIRED. Therefore, there was always a chance he'd come back. With that knowledge, New Jersey never offically released him, but here in the DHL, the Islanders did. If you wanted to retain his rights, YES you should have kept him on your roster. Had New Jersey offically given Kovalchuk his release, he wouldn't have to go through them to get back to the NHL. He would be a free agent. Similar to what we have in the DHL.
So you are right Armando, the DHL is following the NHL rules here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 19:14:25 GMT
This is where the confusion lies. Kovalchuk VOLUNTARILY RETIRED from the NHL.....he never OFFICALLY RETIRED. Therefore, there was always a chance he'd come back. With that knowledge, New Jersey never offically released him, but here in the DHL, the Islanders did. If you wanted to retain his rights, YES you should have kept him on your roster. Had New Jersey offically given Kovalchuk his release, he wouldn't have to go through them to get back to the NHL. He would be a free agent. Similar to what we have in the DHL. So you are right Armando, the DHL is following the NHL rules here. you dont have to release a player if they retire, whether new jersey HAD or NOT they didnt release him and he did retire so there you have it. the reasoning behind his retiring is meaningless, he still RETIRED. so now he comes back to new jersey. if the DHL followed the NHL (which we should because we currently dont have a rule in place) we wouldnt be having this discussion and kovalchuk would be on the islanders. and since you are so stuck on the idea that i released him, technically i didnt, because we use shitty YAHOO kovalchuk was not and still is not in there system that following season!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 20:21:53 GMT
just reading this over... there are many elemants to this discussion.
1) Is Armando asking for the rule to reflect the NHL rules moving forward or is he specifically asking for Kovi to be added back to his team. I think the ladder has way less rope to pull because president has been set with Raduluv last season. Yes there are some semantics which differ between the 2 but not really... they both left for russian hockey.. managers at the time both dropped their guys.
Now moving forward.. the point can be made that if a player defects to the KHL .. maybe a 2 or 3 year grace period to add the player back could be discussed here.. cause there is fairness in that proposal.. def something that if implamented i can vote for.
2) I stated it in the chat.. im not a big fan of the current WW system in place. I believe that a reset each year starting with reverse order on the standings seems more appropriate to me... i have a hard time with the current system due to the amount of managerial turnover fantasy leagues have. Guy comes in and takes over a very good team and then lands the top WW pick only cause he was lucky enough to grab a team available 4 months before the other new team came.. who got WW pick 12...In the reset of the WW order..the teams standings do the talking and talent wont immediatley change when a new manager comes in.
Just wanted to throw my opinion here on this stuff.
Biz -
|
|
|
Post by Chris - Montreal on May 11, 2017 20:23:20 GMT
I am a bit on the fence here...the one thing that bothers me a little is that since Yahoo still had Nich available, even though he didn't play one second in the NHL last year, Peter was able to claim him as a waiver wire pick up (which was a brilliant move by Peter) at the end of the season...but since Kovy wasn't an option on Yahoo, he goes to the team with #1 waiver priority.
I'm not sure why Yahoo makes one available and not the other..that said, I think it is just tough luck...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 20:47:34 GMT
just reading this over... there are many elemants to this discussion. 1) Is Armando asking for the rule to reflect the NHL rules moving forward or is he specifically asking for Kovi to be added back to his team. I think the ladder has way less rope to pull because president has been set with Raduluv last season. Yes there are some semantics which differ between the 2 but not really... they both left for russian hockey.. managers at the time both dropped their guys. Biz - biz i have issues with your first statement because it is untrue and i/we need to clarify. - first, i never dropped kovalchuk, yahoo dropped him for me because he no longer was in the nhl and in there database. - second, yes the precedent was set with radulov but under this circumstance kovalchuk retired radulov did not, therefore its an entire different ruling. radulov is a free agent re-entering the nhl, kovalchuk is not a free agent and has no say but to return to the team he left when he retired (in our case the islanders). 2 totally different scenarios. apples and oranges, sure they are both fruits but they are different fruits lol.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 20:54:08 GMT
I am a bit on the fence here...the one thing that bothers me a little is that since Yahoo still had Nich available, even though he didn't play one second in the NHL last year, Peter was able to claim him as a waiver wire pick up (which was a brilliant move by Peter) at the end of the season...but since Kovy wasn't an option on Yahoo, he goes to the team with #1 waiver priority. I'm not sure why Yahoo makes one available and not the other..that said, I think it is just tough luck... nichuskin was available because yahoo database was released on sept. 1 and nich was still a RFA at that time and it was expected he would sign. its unlikely he will be available on yahoo at start of this new season, forcibly he will have to be dropped if he doesnt return by this season, so peter pickup will be short lived.
