|
|
Post by Vancouver Canucks GM on Sept 24, 2014 6:50:02 GMT -8
 have elected to waive LW Ryan Jones 78 TWF - $2.275M (UFA 2020) (35) and assign him to Oklahoma City {AHL} if cleared.
|
|
|
|
Post by sensrule19 on Sept 24, 2014 7:43:05 GMT -8
If he clears to minors, 750K (1/3) of his salary counts against your cap. If he is bought out instead, 570K (1/4) counts against your cap.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vancouver Canucks GM on Sept 24, 2014 8:13:31 GMT -8
If he clears to minors, 750K (1/3) of his salary counts against your cap. If he is bought out instead, 570K (1/4) counts against your cap. Why the hell would he count against my cap if he's not being bought out?! That's fucking retarded. |
|
|
|
Post by sensrule19 on Sept 24, 2014 10:33:48 GMT -8
If he clears to minors, 750K (1/3) of his salary counts against your cap. If he is bought out instead, 570K (1/4) counts against your cap. Why the hell would he count against my cap if he's not being bought out?! That's fucking retarded. "-Players that are bought out will have 1/4 of their cap retained by the team buying them out for the remainder of the contract -Players that are placed on waivers can be claimed. The process remains the same, 24 hours put on waivers. If the player is claimed, the waiving team pays no penalty -If the player clears waivers, the waiving team must pay 1/3 of the cap for the remaining SEASON" To quote, umm, the rules.... Its like you're new, or playing dumb, especially considering you were an active part of the discussion when this rule was made (admittedly you were against it, but you were still there) |
|
|
|
Post by Vancouver Canucks GM on Sept 24, 2014 17:57:22 GMT -8
Why the hell would he count against my cap if he's not being bought out?! That's fucking retarded. "-Players that are bought out will have 1/4 of their cap retained by the team buying them out for the remainder of the contract -Players that are placed on waivers can be claimed. The process remains the same, 24 hours put on waivers. If the player is claimed, the waiving team pays no penalty -If the player clears waivers, the waiving team must pay 1/3 of the cap for the remaining SEASON" To quote, umm, the rules.... Its like you're new, or playing dumb, especially considering you were an active part of the discussion when this rule was made (admittedly you were against it, but you were still there) You're damn right I was against it, and I still am, cuz it's stupid. lol I get the re-entry waiver dealio... that makes sense, but having to pay more (or at all, for that matter) when they've been waived and they're not on your roster, is ridiculous. The AHL team pays for they're salaries, not the big club. |
|
|
|
Post by luongod on Sept 24, 2014 18:06:40 GMT -8
"-Players that are bought out will have 1/4 of their cap retained by the team buying them out for the remainder of the contract -Players that are placed on waivers can be claimed. The process remains the same, 24 hours put on waivers. If the player is claimed, the waiving team pays no penalty -If the player clears waivers, the waiving team must pay 1/3 of the cap for the remaining SEASON" To quote, umm, the rules.... Its like you're new, or playing dumb, especially considering you were an active part of the discussion when this rule was made (admittedly you were against it, but you were still there) You're damn right I was against it, and I still am, cuz it's stupid. lol I get the re-entry waiver dealio... that makes sense, but having to pay more (or at all, for that matter) when they've been waived and they're not on your roster, is ridiculous. The AHL team pays for they're salaries, not the big club. thats the choice, you pay more short term or pay less long term. |
|
|
|
Post by Vancouver Canucks GM on Sept 24, 2014 18:15:46 GMT -8
You're damn right I was against it, and I still am, cuz it's stupid. lol I get the re-entry waiver dealio... that makes sense, but having to pay more (or at all, for that matter) when they've been waived and they're not on your roster, is ridiculous. The AHL team pays for they're salaries, not the big club. thats the choice, you pay more short term or pay less long term. That's still ridiculous man... No offense, but these are the worst waiver/buyout rules I've every seen. I understand paying for the buyout... hell, I'd even understand paying half for a re-entry waiver pick up, but paying for a player that's not on your roster, playing for your AHL affiliate AND, on top of that paying more than what you'd pay for a buyout?! lol I don't think so Tim...  I mean, see what you're trying to do and what it's supposed to prevent, but we shouldn't be forced to pay for a player that's on the farm team. If we get dinged on the re-entry, fine... but the way you have it there is 100% shite. lol |
|
|
|
Post by luongod on Sept 24, 2014 18:36:42 GMT -8
The NHL irl changed the rules for the new cba, its pretty much the same rule.
We had this discussion when we were implementing new rules, every staff member agreed, except you, so the decision was made. You can't just not follow the rules, especially when it was a near unanimous decision.
|
|
|
|
Post by sensrule19 on Sept 24, 2014 18:56:32 GMT -8
thats the choice, you pay more short term or pay less long term. That's still ridiculous man... No offense, but these are the worst waiver/buyout rules I've every seen. I understand paying for the buyout... hell, I'd even understand paying half for a re-entry waiver pick up, but paying for a player that's not on your roster, playing for your AHL affiliate AND, on top of that paying more than what you'd pay for a buyout?! lol I don't think so Tim... I mean, see what you're trying to do and what it's supposed to prevent, but we shouldn't be forced to pay for a player that's on the farm team. If we get dinged on the re-entry, fine... but the way you have it there is 100% shite. lol Kruze you're not allowed to post until you google "The Wade Redden Rule" |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2014 19:00:31 GMT -8
The NHL irl changed the rules for the new cba, its pretty much the same rule. We had this discussion when we were implementing new rules, every staff member agreed, except you, so the decision was made. You can't just not follow the rules, especially when it was a near unanimous decision. I didn't |
|
|
|
Post by Vancouver Canucks GM on Sept 25, 2014 10:10:30 GMT -8
The NHL irl changed the rules for the new cba, its pretty much the same rule. We had this discussion when we were implementing new rules, every staff member agreed, except you, so the decision was made. You can't just not follow the rules, especially when it was a near unanimous decision. I highly doubt it was unanimous. lol And the actual NHL one is even more ridiculous than this. Whatever.... I'll take the buyout at the lower rate, this is the exact reason we should've gotten 2 compliance buyouts (like the IRL NHL) and a slight raise in salary this season and then plateaued next season. I can see allot of teams being stuck at less than a million over cap because of this and no lee way given at all. But yah, anyways... Jones will be bought out. |
|
I mean, see what you're trying to do and what it's supposed to prevent, but we shouldn't be forced to pay for a player that's on the farm team. If we get dinged on the re-entry, fine... but the way you have it there is 100% shite. lol
var _comscore = _comscore || [];
_comscore.push({ c1: "2", c2: "6036030" });
(function() {
var s = document.createElement("script"), el = document.getElementsByTagName("script")[0]; s.async = true;
s.src = "https://sb.scorecardresearch.com/cs/6036030/beacon.js";
el.parentNode.insertBefore(s, el);
})();