Jump to content

Hainsey Done


les_glorieux

Recommended Posts

May have something to do with their contract...ie...if a player has an NHL contract for $500 k, but earns only 50 k in the AHL, he could end up playing for AHL money for years with only occassional NHL cheques due to short term callups. With the callup waiver, another team who may also be thin at the position at the time could take the player and keep him up full time for half the cost. Increases a player's chances of securing full time NHL employment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by beckham

May have something to do with their contract...ie...if a player has an NHL contract for $500 k, but earns only 50 k in the AHL, he could end up playing for AHL money for years with only occassional NHL cheques due to short term callups. With the callup waiver, another team who may also be thin at the position at the time could take the player and keep him up full time for half the cost. Increases a player's chances of securing full time NHL employment.

I can understand that reasoning, but also gives a big incentive not to call up a guy they think will be claimed on waivers (especially knowing that they will have to pay half his salary for him to play on another team to boot). Incentives to make a player attractive to another team on the callup is a converse incentive for a team not to call him up in the first place. Double edged sword for the NHLPA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can understand that reasoning, but also gives a big incentive not to call up a guy they think will be claimed on waivers (especially knowing that they will have to pay half his salary for him to play on another team to boot).  Incentives to make a player attractive to another team on the callup is a converse incentive for a team not to call him up in the first place.   Double edged sword for the NHLPA.

No, a team will always call up it's best available player first. Plus what is the point of keeping a player if you can't use him on your team? All you would end up doing is paying a frustrated player to perform in the minors indifinitely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by beckham

I can understand that reasoning, but also gives a big incentive not to call up a guy they think will be claimed on waivers (especially knowing that they will have to pay half his salary for him to play on another team to boot).  Incentives to make a player attractive to another team on the callup is a converse incentive for a team not to call him up in the first place.   Double edged sword for the NHLPA.

No, a team will always call up it's best available player first. Plus what is the point of keeping a player if you can't use him on your team? All you would end up doing is paying a frustrated player to perform in the minors indifinitely.

If you believe it probable that one of your AHL players won't clear waivers, why would you call him up. If he's claimed, you lose him, have to pay half his salary and will anyways have to call up someone else. You just lose on all accounts. Might as well call someone else up from the get go. I disagree that teams will always call up their best players with this rule....they'll call up the best player they think stands a good chance to clear waivers. As for wasting the players time, I would agree that that would be the case if you have given up on him.....otherwise you would keep him in the AHL and let him take a shot at making the team next training camp.

A lot of guys end up making a team after having impressed when called up mid season. This rule gives incentives to teams to make definate calls on players at training camp for the duration of the year and will take away the chance to get NHL exposure to prospects the team values. This rule gives an advantage to players a team doesn't care much about (by giving them a secong chance to be claimed on waivers) at the expense of NHL time that would be given to the "best" available player. I can see this being a source of division among players and being dropped from the next CBA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you have to remember that the player has already cleared waivers on the way down. If a team grabs him on the way back up, they have to cut (and probably pay) a player currently on their team. I don't think that it would happen very often that a team would be willing to pay a player who wasn't playing for them plus half of another player's salary as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe it would be best for all if Hainsey could find a new team.

That article showed that Hainsey isn't thrilled by beeing sent back to Hamilton. A player with the right atitude would say something about working even harder and show the GM he was wrong. Ron didn't.

I was also thinking if this would be the time for the Habs to trade a 1# draft pick. There's tons of talent in the farm. But the team is missing a real number one defenceman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by ap79

Hainsey is an self-sufficient underachieving dimwit. Gotta be seriously judgement-challenged to blame his shortcoming on anyone else by Hainsey himself.

Can someone translate that into English for me?:?-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by beckham

I'm sure he'd do a better job than the misshapen runts wearing #51 and #25 out there. You'd have to shove Dandenault's thumb in a light socket to get any glimmer of life in his eyes.

At least they're good enough to play in the NHL on a regular basis. Which, when you think about, is more relevant and useful than being an All-American, College educated, tall & handsome POS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by beckham
Originally posted by ap79

Hainsey is an self-sufficient underachieving dimwit. Gotta be seriously judgement-challenged to blame his shortcoming on anyone else by Hainsey himself.

Can someone translate that into English for me?:?-

Translation: Hainsey = :puke:, you = :guru:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by beckham

I'm sure he'd do a better job than the misshapen runts wearing #51 and #25 out there. You'd have to shove Dandenault's thumb in a light socket to get any glimmer of life in his eyes.

Hehe, that so-called misshapen runt wearing #51 was the the best player on the ice tonight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...