|
|
|
Post by Dave - Calgary on May 11, 2017 21:16:05 GMT
Or Peter can leave a blank spot in Yahoo and still roster Nichushkin on Proboards. I think this even may have happened to Bryzgalov back in the day. The moment you lost Kovalchuk was the moment you no longer had him on your proboards roster. Heck, you even created an alumni shrine for him, pretty much stating he was no longer on your roster. Yes, you were the last team to roster Kovalchuk, but you failed to retain his rights when you didn't include him on future rosters.
Whether you made a release statement for Kovy or not is a non-factor, as we all know you don't have to announce when you release major roster players.
I don't blame you for debating this. Every team wouldn't mind have Kovalchuk on their roster. But I think it's pretty clear cut that you no longer retain his rights.
|
|
|
Post by Chris - Montreal on May 11, 2017 21:58:15 GMT
Just for fun...
Imagine this was a waiver pick up?
Mario Lemieux returns from cancer to finish the season in 1994, with 17 goals and 37 points in only 22 games, followed by 69 goals and 161 points in 70 games the following season.
or...
return from retirement in 2000, with 35 goals and 76 points in only 43 games...
That was fun looking this up, lol...
That said, Dave makes a good point. I think that you would have needed to keep a roster spot on Proboards with Kovy on it to retain his rights.
I also don't blame you for debating this, and to be honest, I kinda feel bad for you, it's a crappy thing that nothing can be done about it. Going forwrd with this, Biz had a good idea with the 2-3 year grace period..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 23:14:13 GMT
I am a bit on the fence here...the one thing that bothers me a little is that since Yahoo still had Nich available, even though he didn't play one second in the NHL last year, Peter was able to claim him as a waiver wire pick up (which was a brilliant move by Peter) at the end of the season...but since Kovy wasn't an option on Yahoo, he goes to the team with #1 waiver priority. I'm not sure why Yahoo makes one available and not the other..that said, I think it is just tough luck... Nich was, and still is, considered an RFA.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 23:14:44 GMT
Or Peter can leave a blank spot in Yahoo and still roster Nichushkin on Proboards. I think this even may have happened to Bryzgalov back in the day. The moment you lost Kovalchuk was the moment you no longer had him on your proboards roster. Heck, you even created an alumni shrine for him, pretty much stating he was no longer on your roster. Yes, you were the last team to roster Kovalchuk, but you failed to retain his rights when you didn't include him on future rosters. Whether you made a release statement for Kovy or not is a non-factor, as we all know you don't have to announce when you release major roster players. I don't blame you for debating this. Every team wouldn't mind have Kovalchuk on their roster. But I think it's pretty clear cut that you no longer retain his rights. Can confirm, Darren did this with Bryz
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 23:34:53 GMT
Or Peter can leave a blank spot in Yahoo and still roster Nichushkin on Proboards. I think this even may have happened to Bryzgalov back in the day. The moment you lost Kovalchuk was the moment you no longer had him on your proboards roster. Heck, you even created an alumni shrine for him, pretty much stating he was no longer on your roster. Yes, you were the last team to roster Kovalchuk, but you failed to retain his rights when you didn't include him on future rosters. Whether you made a release statement for Kovy or not is a non-factor, as we all know you don't have to announce when you release major roster players. I don't blame you for debating this. Every team wouldn't mind have Kovalchuk on their roster. But I think it's pretty clear cut that you no longer retain his rights. Can confirm, Darren did this with Bryz I'm definitely getting 80 year old Bryz back when he comes out of retirement/exile/Siberian labour camp....he's mine!!
|
|
|
Post by Josh - Dallas on May 11, 2017 23:41:30 GMT
I sympathize for sure Armando, but to retain Kovalchuks rights, a roster spot would have needed to be left open. I did this with Bryzgalov waiting for him to resign (He eventually did). I brought this up in 2015 in regards to Radulov (whom I would obviously love to have on my team.) and it was brought up in regards to Sobotka who still had his rights owned by St. Louis when he left. Below is the ruling on Radulov Kovalchuk and Sobotka.
