|
Waivers
Jan 29, 2013 0:13:19 GMT -5
Post by uofmehockey on Jan 29, 2013 0:13:19 GMT -5
There were several changes that I had proposed last season that became effective over the off-season. Included among these changes were changes to the waiver process. It was inconvient for me to process them properly and timely. Hiwever, when these changes were made, I neglected to properly consider the impact of moving to the head-to-head format would have on our standings. In addition, I did a lousy job in wording the rules. So the end result is a system that is confusing and does not properly meet the league's needs.
Although I am not in favor of changing things on the fly, A change is really necessary. I have been in discussions with a few GMs off-line and the end result is as follows:
1. The waiver process will be managed by the Jets GM. 2. Due to the move to a head-to head scheduled, the first three weeks of the season will use the previous season's final standings to determine the waiver priority order. 3. Any player placed on waivers that would clear after the 3rd week/scoring period would be subject to this year's standings. 4. We will return to a seven day waiver period. This change to seven days applies for any player dropped going forward. 5. The team that places player on waivers can not enter claim. 6 A Tie-breaker will be used when necessary. This tie-breaker is determined by doing a "hypothetical" matchup for the entire season comparing total stats (active + bench + minor + IR). This would allow a proper evaluation of a team's overall strength. The weakest team wins the claim.
|
|
|
Waivers
Jan 29, 2013 0:16:54 GMT -5
Post by Sami (CGY) on Jan 29, 2013 0:16:54 GMT -5
Makes sense to me.
|
|
|
Waivers
Jan 29, 2013 0:37:30 GMT -5
Post by zaphod (NYI) on Jan 29, 2013 0:37:30 GMT -5
I have two questions.
1. Why the first 3 weeks, after 1 week we have stats to utilize.
2. Tie breaker sounds unnecessarily complicated and isn't how waivers should work, imo. Waivers are something that is addressed at the moment they occur. how can you guess what injuries a team might incur and any other number of issues that might effect a teams outcome?
There should be an easier stat that deals with the teams at that moment: Wins-Losses-Ties even the number of active players for either team from the previous playing period. The team who played the fewest players should win the claim.
|
|
|
Waivers
Jan 29, 2013 0:52:33 GMT -5
Post by JetsGM on Jan 29, 2013 0:52:33 GMT -5
I think there may be some confusion... The initial tie-breaker is of course w-l-t. what is described is the secondary tie-breaker if two teams are tied in the standings.
|
|
|
Waivers
Jan 29, 2013 1:01:01 GMT -5
Post by uofmehockey on Jan 29, 2013 1:01:01 GMT -5
I have two questions. 1. Why the first 3 weeks, after 1 week we have stats to utilize. 2. Tie breaker sounds unnecessarily complicated and isn't how waivers should work, imo. Waivers are something that is addressed at the moment they occur. how can you guess what injuries a team might incur and any other number of issues that might effect a teams outcome? There should be an easier stat that deals with the teams at that moment: Wins-Losses-Ties even the number of active players for either team from the previous playing period. The team who played the fewest players should win the claim. Tie-breakers only used when there is a tie (duh), but is based to evaluate a team's overall strength. Weakest team is the winner of the claim. GP could encourage GMs to play weak rosters or keep players out of the line up. Using all stats eliminates that possibility. As far as three weeks, the switch to head-to-head really makes me think it is warranted. At this point, I'd rather go this route. I may recommend going down to one or two weeks next season, but for now; that's the way it is. Not really gonna debate it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Waivers
Jan 30, 2013 8:08:43 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2013 8:08:43 GMT -5
Seems fair to me. Thanks for clarifying how it works...I was confused. The bottom line is that 95% of all waiver claims in this league will be for semi-useless players anyway so it's really only for those rare occasions when high end talent from overseas signs and owners are lined up (eg Jagr).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Waivers
Jan 30, 2013 10:20:45 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2013 10:20:45 GMT -5
Seems fair to me. Thanks for clarifying how it works...I was confused. The bottom line is that 95% of all waiver claims in this league will be for semi-useless players anyway so it's really only for those rare occasions when high end talent from overseas signs and owners are lined up (eg Jagr). The overseas player is a whole separate issue, right? Aren't those guys still first come first serve as a free agent, or are they part of a waiver system at the start of free agency? I know we talked about it in the past, but not sure if anything was done. If Radulov signed today and he isn't owned in our league, what's the protocol?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Waivers
Jan 30, 2013 10:36:21 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2013 10:36:21 GMT -5
Seems fair to me. Thanks for clarifying how it works...I was confused. The bottom line is that 95% of all waiver claims in this league will be for semi-useless players anyway so it's really only for those rare occasions when high end talent from overseas signs and owners are lined up (eg Jagr). The overseas player is a whole separate issue, right? Aren't those guys still first come first serve as a free agent, or are they part of a waiver system at the start of free agency? I know we talked about it in the past, but not sure if anything was done. If Radulov signed today and he isn't owned in our league, what's the protocol? OH, then if that's the case I think we've completely missed the real issue here. Our waiver claims are mostly taking pot shots on junk, the overseas/college FA signings are what will really make a difference in this league and I HATE the first come first serve approach!
|
|
|
Waivers
Jan 30, 2013 12:15:07 GMT -5
Post by JetsGM on Jan 30, 2013 12:15:07 GMT -5
The rules laid out a few days ago on waiver claims pertain to the procedures not to player eligibility.
as far as i know we are free to sign any player who has been drafted by an NHL team or had an NHL contract at any point in history. So if anyone wants to sign Radulov(or Richard Park or erik Christenson, etc) they can do so via FA
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Waivers
Jan 30, 2013 19:27:34 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2013 19:27:34 GMT -5
The rules laid out a few days ago on waiver claims pertain to the procedures not to player eligibility. as far as i know we are free to sign any player who has been drafted by an NHL team or had an NHL contract at any point in history. So if anyone wants to sign Radulov(or Richard Park or erik Christenson, etc) they can do so via FA This doesn't cover college FA's who've never been drafted and don't have a contract yet. The rule that we followed last year was that they could be signed the second after proof of an NHL contract. I do not think this is a viable system and think it's far more of an issue that the waiver process. I'd like to see all these newly signed players pass though waivers.....easy rule ;D
|
|
|
Waivers
Jan 30, 2013 22:25:41 GMT -5
Post by zaphod (NYI) on Jan 30, 2013 22:25:41 GMT -5
The rules laid out a few days ago on waiver claims pertain to the procedures not to player eligibility. as far as i know we are free to sign any player who has been drafted by an NHL team or had an NHL contract at any point in history. So if anyone wants to sign Radulov(or Richard Park or erik Christenson, etc) they can do so via FA This doesn't cover college FA's who've never been drafted and don't have a contract yet. The rule that we followed last year was that they could be signed the second after proof of an NHL contract. I do not think this is a viable system and think it's far more of an issue that the waiver process. I'd like to see all these newly signed players pass though waivers.....easy rule ;D agreed. entirely off topic, I'd like some clarification on play-offs.
|
|