Lineups issues Apr 7, 2015 at 10:44am via the ProBoards App Quote Edit like
Post Options
. Post by Tyler - Toronto on Apr 7, 2015 at 10:44am
Sorry guys, I will respond to all this when I get back in more detail.....I saw one issue you bring up and it's a good one.......I have not read your responses but I'd say no Kovalchuk, Radulov, or Sobotka as the are not prospects and would be subject to waivers in our league if they returned home mid season, so they are always subject to waivers.....
Nichushkin, Radulov, Sobotka, Kovalchuk, Bryzgalov, and even guys like Mikko Koskinen, Joacim Eriksson, etc etc all fall under the same rule. Unless you retain them on your roster they are subject to waivers once they determine they are gonna come back and yahoo adds them.
I'm all for making waivers more useful to rebuilding teams as well, but again it could not be an immediate thing, we just had the 3 new teams draft waiver positions, and teams holding waiver positions for years to get their current positions.
|
|
|
Post by Josh - Dallas on May 11, 2017 23:43:40 GMT
Or Peter can leave a blank spot in Yahoo and still roster Nichushkin on Proboards. I think this even may have happened to Bryzgalov back in the day. The moment you lost Kovalchuk was the moment you no longer had him on your proboards roster. Heck, you even created an alumni shrine for him, pretty much stating he was no longer on your roster. Yes, you were the last team to roster Kovalchuk, but you failed to retain his rights when you didn't include him on future rosters. Whether you made a release statement for Kovy or not is a non-factor, as we all know you don't have to announce when you release major roster players. I don't blame you for debating this. Every team wouldn't mind have Kovalchuk on their roster. But I think it's pretty clear cut that you no longer retain his rights. Can confirm, Darren did this with Bryz I also did this with Bryz!.... stupid Bryz, never knowing if he was coming or going!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2017 0:08:04 GMT
Can confirm, Darren did this with Bryz I also did this with Bryz!.... stupid Bryz, never knowing if he was coming or going! I think I held him for a few months praying he'd come back. Didn't I crazily trade him from you Josh...bloody Josh!
|
|
|
Post by Josh - Dallas on May 12, 2017 0:19:06 GMT
I also did this with Bryz!.... stupid Bryz, never knowing if he was coming or going! I think I held him for a few months praying he'd come back. Didn't I crazily trade him from you Josh...bloody Josh! I plead the 5th.... so does James Neal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2017 11:57:05 GMT
This has turned into the goalie thread that I didn't read.
If there's a vote, someone put me down for the anti-Armando option.
Kovalchuk to waivers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2017 13:35:46 GMT
I sympathize for sure Armando, but to retain Kovalchuks rights, a roster spot would have needed to be left open. I did this with Bryzgalov waiting for him to resign (He eventually did). I brought this up in 2015 in regards to Radulov (whom I would obviously love to have on my team.) and it was brought up in regards to Sobotka who still had his rights owned by St. Louis when he left. Below is the ruling on Radulov Kovalchuk and Sobotka. Lineups issues Apr 7, 2015 at 10:44am via the ProBoards App Quote Edit like Post Options . Post by Tyler - Toronto on Apr 7, 2015 at 10:44am Sorry guys, I will respond to all this when I get back in more detail.....I saw one issue you bring up and it's a good one.......I have not read your responses but I'd say no Kovalchuk, Radulov, or Sobotka as the are not prospects and would be subject to waivers in our league if they returned home mid season, so they are always subject to waivers.....Nichushkin, Radulov, Sobotka, Kovalchuk, Bryzgalov, and even guys like Mikko Koskinen, Joacim Eriksson, etc etc all fall under the same rule. Unless you retain them on your roster they are subject to waivers once they determine they are gonna come back and yahoo adds them. I'm all for making waivers more useful to rebuilding teams as well, but again it could not be an immediate thing, we just had the 3 new teams draft waiver positions, and teams holding waiver positions for years to get their current positions. tyler was MIA during that period and never made an official ruling on that matter, how does a random post become a rule especially one that im pretty sure less than half of the league saw it? lol....he even admitted that he didnt even read the responses to this matter. like seriously how is that a rule?!? and if so another interesting note you mention when you said "Nichushkin, Radulov, Sobotka, Kovalchuk, Bryzgalov, and even guys like Mikko Koskinen, Joacim Eriksson, etc etc". of those guys only kovalchuk retired! i totally agree about players leaving and having to enter waivers if they came back, but kovalchuk retired he doesnt fall under that category of these guys as per the "rules". i think everyone is missing the point here. AGAIN, kovalchuk retired regardless of where he went or what he did and was to return to his NHL team in the event he came back. the rest of the players DID NOT retire. the nhl rule should apply to him. no post mentions that yet, you all keep bringing up scenarios and players that fall under different circumstances than kovalchuk. btw i just saw this interesting tweet on twitter..... Igor Eronko Verified account @igoreronko 17h17 hours ago More Per Ilya Kovalchuk "Upon my return to the DHL i will not join the LA Kings and manager Drew. No chance i will play for a loser like him!"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2017 13:37:35 GMT
Can confirm, Darren did this with Bryz I also did this with Bryz!.... stupid Bryz, never knowing if he was coming or going! again, bryzgalov did not retire....not the same...please try again.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2017 13:39:37 GMT
Or Peter can leave a blank spot in Yahoo and still roster Nichushkin on Proboards. I think this even may have happened to Bryzgalov back in the day. The moment you lost Kovalchuk was the moment you no longer had him on your proboards roster. Heck, you even created an alumni shrine for him, pretty much stating he was no longer on your roster. Yes, you were the last team to roster Kovalchuk, but you failed to retain his rights when you didn't include him on future rosters. Whether you made a release statement for Kovy or not is a non-factor, as we all know you don't have to announce when you release major roster players. I don't blame you for debating this. Every team wouldn't mind have Kovalchuk on their roster. But I think it's pretty clear cut that you no longer retain his rights. i created an alumni shrine for him because he retired. the shrine basically made him islander property for life
|
|
|
Post by Dave - Calgary on May 12, 2017 16:48:06 GMT
You are aware that there is a difference between Voluntarily Retired and Offically Retired right? Kovalchuk was never officially retired. He left the door open to come back and there was always the possibility he would do just that. You should've known this before you failed to include him on your roster.
At any rate, since Josh is now the commish of this league and he appears to have made his own ruling on this. You mentioned you would be fine with whatever he ruled, so I encourage you to respect his ruling and move on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2017 18:10:31 GMT
You are aware that there is a difference between Voluntarily Retired and Offically Retired right? Kovalchuk was never officially retired. He left the door open to come back and there was always the possibility he would do just that. You should've known this before you failed to include him on your roster. At any rate, since Josh is now the commish of this league and he appears to have made his own ruling on this. You mentioned you would be fine with whatever he ruled, so I encourage you to respect his ruling and move on. i obviously know the difference but that doesnt matter because AGAIN, the NHL stipulates that if a player retires regardless of voluntary or officially, if and when he decides to return he will join the team he last played for. josh made a ruling? he copy and pasted a post that tyler had no time/interest to give an official response to. both commissioners have the number 1 and 2 waiver slot so it makes it even more unfair for them to make a ruling on this subject especially when no current rule is in place. i say 1 and 2 because the smart choice is for kovalchuk to be the second choice as of now, vadim shipachyov would be my first choice if i had to choose. regardless of when common sense should reward kovalchuk back to his original owner, when no rule is in place it makes sense by default to follow the NHL way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2017 18:16:25 GMT
I vote that each year, the waiver wire resets as follows:
1: Armando 2 - 16: reverse standings
|
|